Schoolio's Movie Corner

[Blinken]

I understand the growl to disguise his voice... but why does he use the growl when he talks to people who knows he is Batman? Racheal and Lucious for example. I am guessing it is to signify that when he puts on the Batsuit, he becomes a different person, but it still seems unneccessary.

I had the conversation with someone else the other day, I think it is so he doesn't get comfortable speaking as Bruce Wayne in the Batsuit. because he is very comfortable around people like Gordon and could slip up if he isn't careful.

[thinnerair]

and the second half rather brilliantly skips ahead to his funeral where his coworkers discuss (at first dismissively) and then become inspired by this man's final act. This film clearly pulls at the heartstrings, but never in a sappy way.

Remember that movie PAY IT FORWARD?

[bmack86]

I had the conversation with someone else the other day, I think it is so he doesn't get comfortable speaking as Bruce Wayne in the Batsuit. because he is very comfortable around people like Gordon and could slip up if he isn't careful.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he have something in the suit in the first movie that automatically altered his voice, hooked at his throat or something? Maybe I'm just making that up.

[thinnerair]

that sounds made up.

[luckyface]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he have something in the suit in the first movie that automatically altered his voice, hooked at his throat or something? Maybe I'm just making that up.

Yeah, that is not true. I think he does that a) to disguise his voice and b) use it as a way to intimidate.

[Blinken]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he have something in the suit in the first movie that automatically altered his voice, hooked at his throat or something? Maybe I'm just making that up.

I think you are wrong, I just say the first one again a week ago. I did notice a radio that Bale put into the ear on his suit, so maybe that is what you saw.

[schoolofruckus]

cuz there's no debate to the awesomeness.

That's quite true. But it would be nice if people cared enough to agree on its awesomeness. And also, if it had made more in the past three weeks than Batman made in its first three days.

[bmack86]

Well, I haven't seen it since it came out, so it's probably just my fantastically developed imagination running wild

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

I watched Kurosawa's Ikiru the other night, and I was blown away. The movie follows a man who learns he's dying of stomach cancer, and he realizes he's basically wasted his entire life (reminiscent of Bergman's Wild Strawberries). The first half of the movie portrays this man coming to terms with his imminent death and deciding to devote his last days to a single act of public service, and the second half rather brilliantly skips ahead to his funeral where his coworkers discuss (at first dismissively) and then become inspired by this man's final act. This film clearly pulls at the heartstrings, but never in a sappy way. I think this could be the best of Kurosawa's films I've seen yet (in addition to Seven Samurai, Rashomon and Ran).

Takashi Shimura's acting in this is just about the best I've ever seen. No film moves me as much as Ikiru.

[kreutz2112]

Batman did indeed announce his intentions to get Rachel, at which point I protested internally, "NO! You have to save the city." Then when he arrived to get Dent, I simply assumed he changed his mind en route.

That the Joker intentionally changed the addresses is definitely a Jokerlike move if he was fully aware of how strongly both Batman and Dent felt about Rachel - he knew Rachel's death would ruin Dent and Dent's incorruptibility was the greatest threat to the criminals in Gotham. It would also ruin Batman's reputation, already shaky as it was.

However, the problem with this would be that the Joker would have to know that Batman would choose his love interest over the good of the city and the Joker had no reason to suspect Batman had such strong feelings for Rachel or be swayed to act against the best interest of the city.

And the lack of surprise or any pointed reference to a switch makes me think Batman had in fact changed his mind. Of course, it could have been intentionally ambiguous.

If Batman changed his mind en route to get rachael and the joker did not switch the addresses batman would have shown up at the same place as the cops. Batman told the cops he was going for Rachael (located at address X), obviously this means the cops are going for Dent (located at address Y). Had Batman changed his mind he would have changed it so that instead of going to address X he goes to address Y, the same address the cops are going to. The cops had no knowlege of batmans mind change so if he did change his mind he would have shown up at the same address as the cops. The only way the scenario that Yabs, Randy, etc are claiming happened could occur is both the cops and batman simultaneously and independently had a change of heart en route to go save the victims, which is highly unlikely, considering those kinds of thoughts deserve an entire scene to be explained.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

I found two-lane blacktop in Chicago for a measly 15 bucks. The Criterion version. Should I watch that, Stalker or 8 1/2 right now?

Watch Stalker.

[Yablonowitz]

Takashi Shimura's acting in this is just about the best I've ever seen. No film moves me as much as Ikiru.

I found it utterly inane and innocuous in the most harmless, uninteresting way -- the fruit of an overrated director's overblown ego, recklessly indulged by studio excess.

[Yablonowitz]

If Batman changed his mind en route to get rachael and the joker did not switch the addresses batman would have shown up at the same place as the cops. Batman told the cops he was going for Rachael (located at address X), obviously this means the cops are going for Dent (located at address Y). Had Batman changed his mind he would have changed it so that instead of going to address X he goes to address Y, the same address the cops are going to. The cops had no knowlege of batmans mind change so if he did change his mind he would have shown up at the same address as the cops. The only way the scenario that Yabs, Randy, etc are claiming happened could occur is both the cops and batman simultaneously and independently had a change of heart en route to go save the victims, which is highly unlikely, considering those kinds of thoughts deserve an entire scene to be explained.

I've been pretty well convinced that the Joker did intentionally mix the two addresses.

Was Gordan presumed dead at the time or was he back and with the cops during the rescue? Because, if he was, then one could presume that Batman had the ability to contact Gordan en route and switch locales. But if Gordan was still out of the picture then, you would be right.

But, like I said, it seems far more likely that the Joker would have mixed the addresses not even knowing which one Batman would go to simply to cause him to be severely disappointed when he arrived.

[wmgaretjax]

I found it utterly inane and innocuous in the most harmless, uninteresting way -- the fruit of an overrated director's overblown ego, recklessly indulged by studio excess.

You are thinking of "Dreams."

[thestripe]

I've been pretty well convinced that the Joker did intentionally mix the two addresses.

Was Gordan presumed dead at the time or was he back and with the cops during the rescue? Because, if he was, then one could presume that Batman had the ability to contact Gordan en route and switch locales. But if Gordan was still out of the picture then, you would be right.

But, like I said, it seems far more likely that the Joker would have mixed the addresses not even knowing which one Batman would go to simply to cause him to be severely disappointed when he arrived.

I just assumed that Batman chose Dent, but this is a really cool theory.

[RotationSlimWang]

I thought Batman had an enraged, frustrated reaction when he got to the warehouse and found Dent instead of Rachel.

Bottom line is, this thread has been whipped into a frothing frenzy based on the interpretations of a guy who admittedly A. went into the movie with a vendetta, and B. missed at least one of the movie's most jarring scenes, as well as sleeping through the last 10 minutes. Let's put some thought into THAT before we decide to go apeshit.

A. I didn't go into the movie with a vendetta, I was excited, but it's not my fault I'd seen the horseshit Heath was pulling in advance.

B. I didn't miss any scene although I did sleep through the last ten minutes. Sorry that I don't find the high wit of his "magic trick" to be something that implants itself so perfectly in my mind. Frankly, although quite funny, it's also a little dumb. And if that was the high point of the film for you, well, that's pretty fucking lame.

And the thread wasn't whipped into a frenzy by some extraneous conjecture of mine--I along with half the other people in here have a completely different impression of how the movie's most crucial scene went than the rest of you. It would appear that we're wrong, to the film's detriment.

[Down Rodeo]

Remember that movie PAY IT FORWARD?

Umm...yeah I do. Ikiru was far superior.

[luckyface]

Was Gordan presumed dead at the time or was he back and with the cops during the rescue? Because, if he was, then one could presume that Batman had the ability to contact Gordan en route and switch locales. But if Gordan was still out of the picture then, you would be right.

He was back with the cops at that point. He arrived at Rachel's building.

[Yablonowitz]

He was back with the cops at that point. He arrived at Rachel's building.


So, technically, to play the devil's advocate, Batman COULD have communicated with Gordon that he had changed his mind, and that would have caused little disruption considering how close the locations were to each other.

That's IF Batman changed his mind. A point I'm no longer contending except for sport.

[iv3rdawG]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6488/jennifersbodyteasecp2.jpg

:afu

[thinnerair]

Jennifer's Body was a great song by Hole.

[anti-square]

One of the girls I went to see the movie with is convinced that Rachel is not dead and will be back for the next Batman flick.

[kreutz2112]

kill her.

[Blinken]

One of the girls I went to see the movie with is convinced that Rachel is not dead and will be back for the next Batman flick.

She is retarded, put her on the short bus and be done with it.

[schoolofruckus]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6488/jennifersbodyteasecp2.jpg

:afu

I don't care how much of Megan's body is in Jennifer's Body. I'd rather get fisted by Edward Scissorhands than sit through that shit.

[luckyface]

Excellent, Gabe.

So what is that? A female vampire movie with lots of indie sensibility or something? Megan Fox is pretty tempting though.

[Mr.Nipples]

megan fox is a bimbo

[schoolofruckus]

Excellent, Gabe.

So what is that? A female vampire movie with lots of indie sensibility or something? Megan Fox is pretty tempting though.

I'm sure it's a horror movie about girls who are "smart" and "original" and love nothing more than to bash on whatever bands are big 8 months before the movie comes out, who then eventually get killed. Maybe by each other.

They would have to put Vincent Gallo in this fucking thing for me to get anywhere near it.

[Young blood]

What is your damage, Heather?

[Young blood]

They all want me as a friend or a fuck. I'm worshiped at Westerburg and I'm only a junior.

[KungFuJoe]

probably the film I'm most looking forward to in 2009. It may be old news, but I just found out Chan Wook Park is in the process of filming his Vampire movie "Thirst".

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2008/05/16/ta.3.thirst.cnn?iref=videosearch

[iv3rdawG]

What in the...

MTV Remaking The Rocky Horror Picture Show
Source: Variety
July 23, 2008

MTV is developing a remake of 1975 cult classic The Rocky Horror Picture Show, reports Variety.

Lou Adler, executive producer of the original film, is partnering with BermanBraun and Fox Television Studios on the new rendition.

The new version will use the original screenplay by Jim Sharman and Richard O'Brien but may also include music not featured in the original.

The director and casting decisions have yet to be announced. The original starred Tim Curry, Susan Sarandon, Barry Bostwick and Meatloaf.

[RotationSlimWang]

What in the...

MTV Remaking The Rocky Horror Picture Show
Source: Variety
July 23, 2008

MTV is developing a remake of 1975 cult classic The Rocky Horror Picture Show, reports Variety.

Lou Adler, executive producer of the original film, is partnering with BermanBraun and Fox Television Studios on the new rendition.

The new version will use the original screenplay by Jim Sharman and Richard O'Brien but may also include music not featured in the original.

The director and casting decisions have yet to be announced. The original starred Tim Curry, Susan Sarandon, Barry Bostwick and Meatloaf.

That's truly terrifying.

[RotationSlimWang]

Anybody that wants to read what the Joker is REALLY supposed to be like... http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HYAGWVHW

[PassiveTheory]

He thought he was going to save Rachel. He would not have had time to change his mind on the drive over. He would have also had to coordinate that with the cops and, as we see, he made it just in time as it was. The Joker didn't really know the outcome, but he figured either way would be a kick, is my interpretation.

This is as close as anyone's gotten to the point. The Joker never specifically said that Dent's at THIS local and Rachel was at THAT local, he just said the two locations (unless my memory's fading) and Batman assumed that Rachel was at one and Dent was at the other.

Either way, the point is that lying isn't above the Joker, and maybe he wasn't lying because he didn't know whether or not only one of the two would be saved, both would be saved or neither would be saved... Or maybe he did. That's the Joker for ya.

Only thing that pissed me off was how it just kinda jumped to the joker scene where he goes "btw, Dent and Rachel are captured". Just seemed like a lazy approach to set up the next plot points and scenes. Just outta the blue with no explanation or scenes, we find out he captured both Dent and Rachel...that was pretty weak in my eyes.

If you blinked you probably missed it, but after the successful capture of the Joker, when Dent hops into the police car, the camera stays on Detective Montoya (or whatever her fucking name is) for a few seconds longer than usual as she looks after the car leaving. I found that weird when I saw it, but thinking back, it's the one subtle sign that Harvey was kidnapped (since she's one of the two corrupt cops, yadda yadda yadda). Maybe there was an extra scene to highlight him being kidnapped, or maybe not, either way it's probably one of the film's weak points.

Also, Randy, is that the Killing Joke?... I bet it's the Killing Joke.

[RotationSlimWang]

Of course it's The Killing Joke.

[PassiveTheory]

I think it's funny that Moore looks back on it half-heartedly. Then again, I'm inclined to think he hates when any of his work gets critical acclaim...

[Blinken]

I saw it again tonight, and I can 100% say that Batman did not change his mind. The Joker said Rachel was at 150 something and Dent was at 250 52nd steeet. After Batman says he is going after Rachel, Gordon says they are going to 250 52nd street to save Dent. Then right before they get to the spot with Rachel Gordon orders everyone to surround 250 52nd Street. At the end Dent takes Gordon's family to 250 52nd st., he tells Batman this is where to find him, and says that this where Rachel died. If this doesn't prove it 100% I don't know what will.

Of course it's The Killing Joke.

I actually read that earlier today, and I think that this Joker is the same as the one in The Killing Joke in alot of ways.

He does say multiple times at the end that he made Dent crazy, and brought him down to his level. He calls Dent his ace up his sleeve, that is one of the reasons to hide two-face from the public, so the Joker won't win. In the interogation room he talks about the connection between Batman and Rachel, even asking if Dent knows about the two of them.

He was also laughing alot through the movie I don't see how you missed this.

It was the same ideas behind The killing Joke, just with Dent instead of Gordon, and the Joker actually succeeded. True his plot was a little convoluted but it is still a superhero movie and that is too be expected.

Sorry for bringing this all up again but I wanted to give proof of the Joker's lies.

[RotationSlimWang]

I accept that you guys were right. I also stipulate that that's piss-poor filmmaking if half the audience of this thread didn't process it that way. Furthermore, that that's the much, much weaker way for him to have gone than the way we expected it.

You're just fucking dense if you think that's the same Joker. Whatever, I'm tired of talking about this. But that's fucking retarded.

[woogie846]

I just finished Ed Wood. The part where Martin Landau wrestles the Octopus is one of the funniest scenes ever.

[stinkbutt]

Excuse me, but you maybe right in most regards but is this the first time Nolan left his films up for discussion and never left a real answer? No, so fuck off Batman isn't a crybaby pussy bitch no matter how much you want him to be. Like I said if Nolan wanted to make a girl over justice movie Spider-Man 4 still needs a director. Piss off all you whinny bitches that insist on killing what Batman truly is.

[stinkbutt]

Randy why are you of all people backing down to these polesmokers? This movie is open to interpretation like quite a few of Nolan's films. Fuck them if they want to kill Batman and Fist you if you're going to let them

anyhow night you fucks have fun ruining everything great about what batman is

[Mr. Dylanja]

Excuse me, but you maybe right in most regards but is this the first time Nolan left his films up for discussion and never left a real answer? No, so fuck off Batman isn't a crybaby pussy bitch no matter how much you want him to be. Like I said if Nolan wanted to make a girl over justice movie Spider-Man 4 still needs a director. Piss off all you whinny bitches that insist on killing what Batman truly is.



Someone misses Robin... :(

[boarderwoozel3]

Randy why are you of all people backing down to these polesmokers? This movie is open to interpretation like quite a few of Nolan's films. Fuck them if they want to kill Batman and Fist you if you're going to let them

anyhow night you fucks have fun ruining everything great about what batman is

Whats so great about him? And how are people kiling that greatness again?

[denies the day]

Persepolis is a fantastic piece of cinema.

[RotationSlimWang]

Randy why are you of all people backing down to these polesmokers? This movie is open to interpretation like quite a few of Nolan's films. Fuck them if they want to kill Batman and Fist you if you're going to let them

anyhow night you fucks have fun ruining everything great about what batman is

Oldman shows up at Rachel's location. So either Joker gave them the wrong addresses or Batman relayed the wrong addresses intentionally or just fucked up, but none of those answers are Batman either. It doesn't even matter, it's fucked. No matter how you slice it it's shitty plot and unclear communication.

[schoolofruckus]

I accept that you guys were right. I also stipulate that that's piss-poor filmmaking if half the audience of this thread didn't process it that way. Furthermore, that that's the much, much weaker way for him to have gone than the way we expected it.

You're just fucking dense if you think that's the same Joker. Whatever, I'm tired of talking about this. But that's fucking retarded.

Are you sure it's not piss-poor film watching instead?

Randy why are you of all people backing down to these polesmokers? This movie is open to interpretation like quite a few of Nolan's films. Fuck them if they want to kill Batman and Fist you if you're going to let them

anyhow night you fucks have fun ruining everything great about what batman is

Ooooooh, look at how mad you're getting!

Read Blinken's post, or watch the film again. The evidence exists in spades. Just because that doesn't fit with your preconceived notion of "what Batman is" doesn't make it any less clear.

[schoolofruckus]

"The Killing Joke" was cool for what it was. And what it was....is a comic book. And if they'd made that Joker or that story into a movie, it would have been terrible.

The Joker's backstory was contrived and his manner was decidedly non-threatening. If I were attempting to faithfully make a movie out of this, I'd be phoning Hugh Grant to play him. Not only that, but the conflict was resolved with seemingly zero difficulty, and the entire thing was one big long expository speech. I get that's how comics are written; it works in this format. But it would never work in a film. And moreover, I don't see how you, Randy - who virulently hates all of the things I have mentioned - could possibly have wanted to see THIS on your IMAX screen this past weekend.

Maybe I don't know how to read comics and I'm missing something huge. But the Joker in this story ain't haunting my dreams anytime soon.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

Went to see Wall-E last night. It was lovely, and the visuals were astounding, but I'm not really sure the story will stand the test of time.

[schoolofruckus]

It will if things keep going the way they have been!

[wmgaretjax]

This movie is open to interpretation like quite a few of Nolan's films.

You are a fucking moron, none of Nolan's films have had obscured plot elements. They've all been crystal clear. You've always just been too stupid to put the pieces together.

[schoolofruckus]

I agree. Nolan's a clever dude who likes to obscure the clarity of his protagonist's perspectived (he's said as much in regards to his earlier films), but his movies aren't all that complicated.

[Yablonowitz]

You are a fucking moron, none of Nolan's films have had obscured plot elements. They've all been crystal clear. You've always just been too stupid to put the pieces together.

Memento offers contradictory and vague images leaving the viewer to conclude that they can not trust the narrator's perspective. This is a conscious effort from Nolan, but it is definitely an example of obscuring the plot/reality so you're left with the conclusion that you have no idea what really fucking happened.

[wmgaretjax]

Memento offers contradictory and vague images leaving the viewer to conclude that they can not trust the narrator's perspective. This is a conscious effort from Nolan, but it is definitely an example of obscuring the plot/reality so you're left with the conclusion that you have no idea what really fucking happened.

While you are watching yes, but by the time all the pieces are together it's fairly clear. Segments earlier on in the film that contradict later ones are revealed to be false. In the end there is clear picture of exactly what occurred. You could potentially argue that you can't trust the antagonist's explanation at the "end" can't be trusted, but he doesn't really have any reason to lie, and his explanation seems consistent with both the manner in which the story is told, and the different plot elements in and of themselves.

[RotationSlimWang]

"The Killing Joke" was cool for what it was. And what it was....is a comic book. And if they'd made that Joker or that story into a movie, it would have been terrible.

The Joker's backstory was contrived and his manner was decidedly non-threatening. If I were attempting to faithfully make a movie out of this, I'd be phoning Hugh Grant to play him. Not only that, but the conflict was resolved with seemingly zero difficulty, and the entire thing was one big long expository speech. I get that's how comics are written; it works in this format. But it would never work in a film. And moreover, I don't see how you, Randy - who virulently hates all of the things I have mentioned - could possibly have wanted to see THIS on your IMAX screen this past weekend.

Maybe I don't know how to read comics and I'm missing something huge. But the Joker in this story ain't haunting my dreams anytime soon.

This is just infuriating. I don't get how you don't get it, but then again I never do. I'm done with this subject matter. Enjoy your one-dimensional Hollywood bullshit, you independent rebel, you.

Oh, and way to be pretentious about it "just being a comic book." This is why you and the cocksucking studio you work have been fucking them up for so many years.

[schoolofruckus]

This is just infuriating. I don't get how you don't get it, but then again I never do. I'm done with this subject matter. Enjoy your one-dimensional Hollywood bullshit, you independent rebel, you.

Oh, and way to be pretentious about it "just being a comic book." This is why you and the cocksucking studio you work have been fucking them up for so many years.

If I were rebellious, would I be singing the praises of the #1 film in the world? From an office on the facilities of the mega-corporation that produced that film, no less? Not that I can lay claim to the parts of the film that were fucked up, anymore than I can take credit for the parts that were great. But I never have claimed to be any kind of rebel. When you know who you are and what you like, you don't need to break free of anybody.

I never said it was "just" a comic book. I said it IS a comic book, and the way it's written works in that format, but would not work in the movie format. It was a kick-ass read and I enjoyed it entirely. But I'm glad the movie wasn't trying to be this.

I'm perfectly fine with things being what they are - rather than INSISTING they be exactly what I would have made them - as long as they work on their own terms. I claim no ownership over anything that doesn't come from my hand. That's a principle that you would do well to adopt.

[RotationSlimWang]

Gabe, HEY GABE--did you really think I was proposing that that should have been the movie? Do you realize how fucking dumb that is for about half a dozen reasons?

Whatever. You and Jared wouldn't know why one is a good character and the other isn't if I tried to explain it for a thousand years. Maybe the comic's character didn't have enough explosions to make him scary. 'Cause that's the kind of characterization I love--stuff blowing up. WOOOOOOO!

[wmgaretjax]

Gabe, HEY GABE--did you really think I was proposing that that should have been the movie? Do you realize how fucking dumb that is for about half a dozen reasons?

Whatever. You and Jared wouldn't know why one is a good character and the other isn't if I tried to explain it for a thousand years. Maybe the comic's character didn't have enough explosions to make him scary. 'Cause that's the kind of characterization I love--stuff blowing up. WOOOOOOO!

pretty much yeah.

[schoolofruckus]

Randy, if not knowing whether or not a character is good means not being a rabid, hysterical disciple of your exact opinions.....I think I'm okay with that.

I don't know what Jared has to do with this. I thought we were talking about me, here.

[RotationSlimWang]

Cause he's supposed to know better too and somehow you're both being dumbfucks.

[schoolofruckus]

Because I/we like a movie that you say you liked a little bit more than you did? Or because I/we feel less passionately about the source material and the movie's adherence to it?

[RotationSlimWang]

Because you somehow don't see how one is inferior to the other as a character.

[wmgaretjax]

Because you somehow don't see how one is inferior to the other as a character.

somehow....

[RotationSlimWang]

Yes, somehow. Look, I recognize that this is kinda crazy and I'm beginning to suspect that Yabs was right on the money a few weeks back when he pegged me as having a massive personality disorder (although, it should be said that I fit into one of the better categorizations of all the forms of those disorders)... but I don't get it.

I know both of you. You're both intelligent, so I can't just dismiss it as you being some monkeys. You're both extreme cine-o-philes. And it honestly like fucking BOGGLES my mind that you don't see this thing the way I do. I'm talking about just comparing The Joker in that book to that movie. Forget about all the exposition in Killing Joke--Gabe, the reason there's so much exposition is that it's an origin story, that was the primary purpose of the book, think of it like an episode in a long-running series which is why it can't be a whole movie.

I flat out don't get how two people who I consider intelligent and who are so into film and storytelling don't see this the way I do. I know I can't really blame you for that--like Gabe says, it seems like I'm insisting everyone fanatically agree with whatever I think, but it's not. I just can't comprehend how something that seems really clear to me doesn't to you.

And yes, this is one of my absolute biggest mental dysfunctions. It drives me crazy sometimes. I go looo-ooo-ooony... like a lightbulb-battered bug.

If you hurt inside, get certified, and if life should treat you bad...

don't get eee-eee-even... get mad.

[wmgaretjax]

Gabe, the reason there's so much exposition is that it's an origin story

I just don't want the Joker to have an origin story.... Well, not one so explicit. But I actually like that comic, but I would never want it taken to screen.

I don't know, I'm past the point of caring.

[luckyface]

I thought was better that there was no Joker origin story in Dark Knight. It somehow makes him more interesting and creepy. When you provide an origin, you are humanizing him.

[RotationSlimWang]

I was never proposing the backstory have any part whatsoever in TDK. It's not the backstory I'm talking about. It's how the Joker is--his motivations, his methods, his demeanor--in the present day in Killing Joke that I feel got butchered. You know how much I hate exposition.

I don't see any motivation in Heath's Joker. Apparently he just wants to cause chaos and mayhem and whatever and didn't like what Batman's presence was doing to the city, but there was just nothing resembling a genuine psychopathic emotional rationale behind it.

In Killing Joke he's a man driven to complete homicidal insanity by tragedy who then feels deeply convinced that going insane is simply the only way to live in a world filled with tragedy and that it's his responsibility to bring everyone else to his enlightened state of perspective... THAT'S a character. That's a clear motivation, it's way fucking creepier than Heath and all his explosions, and it's a multi-dimensional, complete. You don't need the exposition. But that's what made the Joker the best of the Batman villains.

He didn't have a real ethos in TDK is my point. He robbed the mob, then was working for the mob, and was obsessed with killing Batman and causing general chaos in Gotham. A villain needs to have a philosophy they hold on to that gives them their strength, their determination. In TDK he just liked fucking shit up. It was Osama Bin Joker. *shrug*

Maybe that helps to explain, probably doesn't, none of my explanations ever seem to. Anyways, I'll drop it now, but that's my point I guess.

[schoolofruckus]

Yes, somehow. Look, I recognize that this is kinda crazy and I'm beginning to suspect that Yabs was right on the money a few weeks back when he pegged me as having a massive personality disorder (although, it should be said that I fit into one of the better categorizations of all the forms of those disorders)... but I don't get it.

I know both of you. You're both intelligent, so I can't just dismiss it as you being some monkeys. You're both extreme cine-o-philes. And it honestly like fucking BOGGLES my mind that you don't see this thing the way I do. I'm talking about just comparing The Joker in that book to that movie. Forget about all the exposition in Killing Joke--Gabe, the reason there's so much exposition is that it's an origin story, that was the primary purpose of the book, think of it like an episode in a long-running series which is why it can't be a whole movie.

I flat out don't get how two people who I consider intelligent and who are so into film and storytelling don't see this the way I do. I know I can't really blame you for that--like Gabe says, it seems like I'm insisting everyone fanatically agree with whatever I think, but it's not. I just can't comprehend how something that seems really clear to me doesn't to you.

And yes, this is one of my absolute biggest mental dysfunctions. It drives me crazy sometimes. I go looo-ooo-ooony... like a lightbulb-battered bug.

If you hurt inside, get certified, and if life should treat you bad...

don't get eee-eee-even... get mad.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.....I have to admit, I should have seen that answer coming.

I know that the exposition in the comic was entirely necessary. I also know that the way the comic appears to me - with the Joker coming off as more of a practical prankster than a flat out force of evil - is probably due to my not reading a lot of comics, and seeing them in more broad terms than someone who reads a lot of them and understands the language (visually, I mean). That's why I'm saying - it works on the page. But I prefer the movie's re-invention of who the Joker is, both independently and in context with the movie itself.

I just don't want the Joker to have an origin story.... Well, not one so explicit. But I actually like that comic, but I would never want it taken to screen.

I don't know, I'm past the point of caring.

I, too, like the Dark Knight take on not explaining the Joker's reason for being, to the point that his "explanations" for his actions are complete bullshit. It makes more sense psychologically.

[downingthief]

It comes down to interpretation of a character, and if you like that interpretation or not. It is possible to like the portrayal of the Joker in KJ, as well as DK, and for different reasons.


I personally do like both. I see what Gabe is saying in that the KJ approach works well in comic form, as does the DK in movie form. If they were switched, they simply would not work.

I also think comparing the two is very difficult (as proven by the amount of pages dedicated to this).

[RotationSlimWang]

I don't see any reason why you couldn't take Joker's KJ motivation and persona and put it in TDK and make it just as fucking creepy and disturbing. Honestly, why doesn't this fit?

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h165/thelastgreatman/Pages2fromBatman-TheKillingJoke-2.jpg

[schoolofruckus]

I was never proposing the backstory have any part whatsoever in TDK. It's not the backstory I'm talking about. It's how the Joker is--his motivations, his methods, his demeanor--in the present day in Killing Joke that I feel got butchered. You know how much I hate exposition.

I don't see any motivation in Heath's Joker. Apparently he just wants to cause chaos and mayhem and whatever and didn't like what Batman's presence was doing to the city, but there was just nothing resembling a genuine psychopathic emotional rationale behind it.

In Killing Joke he's a man driven to complete homicidal insanity by tragedy who then feels deeply convinced that going insane is simply the only way to live in a world filled with tragedy and that it's his responsibility to bring everyone else to his enlightened state of perspective... THAT'S a character. That's a clear motivation, it's way fucking creepier than Heath and all his explosions, and it's a multi-dimensional, complete. You don't need the exposition. But that's what made the Joker the best of the Batman villains.

He didn't have a real ethos in TDK is my point. He robbed the mob, then was working for the mob, and was obsessed with killing Batman and causing general chaos in Gotham. A villain needs to have a philosophy they hold on to that gives them their strength, their determination. In TDK he just liked fucking shit up. It was Osama Bin Joker. *shrug*

Maybe that helps to explain, probably doesn't, none of my explanations ever seem to. Anyways, I'll drop it now, but that's my point I guess.

My interpretation of the Joker is actually kind of like what you were saying above in regards to yourself. You see things a certain way, and it drives you nuts that other people don't, to the point of a hostile reaction (though not always intentionally in your case). The movie Joker also sees the world a certain way (i.e., chaotic and full of selfish, ugly people who only need a slight nudge to descend into madness), and it drives him up the wall that others don't see the world that way. Which is why he aspires to plunge the world into the state he sees it. Frankly, I'm surprised that this angle never occurred to you.

As for Batman....I think I see what you're saying in regards to his decision to save Rachel. He's selfless enough to put saving Gotham over living a life of personal fulfillment, so why would he choose to (intend to) save a girl over saving the guy who represents Gotham's best chance for redemption? But see....while he does love Gotham and want to clean it up, part of what separates Batman from Superman is that he's NOT all that virtuous in spite of his intentions. He's an angry, volatile dude, and prone to somewhat reckless decisions. So when the Joker says "Harvey dies, or Rachel dies", he follows his gut impulse - to save the girl he's been in love with his whole life. Maybe if he were in a situation that allowed him to think clearly about it, he would choose Dent and save Gotham. But in a heated moment where a ticking clock is thrust in his face, I think it's perfectly acceptable - without betraying the character's nature - for him to react on impulse.

[schoolofruckus]

I don't see any reason why you couldn't take Joker's KJ motivation and persona and put it in TDK and make it just as fucking creepy and disturbing. Honestly, why doesn't this fit?

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h165/thelastgreatman/Pages2fromBatman-TheKillingJoke-2.jpg

I feel like the sentiment expressed there comes through in both of the Jokers on the table.

[RotationSlimWang]

I dunno, dude. The Rachel character was mad weak in Begins and even weaker here. If they wanted to set her up to mean that much to him, they didn't do a very good job of it.

Honestly, would any of us really save Maggie Gyllenhall over the future of Gotham? I mean, c'mon. I'd let the bitch die if it meant having to drive to the westside during rush hour.

[RotationSlimWang]

I feel like the sentiment expressed there comes through in both of the Jokers on the table.

Really? Okay, well I just didn't see that very much at all in TDK. The only time it ever gets discussed remotely close to that is in the interrogation room.

[schoolofruckus]

I dunno, dude. The Rachel character was mad weak in Begins and even weaker here. If they wanted to set her up to mean that much to him, they didn't do a very good job of it.

Honestly, would any of us really save Maggie Gyllenhall over the future of Gotham? I mean, c'mon. I'd let the bitch die if it meant having to drive to the westside during rush hour.

No argument here. I hated Rachel Dawes in both movies. But Batman loved the shit out of her, for whatever reason; that much was established and then some.

[RotationSlimWang]

Yeah but you have to make the audience care about what the hero cares about. Fact is, Batman was a supporting character in this flick.

[downingthief]

Really? Okay, well I just didn't see that very much at all in TDK. The only time it ever gets discussed remotely close to that is in the interrogation room.

I think you also see it when he walks in on the Mob meeting. As well as when he goes after the black mob boss.
There are others, too. Those are the most glaring, though.

[chairmenmeow47]

Fact is, Batman was a supporting character in this flick.

my mom said the same thing.

[RotationSlimWang]

I think you also see it when he walks in on the Mob meeting. As well as when he goes after the black mob boss.
There are others, too. Those are the most glaring, though.

Well, no, and again I defer to my poor memory as it seems to have come up a few times in this thread, but in the mob meeting scene I just remember him talking about how Batman needs to go a lot. I recall the gist of the motivation he expressed that carried over from that scene to the interrogation, that the crime underworld (and Gotham in general I guess) needed to be released from the terrorism of Batman... but that's just not the same.

[downingthief]

So, shoving a dude's head into a pencil while "showing" a magic trick doesn't suffice? Or, strapping yourself to about a dozen grenades?

[RotationSlimWang]

Um... no, no, listen, I'm not arguing that he wasn't homicially insane. Of course he was. I'm saying that his motivation for doing so and the persona in general became muddled.

[downingthief]

Ok, ok. I get where you are coming from. I disagree, but I get it.

I disagree in the sense that it was muddled. Yes, KJ was much more pronounced, etc. More detailed. But, wouldn't you agree that in comic book form it would need to be? More than a movie?

[RotationSlimWang]

They had two and a half hours. That movie was twenty minutes too long with vastly less important bullshit as it was, and a good writer (and actor) could have communicated all that with just a few simple rewrites of his dialogue scenes.

[Blinken]

I feel like the sentiment expressed there comes through in both of the Jokers on the table.

It comes through for me, at least, in the interogation scene, and towards the end. When Dent changes into Two-Face, and the joker is telling Batman about the change, he expresses the same ideas that he is talking about in that page.

[downingthief]

Just got this forwarded to me:

Jeffrey Katzenberg, who is a major advocate of theatrical 3-D films, has disclosed that George Lucas is investing in a technology that could turn all of his Star Wars movies into 3-D features that could be given new releases. Katzenberg told the website ComingSoon.net that he now has the technical resources to begin the conversion process. Previous attempts to turn 2-D movies into 3-D have produced mixed results and reactions -- mostly negative -- but Katzenberg remarked in the interview that Lucas "isn't going to put a product out, I think, that isn't anything other than first rate."

[schoolofruckus]

Really? Okay, well I just didn't see that very much at all in TDK. The only time it ever gets discussed remotely close to that is in the interrogation room.

The interrogation room, and the scene where the Joker's hanging upside down and boasting about how one of the ferry boats will certainly push the button. And that was all it needed. There's only so much theoretical discussion about the nature of the world for one movie - even one as long as this.

[Blinken]

but Katzenberg remarked in the interview that Lucas "isn't going to put a product out, I think, that isn't anything other than first rate."

He thinks wrong!!!!!!

[RotationSlimWang]

The interrogation room, and the scene where the Joker's hanging upside down and boasting about how one of the ferry boats will certainly push the button. And that was all it needed. There's only so much theoretical discussion about the nature of the world for one movie - even one as long as this.

See, the ferry boat is a good example though. That's the Joker BANKING on everyone else being inherently evil and crazy, which isn't quite the same thing as making it his mission to suck the rest of the world into his own demented madness. He's not trying to drive them to any real state of horrific psychopathy, he's just playing a game with survival instinct. It wouldn't be necessarily crazy or demonic for either of those boats to have pushed the button, it was just a Sophie's Choice deal.

[menikmati]

Just got this forwarded to me:

Jeffrey Katzenberg, who is a major advocate of theatrical 3-D films, has disclosed that George Lucas is investing in a technology that could turn all of his Star Wars movies into 3-D features that could be given new releases. Katzenberg told the website ComingSoon.net that he now has the technical resources to begin the conversion process. Previous attempts to turn 2-D movies into 3-D have produced mixed results and reactions -- mostly negative -- but Katzenberg remarked in the interview that Lucas "isn't going to put a product out, I think, that isn't anything other than first rate."

Enough already. Is Lucas broke?

[schoolofruckus]

Yeah but you have to make the audience care about what the hero cares about. Fact is, Batman was a supporting character in this flick.

I agree that this was inadequately pulled off. The movie had plenty of flaws and many of them had to do with Rachel Dawes' character, as written and played.

[downingthief]

Enough already. Is Lucas broke?

No kidding. The last Non Star Wars related movie he directed was American Graffiti...in 1973. Dude needs to get another hobbie.

[chairmenmeow47]

lucas needs to put everything on hold and get me a game for the wii so i can play with lightsabers. i mean WHAT THE EFF, srsly!!!

[downingthief]

lucas needs to put everything on hold and get me a game for the wii so i can play with lightsabers. i mean WHAT THE EFF, srsly!!!

Soon, Ivy...soon. I heard around Christmas.

EDIT: Just looked it up. Launch date is September 16th.

[schoolofruckus]

See, the ferry boat is a good example though. That's the Joker BANKING on everyone else being inherently evil and crazy, which isn't quite the same thing as making it his mission to suck the rest of the world into his own demented madness. He's not trying to drive them to any real state of horrific psychopathy, he's just playing a game with survival instinct. It wouldn't be necessarily crazy or demonic for either of those boats to have pushed the button, it was just a Sophie's Choice deal.

He was forcing people to choose to kill in the name of saving themselves, intending to prove that they are not that far off from evil and all they need is a "bad day". The mentality to kill or be killed is animalistic (i.e., subhuman). Either the civilians on their boat play God with the lives of the prisoners (under the flimsy rationalization that "they had their chance"); the guards on the prison boat do the same out of selfish desire not to die; or the prisoners over-take the guards (creating chaos) and kill the civilians. Granted, the last scenario is probably both most likely, and most flimsy according to the Joker's logic. But it's a chaotic situation that forces everyone involved to make choices they wouldn't usually have to make.

[schoolofruckus]

No kidding. The last Non Star Wars related movie he directed was American Graffiti...in 1973. Dude needs to get another hobbie.

What's so sad about this is if you watch THX 1138 nowadays. That movie was AWESOME, and definitely an influence on films like Pi and The Matrix. Lucas' output since then has gotten amazingly worse.

[chairmenmeow47]

Soon, Ivy...soon. I heard around Christmas.

EDIT: Just looked it up. Launch date is September 16th.

thanks, sean. and it's around my techie roommate's birthday, so i can buy it for him as a "present". excellent *taps fingers mr. burns style*

[downingthief]

What's so sad about this is if you watch THX 1138 nowadays. That movie was AWESOME, and definitely an influence on films like Pi and The Matrix. Lucas' output since then has gotten amazingly worse.

Agreed. I still enjoy watching AG and THX from time to time. An example of a Director who simply got wooed by technology, and forgot the most important parts of any movie : Characters, script, and plot.

[amyzzz]

when will this thread be safe for people who haven't seen batman yet?

[downingthief]

when will this thread be safe for people who haven't seen batman yet?

Never. Go see it. Now. :)

[schoolofruckus]

Probably about a week. All the biggest loudmouths have seen it already, so there shouldn't be reason to fervently debate it much longer.

[amyzzz]

Never. Go see it. Now. :)
Since we decided not to take the kids, I have to work up the nerve to ask someone (i.e. annoying family member) to watch them. I know, I know--I should just find some local teen to babysit, but I haven't gotten around to that yet.

Anyone planning to see the new X-Files?

[downingthief]

Anyone planning to see the new X-Files?

Not me. I'll wait for it to come out on DVD. Just doesn't interest me any more.

[wmgaretjax]

Anyone planning to see the new X-Files?

No, because from what I've heard it's not mythology related. If it turns out that it is, I will go.

[RotationSlimWang]

Chris Carter must be recognized no matter what. The mythology is done anyway.

[Blinken]

I will end up seeing it, don't know if it will be this weekend though

[amyzzz]

No, because from what I've heard it's not mythology related. If it turns out that it is, I will go.
You mean it doesn't deal with past X-Files issues? I saw the trailer, and I couldn't figure out what they were dealing with. It didn't seem like aliens; it seemed more like something supernatural (bodies under ice?). I can't really remember the trailer very well.

[Blinken]

Yeah it is a completly new story, basically a stand alone film so that if you have forgotten what happened 6 years ago you will still be fine.

[Somewhat Damaged]

Anyone planning to see the new X-Files?

Jen and I are going Saturday.

[atom heart]

Katzenberg remarked in the interview that Lucas "isn't going to put a product out, I think, that isn't anything other than first rate."

Where has this man been for the past ten years?


X Files couldn't possibly pick up on its mythology again. It was getting way too convoluted.

[Mr. Dylanja]

Chris Carter must be recognized no matter what.


I think the ref does a fine job recognizing, along with the entire crowd......
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~dsandov1/Touchdown.jpg

[iv3rdawG]

Revolution Studios has announced its interest in continuing the “Daddy” franchise with a third installment which has been tentatively entitled Daddy Day Cruise.

Eddie Murphy, who was absent from the film’s first sequel, will be reprising the movie’s title role as Charlie Hinton, the day care’s co-founder.

Murphy was quoted, “All I know about this one is that it’s gonna be different. We’re heading in a different direction. I understand what they were trying to do with the sequel, but we’re really amping it up this time around. We’re going back to its roots, but with a twist.”

The film’s supporting role of Phil Ryerson (originally played by Jeff Garlin) is still not yet confirmed, but there are talks of Lawrence Guterman (Cats and Dogs, Son of the Mask) having extreme interest in directing the third film.

Daddy Day Cruise once again follows stay at home dad Charlie Hinton, the co-founder of Daddy Day Care. When Charlie’s wife, Kim, wants a little break from her husband’s up and coming business, she asks him to take her and their son on a cruise to get Charlie’s mind off all his work. Unable to abandon his day care kids, Charlie is forced to bend some rules and bring along the whole day care as well.

The “Daddy” movies have made a total of $110 million with this one having an expected release date of fall 2009.

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/7160/images5cdonotwantre4.jpg

[wmgaretjax]

Chris Carter must be recognized no matter what. The mythology is done anyway.

:( yeah, but it ended so shittily... and there were still unanswered issues and plot lines.

I'm being stubborn, I'll end up going to see it, I'm sure.

[Yablonowitz]

While you are watching yes, but by the time all the pieces are together it's fairly clear. Segments earlier on in the film that contradict later ones are revealed to be false. In the end there is clear picture of exactly what occurred. You could potentially argue that you can't trust the antagonist's explanation at the "end" can't be trusted, but he doesn't really have any reason to lie, and his explanation seems consistent with both the manner in which the story is told, and the different plot elements in and of themselves.

No, the first few times I saw it, I was convinced you could actually figure out the objective truth of the story...but the more I've watched it, the more it seems the very essence of the film is to question the nature of objective reality and that the "truth" of what happened was entirely up to the whims of the narrator/Guy Pearce.

You should actually pay attention when you watch it. Maybe that wool scarf is obstructing your view.

[wmgaretjax]

You should actually pay attention when you watch it. Maybe that wool scarf is obstructing your view.

Actually, wool is much too posh for me.... Makes me itch. I think it's just cotton. And it's summer...

I haven't seen the film in a long time, and I'm not denying that one of the points of the film is that a subjective narrator is leading us through plot. And, in what might be a cop out, Nolan drives this home by proving to us that the protagonist has been wrong and mislead this whole time by showing us the "reality" of his situation. This is solidified even further by the fact we know that he will forget this revelation in a few moments. The subjectivity is still there, but the plot points are fairly clear.

[Yablonowitz]

Actually, wool is much too posh for me.... Makes me itch. I think it's just cotton. And it's summer...



You know, Italian wool is relatively itch free, I've found. It's also amazingly economical in terms of how thin it can be and still retain heat. If there is one fabric in this great big world of ours that I would actually go door-to-door selling, it's Italian wool.

[RotationSlimWang]

Memento is a brilliant gimmick movie. But that's all. The actual plot when put together properly is just fucking silly and the ending a stupid reveal.

[Down Rodeo]

Memento is a brilliant gimmick movie. But that's all. The actual plot when put together properly is just fucking silly and the ending a stupid reveal.

Huh...kind of sounds like The Usual Suspects to me.

[RotationSlimWang]

Um... well I can't argue against that slight entirely. Usual Suspects is also gimmicky. Well, no, I'm going to take a second to distinguish between what Memento does which constitutes a gimmick and what Usual does which is really just a theoretically hacky reveal. In retrospect Usual's ending does shine as a bit obvious in its secrecy--taking the one character furthest from suspicion as Kaiser and thus making the narrative a smarmy little "Was it ALL a lie? Tee hee!"

But that's just a snap at the end that has ripples backwards. Memento's triumph is in the way it fuses the execution of how the story is presented with the protagonist's perspective. But when you break it down, it's basically just a series of vignettes simply structured to produce the highest incidence of role and situations reversals from one scene to the next. It's very clever, and since it hadn't be done before deserves plenty of credit as a merging of concept and content... but each watching after the first rings way less interesting.

I suppose the difference is that Verbal Kint wasn't really the protagonist of the story at all, just the narrator (I mean if we put the reveal that he's Kaiser aside for the moment, of course). The protagonist starts as Gabriel Byrne but is then replaced with the spectre of Kaiser. The reveal--smarmy though it may be--is actually a similar combination of those factors I mentioned for Memento. The best way to execute a story about Kaiser Soze was achieved: even we the audience can only manage to get a half-truth about him, if that. How better to demonstrate an almost supernaturally deceptive character?

But by the end of Memento we've seen that not only were none of the characters what they seemed to be, they were all the COMPLETE POLAR OPPOSITES of what we were initially shown of them. Frequently there's even three or four polar opposites they flip through to keep us on our toes. When all's said and done though and it turns out he's the guy he was looking for all along and the entire plot was a delusion of his--not an intentional deception of the audience by a trickster protagonist but an incidental deception of the audience by a deluded one. It invalidates any legitimacy anything that we saw had except for the nifty execution. That's a gimmick.

When your reveal is that the entire premise of a story that did nothing except "bet you things aren't what they seem... LOOK! ALL DIFFERENT NOW! SUDDENLY! SUDDENLY ALL OVER YOUR FUCKING FACE! Sorry to have to do that, here's what's really going on, I swear I won't yell at you like that at the beginning of each scene anymore. Yeah, I promise, for realsies this time. Hey, pay attention, something significant is happening now. Pinky swear." That's the point where I say it's safe to say we've hit style over substance.

Oh, and there's the whole thing where somehow he's actually had this condition back before his wife died, and it turns out he killed her and made up the story of her murder to hide the truth from himself. Um... excuse me, but he had no memory before she died too. How could he possibly have ever remembered killing her, let alone felt a psychological need to invent a fake memory for himself... when he must know he couldn't possibly remember the made-up story just like he shouldn't possibly remember the truth. And on top of it all, he would have had to choose this totally absurdly paradoxical course of action--motivated by a traumatic shock he cannot possibly experience--all in the timeframe of one of the fifteen minute slivers of memory. Most convoluted plan ever, conceived, plotted, somehow made to seem like a good idea all in fifteen minutes AND gotten to a tattoo shop with a first tattoo idea that would somehow fill in all these blanks again.

I mean, fuck. This guy can't string more than three thoughts together the whole movie, how the fuck does he ever conjure this horseshit all by himself? Was he a gimmicky screenwriter before he killed his wife or something? Actually, that would have made the movie kinda awesome. But he wasn't, so take all that ridiculous and then multiply by the convenient way somehow nobody like Teddy ever bought a fucking tattoo gun and just tricked him into letting them tattoo "NEVERMIND--I FOUND OUR WIFE'S KILLER, KILLED HIM. TOTALLY SATISFYING. NOT FUN KILLING ANYONE ELSE THOUGH, NEVER DO THAT AGAIN. NOW HURRY UP AND GET TO MENTAL HOSPITAL FOR PRESIDENTIAL COMMENDATION, SELF" on him?

Sorry for the rant, but it kinda annoys me that people still think that's a really great movie even after multiple viewings. Those're some big holes, they are.

[Blinken]

It has been awhile since I saw Momento, but I thought that the attack still happened. The wife survived it but his memory got fucked up at that point. So after he kills his wife with insulin he assumes she died in the last thing he can remember the attack. I could be wrong seeing as I haven't seen the movie in years.

[schoolofruckus]

That was how I also interpreted it.

[Yablonowitz]

Um... well I can't argue against that slight entirely. Usual Suspects is also gimmicky. Well, no, I'm going to take a second to distinguish between what Memento does which constitutes a gimmick and what Usual does which is really just a theoretically hacky reveal. In retrospect Usual's ending does shine as a bit obvious in its secrecy--taking the one character furthest from suspicion as Kaiser and thus making the narrative a smarmy little "Was it ALL a lie? Tee hee!"

But that's just a snap at the end that has ripples backwards. Memento's triumph is in the way it fuses the execution of how the story is presented with the protagonist's perspective. But when you break it down, it's basically just a series of vignettes simply structured to produce the highest incidence of role and situations reversals from one scene to the next. It's very clever, and since it hadn't be done before deserves plenty of credit as a merging of concept and content... but each watching after the first rings way less interesting.

I suppose the difference is that Verbal Kint wasn't really the protagonist of the story at all, just the narrator (I mean if we put the reveal that he's Kaiser aside for the moment, of course). The protagonist starts as Gabriel Byrne but is then replaced with the spectre of Kaiser. The reveal--smarmy though it may be--is actually a similar combination of those factors I mentioned for Memento. The best way to execute a story about Kaiser Soze was achieved: even we the audience can only manage to get a half-truth about him, if that. How better to demonstrate an almost supernaturally deceptive character?

But by the end of Memento we've seen that not only were none of the characters what they seemed to be, they were all the COMPLETE POLAR OPPOSITES of what we were initially shown of them. Frequently there's even three or four polar opposites they flip through to keep us on our toes. When all's said and done though and it turns out he's the guy he was looking for all along and the entire plot was a delusion of his--not an intentional deception of the audience by a trickster protagonist but an incidental deception of the audience by a deluded one. It invalidates any legitimacy anything that we saw had except for the nifty execution. That's a gimmick.

When your reveal is that the entire premise of a story that did nothing except "bet you things aren't what they seem... LOOK! ALL DIFFERENT NOW! SUDDENLY! SUDDENLY ALL OVER YOUR FUCKING FACE! Sorry to have to do that, here's what's really going on, I swear I won't yell at you like that at the beginning of each scene anymore. Yeah, I promise, for realsies this time. Hey, pay attention, something significant is happening now. Pinky swear." That's the point where I say it's safe to say we've hit style over substance.

Oh, and there's the whole thing where somehow he's actually had this condition back before his wife died, and it turns out he killed her and made up the story of her murder to hide the truth from himself. Um... excuse me, but he had no memory before she died too. How could he possibly have ever remembered killing her, let alone felt a psychological need to invent a fake memory for himself... when he must know he couldn't possibly remember the made-up story just like he shouldn't possibly remember the truth. And on top of it all, he would have had to choose this totally absurdly paradoxical course of action--motivated by a traumatic shock he cannot possibly experience--all in the timeframe of one of the fifteen minute slivers of memory. Most convoluted plan ever, conceived, plotted, somehow made to seem like a good idea all in fifteen minutes AND gotten to a tattoo shop with a first tattoo idea that would somehow fill in all these blanks again.

I mean, fuck. This guy can't string more than three thoughts together the whole movie, how the fuck does he ever conjure this horseshit all by himself? Was he a gimmicky screenwriter before he killed his wife or something? Actually, that would have made the movie kinda awesome. But he wasn't, so take all that ridiculous and then multiply by the convenient way somehow nobody like Teddy ever bought a fucking tattoo gun and just tricked him into letting them tattoo "NEVERMIND--I FOUND OUR WIFE'S KILLER, KILLED HIM. TOTALLY SATISFYING. NOT FUN KILLING ANYONE ELSE THOUGH, NEVER DO THAT AGAIN. NOW HURRY UP AND GET TO MENTAL HOSPITAL FOR PRESIDENTIAL COMMENDATION, SELF" on him?

Sorry for the rant, but it kinda annoys me that people still think that's a really great movie even after multiple viewings. Those're some big holes, they are.

FYI - nobody read that.

Too long.

Brevity, man.

[bmack86]

I agree with Gabe and Blinken, but I haven't seen it in years either.
I thought the attack still happened, and that he killed the attacker early on.

[unitedwestand]

has anyone seen the new X-Files movie?
Hear its suppose to be very good.
Do you need to watch the previous one in order to go see it?
I've seen most of the television series, but not the older X-Files movies.

[wmgaretjax]

That was how I also interpreted it.

Me too.

[RotationSlimWang]

It has been awhile since I saw Momento, but I thought that the attack still happened. The wife survived it but his memory got fucked up at that point. So after he kills his wife with insulin he assumes she died in the last thing he can remember the attack. I could be wrong seeing as I haven't seen the movie in years.

That was how I also interpreted it.

Right right right, insulin, the particulars aren't really relevant. Although that's interesting, I hadn't ever considered the possibility that the memory of the attack would feel like the last thing that happened.

Call what he killed her with a banana if you want, the order of events I care about is 1. No memory; 2. Wife dies; 3. Man who can only have a fifteen minute max train of thought and has doctors and counselors and has to remember she's dead every fifteen minutes again... why hasn't anyone tattooed that "VENGEANCE COMPLETE, NOW VACATION" gist I posted earlier on him? It's not like he's hard to dupe, for fuck's sake.

[wmgaretjax]

Call what he killed her with a banana if you want, the order of events I care about is 1. No memory; 2. Wife dies; 3. Man who can only have a fifteen minute max train of thought and has doctors and counselors and has to remember she's dead every fifteen minutes again... why hasn't anyone tattooed that "VENGEANCE COMPLETE, NOW VACATION" gist I posted earlier on him? It's not like he's hard to dupe, for fuck's sake.

Well, up until the end of the movie (beginning?), he's had that dude to help maintain the revenge romp (isn't he making money off of him as well?).

[RotationSlimWang]

How could it possibly be any harder to make money or do whatever the fuck you want with that guy to have him convinced he's on a vengeance quest? Who in the holy hell went to the trouble of planting and getting him started tattooing this wild goose chase on the widower who can't possibly know what's going on ever?

I remember the insulin scene now, and I could swear Teddy attributes the credit for inventing the murder story to hide the thought of what really happened from himself, I remember there was definitely something along those lines. I dunno, it's annoying.

[Somewhat Damaged]

I'm planning on watching Memento again this weekend. Will see how it holds up, and if I like it as much as I did when I first saw it, I'll clarify things for you, Randy.

[amyzzz]

Has anyone seen Journey to the Center of the Earth (3D)? Planning to see that with kids in tow this weekend. (brendan fraser eye candy)
Don't make fun.

[schoolofruckus]

How could it possibly be any harder to make money or do whatever the fuck you want with that guy to have him convinced he's on a vengeance quest? Who in the holy hell went to the trouble of planting and getting him started tattooing this wild goose chase on the widower who can't possibly know what's going on ever?

I remember the insulin scene now, and I could swear Teddy attributes the credit for inventing the murder story to hide the thought of what really happened from himself, I remember there was definitely something along those lines. I dunno, it's annoying.

Teddy is a bad cop who's using him to kill off criminals that he can then steal from. Teddy shows up when he needs to to keep pointing Leonard in the direction of the guys he needs him to kill. Since Leonard can't remember Teddy telling him to do this, Teddy's plan has only one hole - that Leonard would eventually convince himself that Teddy is the guy he's trying to kill.

[Down Rodeo]

Has anyone seen Journey to the Center of the Earth (3D)? Planning to see that with kids in tow this weekend. (brendan fraser eye candy)
Don't make fun.

I saw it but not in 3D. It's fucking terrible, but your kids will love it.

[amyzzz]

I heard it was much better in 3D.

[schoolofruckus]

What did you think of the post production supervision? Was that top-shelf, at least?

[Down Rodeo]

What did you think of the post production supervision? Was that top-shelf, at least?

Is this supposed to mean something?

[RotationSlimWang]

Teddy is a bad cop who's using him to kill off criminals that he can then steal from. Teddy shows up when he needs to to keep pointing Leonard in the direction of the guys he needs him to kill. Since Leonard can't remember Teddy telling him to do this, Teddy's plan has only one hole - that Leonard would eventually convince himself that Teddy is the guy he's trying to kill.

Wait, is this like seriously what we're supposed to have gleaned from that half-assed mindfuck ending? It sounds almost familiar, but I'd remembered it fonder than I meant to, then. That's fucking absurd.

[RotationSlimWang]

Is this supposed to mean something?

It's a trick question--tell him it sucked or they won't let you in the clubhouse.

[schoolofruckus]

Wait, is this like seriously what we're supposed to have gleaned from that half-assed mindfuck ending? It sounds almost familiar, but I'd remembered it fonder than I meant to, then. That's fucking absurd.

There's more "listening to Pantoliano's dialogue" than "gleaning" to it, but yeah. That's not to say that there aren't gigantic holes to it, or that it isn't still a gimmicky movie (albeit a really good one), so I'm not surprised you remember it unfondly. It's just that the motivations weren't all that vague.

Maybe you give Nolan's aspirations too much credit?

[RotationSlimWang]

Well, I guess you can't call them vague exactly... you can certainly call it righteously shitty writing to try and cram that much surprise and exposition into one fucking scene. It's like some old mystery whodunit, where they lead you down a big long path of showing clues and characters and the audience is supposed to be trying to discern the killer's identity by paying close attention...

and then the brilliant detective gathers everyone in the den to unveil how he's deduced the killer is actually... some character no one could ever have possibly guessed, barely featured in the story if at all, and the only explanation for jerking us off like that is throwing in five minutes of dialogue exposition that completely rewrites the hour and thirty minutes of supposed plot leading up to that point.

That's utter hack shit. Sorry. It's like the definition of hack writing. Great gimmick, though.

[schoolofruckus]

I think if you really wanted to study it (and at this point, I wouldn't say it's worth it), you'd find a lot of little justifications for Teddy's involvement throughout the movie. Ones that I found sufficient, at least.

[schoolofruckus]

It's a trick question--tell him it sucked or they won't let you in the clubhouse.

Now you're giving ME too much credit.

Someone in our midst was the post supervisor.

[RotationSlimWang]

I think if you really wanted to study it (and at this point, I wouldn't say it's worth it), you'd find a lot of little justifications for Teddy's involvement throughout the movie. Ones that I found sufficient, at least.

... sorry, it just doesn't work. You can't reneg on the ENTIRE storyline right up to the ending and then try to explain The Matrix in the last scene. No, fail. Fails for all the reasons Usual Suspects succeeds.

[Down Rodeo]

In that case, the post production was one of the highlights of Journey to the Center of the Earth. Can't say the same for the writing...

[RotationSlimWang]

Gabe wrote it and did some post production too. Good work on one of those things, try not to suck at the other next time, Gabe.

[schoolofruckus]

Now you're giving me simultaneously WAY too much and not nearly enough credit.

[ivankay]

i went to a screening of Tropic Thunder last night in connection with this Comic-Con thing. The movie was hilarious. i thought before the screening the premise would be shakey, but it works and the cast is solid. Some of the laughs were big and good in a very evil way. Seeing this again is a definite for me. Robert Downey Jr. was so good.

[bmack86]

I just watched Stalker. jared, what was your tip to a better understanding?

[wmgaretjax]

I just watched Stalker. jared, what was your tip to a better understanding?

In terms of better understanding, it's mostly in regards to how the film was shot and how it works psychologically.

When the film was sent to the development lab about half of the film was destroyed. So a large chunk of the film had to be re-shot. Due to the fact that the budget was so tight, a large part of that was shot in close-ups in order to avoid lots of art direction costs. The movie has a strange psychological presence because of the prominence of these kinds of shots. It works incredibly well, and it's interesting that this came as a result of a total disaster.

One of those beautiful accidents.

[schoolofruckus]

Speaking of beautiful accidents....wait, hold on a second.

*lights snob card on fire*

Step Brothers had me pissing myself laughing. It's one of the dumbest movies ever made, but holy shit, was it funny.

There is literally nothing else to say about it.

[betao]

i went to a screening of Tropic Thunder last night in connection with this Comic-Con thing. The movie was hilarious. i thought before the screening the premise would be shakey, but it works and the cast is solid. Some of the laughs were big and good in a very evil way. Seeing this again is a definite for me. Robert Downey Jr. was so good.

thanks for this review. was thinking about catching it soon, so its good to hear some positive info on it..

[bmack86]

okay, because I wasn't sure if your statement was going to dramatically alter my interpretation of this fantastic film. I started out a bit wary; the beginning seemed almost too conventional for Tarkovsky. There were regular shots, and it seemed to move decently. However, once they wound up in the Zone, it became something amazing, and I liked the way he contrasted outside the zone with inside. The journey is impressive, and I like the fact that there is a possible twist at the end; it's not clear whether there really is one or not, but the possibility is there, and that was fascinating to me. I loved it, and it's probably my favorite Tarkovsky I've seen

[Xenocide]

has anyone seen the new X-Files movie?
Hear its suppose to be very good.
Do you need to watch the previous one in order to go see it?
I've seen most of the television series, but not the older X-Files movies.

can't believe no one has posted on this yet...


the X-Files movie was pretty good (even if it was a kinda restrained plot, and less sci-fi than The Happening)...

and no, you don't need to have seen the previous movie... or even the series for that matter... although, i saw only a few little things here and there that you could even connect to the series, pretty stand-alone flick if you ask me... no Cigarette-Smoking man or Lone Gunmen or aliens or anything like that... a couple of real funny moments too... and a real die-hard fan moment at the end too... but at the same time, if you changed the name of the movie it coulda been a Ashley Judd/Morgan Freeman vehicle... the abundance of snow was a nice visual effect throughout... (secret scene at the end of this one too)

god, Gillian Anderson looks fuckin hot!

[Xenocide]

Step Brothers was better than most of the recent Will Ferrell stuff out there, but the few very, very funny moments didn't totally make up for the not-nearly as funny moments that made up the majority of the flick... (2 secret scenes, btw)

Wanted was a tad over-the-top, but not nearly as bad as I was expecting... (compared to most of the crappy summer blockbusters... {dark knight aside} i'd say it was pretty good)

Hellboy II was eh... good visuals, and better than most of the recent comic book fare (hulk, hancock, etc)

Mama Mia... best & worst movie of '08? (well, except for Darkon maybe)... Amanda Seyfried is always fucking hot as fuck though, so... credits were funniest part of the flick by far...

[Down Rodeo]

okay, because I wasn't sure if your statement was going to dramatically alter my interpretation of this fantastic film. I started out a bit wary; the beginning seemed almost too conventional for Tarkovsky. There were regular shots, and it seemed to move decently. However, once they wound up in the Zone, it became something amazing, and I liked the way he contrasted outside the zone with inside. The journey is impressive, and I like the fact that there is a possible twist at the end; it's not clear whether there really is one or not, but the possibility is there, and that was fascinating to me. I loved it, and it's probably my favorite Tarkovsky I've seen

So do you think they were in the Room at the end of the movie? Stalker said they were on the threshold, but it seemed to me like their innermost desires were actually fulfilled. Very fascinating movie, but I don't think it tops Andrei Rublev for me.

[bmack86]

Well, based on some of the things that happened, specifically with the Stalker, I wasn't sure whether the room really had the powers he suggested at all. When he has that breakdown at the end, I couldn't help but think that maybe the reason the room worked so well for him was just because it inspired hope in people, regardless of whether it granted their wishes. He never saw that it had actually granted anything that anybody asked for, as he says, but he just believes. The two literal thinkers he brought with him make him question his faith, which has always gotten him through the tough and bleak area.

[Down Rodeo]

Yeah, those are good points. But the writer just wanted to be inspired again, and he seemed to have found his inspiration by the end, and the scientist wanted his wife and lover dead, and I seem to recall a scene with a dead woman lying on the ground. I may be mistaken, I don't know.

Also, doesn't the final scene seem to suggest that the Zone actually does have supernatural powers after all? Or it could just signify the need for faith.

[schoolofruckus]

W. teaser. Watch it quick before it gets yanked.

PJh7Md5KuWc

[bmack86]

Yeah, those are good points. But the writer just wanted to be inspired again, and he seemed to have found his inspiration by the end, and the scientist wanted his wife and lover dead, and I seem to recall a scene with a dead woman lying on the ground. I may be mistaken, I don't know.

Also, doesn't the final scene seem to suggest that the Zone actually does have supernatural powers after all? Or it could just signify the need for faith.

It's entirely possible. Someone pointed out to me that it could have been the oncoming train moving the glasses, although I disagree with that. If they were in the room, though, then the Stalker's deepest wish would have had to come true as well. So, that leaves open the question of what he really would have asked for. Did he want his daughter to be better (hence the supernatural ability playing some part) or did he want the Zone to exist? I lean towards the latter. The fact that the Zone is there gives him something to believe in, so he can go through his days without collapsing under the weight of life.

[Courtney]

W. teaser. Watch it quick before it gets yanked.

PJh7Md5KuWc

Yanked. :(


I have seen a series of mediocre films this summer, including most recently Baby Mama. Although the jokes were tired, I guess I can at least appreciate that it broke the romantic comedy mold. Not to mention that Tina Fey and Amy Poehler definitely have more chemistry than 99% of on-screen couples.

[corbo]

step brothers had me LMAO

[Blinken]

Here is another link for the W. trailer

http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/w/teaser-trailer

[algunz]

I am watching "The Ten" right now. I'm not sure what to think of it. I've definitely had a few good laughs.


Winona is still on my "I'd go gay for . . ." list.

[tessalasset]

I thought I was totally gonna get ripped on for coming in here and saying Step Brothers was good but I see I'm in good company. I definitely didn't think it was the best one of Judd's lately, but there were many times that I laughed out loud at random scenes or lines. The whole premise and story line was retarded but they kinda made it work. I LOVED the ending. At first I thought it was so cheap as fuck, but then it kept getting cheaper and cheaper until it was fucking hilarious to me and I was laughing out loud. And someone was definitely smoking weed in the theater during the film.


There was a trailer for pineapple express beforehand and it looked sooooo funny. I sorta can't wait to see that.

[Hopeless Semantic]

Caught I'm Reed Fish yesterday and though it wasn't the greatest movie I've seen before, it was a rather decent movie. Jay Baruchel of Knocked up and Undeclared fame, stars as Reed Fish a smalltown radio show host who is caught in life's scheme of following his well-loved, deceased father. He is torn by his fiance and his once good friend who has returned to Mud Meadows. It is a rather quaint film and the way they play the film's point-of-view was also relatively interesting. Anyhow, I think Schuyler Fisk's performance in the bar scene was one of the highlights of the movie.

[schoolofruckus]

Interesting....I've never even heard of that one.

Here's the teaser for Pixar's next film, Up. Looks to be about an old man who ties balloons to his house so it can lift off and.....I don't know.

AFdHyW-FGRk

[Hopeless Semantic]

Well, the early moaning of Wall-E were kinda iffy on the movie and look how that turned out. Here's to Up bringing something great to the big screen.

On a sidenote, Lost Boys 2 (blah) is coming to DVD tomorrow.

[stinkbutt]

I finally got around to seeing Dark Knight again and you guys were right although I still don't think Batman looked surprised when he walked through the door. When I watched the second time I realized the place where Harvey took Gordan and family was the same address that Joker told Batman Dent was at, but it was where Rachel died. As lame as it is you all were right.

[PotVsKtl]

I had heard Stone was trying to get some of his Hollywood pull back by making a less controversial W documentary. It appears that is not the case.

[PotVsKtl]

Docudrama.

[schoolofruckus]

I think he already tried to do that with World Trade Center. Hopefully he feels like he's redeemed himself enough that he can make this movie the way it should be.

[Blinken]

Isn't W supposed to come out before the election?

[PotVsKtl]

http://chud.com/articles/content_images/125/t-rex%20third.jpg

[Mr.Nipples]

good!

[whynotsmile99]

holy shit thats a great poster

[thestripe]

Isn't W supposed to come out before the election?

imdb has 17 Oct 2008 as the U.S release date.

[schoolofruckus]

Trailer for The Brothers Bloom. (http://movies.yahoo.com/premieres/9021110/standardformat/) Talented director (Rian Johnson, who made Brick), solid cast (Rachel Weisz, Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo)......awful trailer. I hope it's better than this.

Unless Aronofsky's The Wrestler or Soderbergh's Che comes out before year's end, there's very little to look forward to in American cinema this fall outside of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Milk.

[tessalasset]

Oh my god the new Harry Potter trailer gave me the chills.

[stinkbutt]

Oh my god the new Harry Potter trailer gave me the chills.

This is out already where?

[iv3rdawG]

This is out already where?

sBGbKCm_pQQ

[amyzzz]

wicked.

[ragingdave]

Next up...

Harry Potter
Fly's with Silver Wings

[Mr. Dylanja]

I saw Mongol last night, loved it.

Great epic and beautiful cinematography!

Can't wait for parts 2 and 3!

[unitedwestand]

guess we now know the next Tom Cruise movie.
from IMDB:
From John Woo.
The Director of Windtalkers

Tom Cruise
Dakota Fanning

From the National Best Seller Novel

Isaac's Storm
Memorial Day. 2009

Plot: In 1900, The Most Deadliest Disaster in U.S. History happened, known today as The Galveston Hurricane.

[whynotsmile99]

guess we now know the next Tom Cruise movie.
from IMDB:
From John Woo.
The Director of Windtalkers

Tom Cruise
Dakota Fanning

From the National Best Seller Novel

Isaac's Storm
Memorial Day. 2009

Plot: In 1900, The Most Deadliest Disaster in U.S. History happened, known today as The Galveston Hurricane.

never even heard of the Galveston Hurricane. When did this pop up and how will it be ready by 2009? I thought woo was tied up with his epic 4 hour Chinese film and Cruise was doing that plot to kill Hitler movie that got postponed

[schoolofruckus]

guess we now know the next Tom Cruise movie.
from IMDB:
From John Woo.
The Director of Windtalkers

Tom Cruise
Dakota Fanning

From the National Best Seller Novel

Isaac's Storm
Memorial Day. 2009

Plot: In 1900, The Most Deadliest Disaster in U.S. History happened, known today as The Galveston Hurricane.

Nothing good can come of this.

But Tom Cruise's next movie is Valkyrie. He's also got a (supposedly) pretty funny cameo in Tropic Thunder.

[KungFuJoe]

noooooo!!

John Woo needs to stay in China & away from Hollywood.

Red Cliff has gotten amazing reviews & I can't wait to see it. I'm not going to settle for the condensed 3hr U.S. release either.

[Down Rodeo]

I saw Sokurov's Day of Eclipse tonight at the PFA, and I wasn't terribly impressed. It was supposed to be a sci-fi film in the same vein as Tarkovsky, but I spent most of the movie trying to figure out what the hell was going on. Visually, it was actually very stunning and creative, but the story needed some coherence to really make an impact. Maybe with more knowledge of Central Asia and the effects of Stalinism, it might have been more appreciated. Oh well, I'm still excited to watch Russian Ark when I get a chance.

[rage patton]

http://chud.com/articles/content_images/125/t-rex%20third.jpg

Is this Rob Zombies animated movie? I was reading about it a couple months ago and it sounds like it is going to be fucked up. I was wondering what happened to it. Ask and you shall recieve.

[wmgaretjax]

I saw Sokurov's Day of Eclipse tonight at the PFA, and I wasn't terribly impressed. It was supposed to be a sci-fi film in the same vein as Tarkovsky, but I spent most of the movie trying to figure out what the hell was going on. Visually, it was actually very stunning and creative, but the story needed some coherence to really make an impact. Maybe with more knowledge of Central Asia and the effects of Stalinism, it might have been more appreciated. Oh well, I'm still excited to watch Russian Ark when I get a chance.

haven't seen that Sokurov film, but I'll look into it.

I will vouch for Russian Ark, Mother and Son, Father and Son, The Sun, and The Second Circle.

[PotVsKtl]

I'm starting to get the feeling Valkyrie isn't getting released.

No, it's not an animated movie.

[PotVsKtl]

Russian Ark was over the line.

[rage patton]

No, it's not an animated movie.

Oh really? Hmm... well then in that case I am still wondering what happened to that project. Either way that poster looks so bad, it had to be good.

[iv3rdawG]

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28771.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28772.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28773.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28774.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28775.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/28776.jpg

[stinkbutt]

Oh really? Hmm... well then in that case I am still wondering what happened to that project. Either way that poster looks so bad, it had to be good.

Still coming out I think next year but it's not that movie above just imdb it

[Hopeless Semantic]

Caught Step Brothers last night and even though it wasn't the greatest movie, it managed to entertain a friend of mine, and to see her laugh was good enough for me. It is essentially the same smarm that Will Farrell replicates in any of his other films, so it isn't remarkable. There is laughs to be had throughout the film, but nothing that hasn't been don a hundred times over. If you're looking to laugh a little at the stupidity of a film, I recommend it. Or, bring along someone who needed a break from the weight on her shoulders. It will make things a tad bit more enjoyable.

[schoolofruckus]

Trailer for Soderbergh's Che. This/these (if they release it in separate halves, as it was written) need to come out this fall - it's that simple. I'm not even some frathouse Che apologist; this just looks like it has potential for greatness.

uAsyGJbuU9Q

[Down Rodeo]

Wow, that does look really good. I hope it comes out soon.

[wmgaretjax]

I have a Parisian/Mexican friend who went to Cannes that said it was awful...

She has good taste in films, so it makes me nervous...

[Yablonowitz]

In case you're very particular to this thread as the only meaningful movie thread, I thought I'd provide you with some selected dramatizations of "Wasted's Foreign Book/Movie Palace." (http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/28217/Selected%20Readings%20from%20Wasted%27s%20F.zip)

This is clearly giving the movie corner a run for its money.

[Mr.Nipples]

In case you're very particular to this thread as the only meaningful movie thread, I thought I'd provide you with some selected dramatizations of "Wasted's Foreign Book/Movie Palace." (http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/28217/Selected%20Readings%20from%20Wasted%27s%20F.zip)

This is clearly giving the movie corner a run for its money.

'hahahahaha' just isnt enough for this...

[schoolofruckus]

In case you're very particular to this thread as the only meaningful movie thread, I thought I'd pr