I watched this 2 nights ago:

And I positively ADORED it. It's 5 or so years old, though. I'd never heard of it before a week or so ago when netlfix told me I'd love it and I did.

Quirky, cute, witty, colorful and a really fun aesthetic.

Highly recommended.

Deadcake said:

I saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes I loved it, can't wait for the next ones 4/5

Is it strange that i found that Ceaser sexy

[Edited 12/29/11 14:28pm]

formallypickles said:

Deadcake said:

I saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes I loved it, can't wait for the next ones 4/5

Is it strange that i found that Ceaser sexy

[Edited 12/29/11 14:28pm]

No,

you've had a rough couple of days

so it could happen...

formallypickles said:

PurpleJedi said:

The Dubai scenes made it worthwhile.

The "nuclear-terrorist-about-to-destroy-the-world" plot was done better by James Bond back in the 80's.

I thought it was better done here. Much more realistic. Especially pointing out that it takes more than just obtaining a bomb to detonate a bomb.

What they did with the missile after launch was criminally lazy. They could have done it right and it would have been a more intense scene.

SUPRMAN said:

artist76 said:

I LOVED "Revolutionary Road." As a kid, I thouht the '50s were like "Leave it to Beaver," but as I matured and learned about history and life generally, it's apparent that a LOT of stuff was happening and brewing in the '50s. And in suburban life and in "perfect" homes even today.

The acting is brilliant.

A companion type movie would be "Pleasantville."

And since Leo was in "Revolutionary Road," I'm reminded of "Inception," which I've seen about 5 times now because was recently on repeat on HBO.

I think it would be closer to 'Far From Heaven' than 'Pleasantville.'

I haven't seen it though but have seen 'Pleasantville' and 'Far From Heaven.'

Yes, I see the connection w/ "Far From Heaven" - but "Pleasantville" is also dealing w/ the deep down feelings that are being suppressed and being made to conform to some post-war suburban ideal. Pleasantville is ultimately a "feel-good" movie, of course, while "Revolutionary Road" is very much the opposite, mainly because RR is very realistic and Pleasantville is a kind of fantasy. But similar themes touched on. Since you haven't seen RR, put it on your list! You seem like a thinking man based on your posts, so it may be up your alley.

SUPRMAN said:

PurpleJedi said:

The Dubai scenes made it worthwhile.

The "nuclear-terrorist-about-to-destroy-the-world" plot was done better by James Bond back in the 80's.

I thought it was better done here. Much more realistic. Especially pointing out that it takes more than just obtaining a bomb to detonate a bomb.

What they did with the missile after launch was criminally lazy. They could have done it right and it would have been a more intense scene.

I see your point to a certain extent. I mean, the bad guy didn't really "obtain a bomb" but rather the wherewithall with which to launch a bomb.

...and if you ask me...getting those codes was criminally easy, and wouldn't the Russian high command just CHANGE the codes once they'd been stolen???

PurpleJedi said:

SUPRMAN said:

I thought it was better done here. Much more realistic. Especially pointing out that it takes more than just obtaining a bomb to detonate a bomb.

What they did with the missile after launch was criminally lazy. They could have done it right and it would have been a more intense scene.

I see your point to a certain extent. I mean, the bad guy didn't really "obtain a bomb" but rather the wherewithall with which to launch a bomb.

...and if you ask me...getting those codes was criminally easy, and wouldn't the Russian high command just CHANGE the codes once they'd been stolen???

But the Russians didn't yet know the codes were missing.

But after the missile launched, they had a 30 minute window to defuse the bomb.

1. If the bomb were sub launched it was likely MIRV'd. That mean multiple warheads. Economy of putting them on a sub.

2. Upon free fall re-entry the missile casing would have opened releasing six to eight individual nuclear warheads. Obviously once that happens, it's a lot harder to knock down six to eight warheads rather than just one.

3. I don't know of a single sub carrying nuclear warheads that still carries one warhead per missile. Inefficient in limited space of a submarine.

4. Any atomic or thermonuclear device does not detonate upon impact with the ground or a structure. They are ALL designed for airburst of 1,500 feet or higher. You get a broader blast radius and the power of the bomb means it doesn't have to touch the ground to destroy everything for miles.

If they had disarmed it before its free fall, then it would have simply fallen to earth. It would still have been red hot from re-entry and would have done a lot more damage even grazing a building.

[Edited 12/30/11 16:39pm]

SUPRMAN said:

PurpleJedi said:

I see your point to a certain extent. I mean, the bad guy didn't really "obtain a bomb" but rather the wherewithall with which to launch a bomb.

...and if you ask me...getting those codes was criminally easy, and wouldn't the Russian high command just CHANGE the codes once they'd been stolen???

But the Russians didn't yet know the codes were missing.

But after the missile launched, they had a 30 minute window to defuse the bomb.

1. If the bomb were sub launched it was likely MIRV'd. That mean multiple warheads. Economy of putting them on a sub.

2. Upon free fall re-entry the missile casing would have opened releasing six to eight individual nuclear warheads. Obviously once that happens, it's a lot harder to knock down six to eight warheads rather than just one.

3. I don't know of a single sub carrying nuclear warheads that still carries one warhead per missile. Inefficient in limited space of a submarine.

4. Any atomic or thermonuclear device does not detonate upon impact with the ground or a structure. They are ALL designed for airburst of 1,500 feet or higher. You get a broader blast radius and the power of the bomb means it doesn't have to touch the ground to destroy everything for miles.

If they had detonated it before its free fall, then it would have simply fallen to earth. It would still have been red hot from re-entry and would have done a lot more damage even grazing a building.

Damn, you know your nuclear weaponry, huh?

Read the book. Watched both movies the same night. I will have to say that I did like the Amercian version. I was expecting to like the Swedish film more. I also liked the way Roony Mara played Lisbeth more than Noomy Rapace. It seemed she was closer to the book personality of Lisbeth. They did leave some important parts of the book out of both films. I wonder why?

And Daniel Craig is definitely hotter than Micheal Nyqvist.

I plan to read the next two books, The Girl Who Played with Fire, which will come out on film here in 2013, and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest. I hope Netlfix has those two movies!

[Edited 12/30/11 14:02pm]

noimageatall said:

Read the book. Watched both movies the same night. I will have to say that I did like the Amercian version. I was expecting to like the Swedish film more. I also liked the way Roony Mara played Lisbeth more than Noomy Rapace. It seemed she was closer to the book personality of Lisbeth. They did leave some important parts of the book out of both films. I wonder why?

And Daniel Craig is definitely hotter than Micheal Nyqvist.

I plan to read the next two books, The Girl Who Played with Fire, which will come out on film here in 2013, and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest. I hope Netlfix has those two movies!

[Edited 12/30/11 14:02pm]

I've actually been told that the American version is better than the Swedish even though Niels Arden Oplev did a really good job with the Swedish one. Did you find the American better? One thing Ive been thinking is that Daniel Craig is 2 hot 2 play Mikael Blomkvist.

Do read the other books - they are really really good.

lenis said:

noimageatall said:

Read the book. Watched both movies the same night. I will have to say that I did like the Amercian version. I was expecting to like the Swedish film more. I also liked the way Roony Mara played Lisbeth more than Noomy Rapace. It seemed she was closer to the book personality of Lisbeth. They did leave some important parts of the book out of both films. I wonder why?

And Daniel Craig is definitely hotter than Micheal Nyqvist.

I plan to read the next two books, The Girl Who Played with Fire, which will come out on film here in 2013, and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest. I hope Netlfix has those two movies!

[Edited 12/30/11 14:02pm]

I've actually been told that the American version is better than the Swedish even though Niels Arden Oplev did a really good job with the Swedish one. Did you find the American better? One thing Ive been thinking is that Daniel Craig is 2 hot 2 play Mikael Blomkvist.

Do read the other books - they are really really good.

I thought the Swedish film was better in some ways and the Amercian version better in other ways. I liked them both. I don't think Daniel is too 'hot' to play Mikael. If you look at him objectively, he's not that good-looking. His mouth is too pouty, his eyes are weird...but he's got that 'something.' His face is interesting. I think he's perfect for the part. Just the right combination of imperfection and ruggedness.

I plan on buying the next two books today before I see the other films.

All three of the Swedish versions are on Netflix, either in Swedish with subtitles or dubbed in American English.

runphilrun said:

All three of the Swedish versions are on Netflix, either in Swedish with subtitles or dubbed in American English.

I saw the first one last night but didn't look for the other ones. Thanks!!

PurpleJedi said:

SUPRMAN said:

But the Russians didn't yet know the codes were missing.

But after the missile launched, they had a 30 minute window to defuse the bomb.

1. If the bomb were sub launched it was likely MIRV'd. That mean multiple warheads. Economy of putting them on a sub.

2. Upon free fall re-entry the missile casing would have opened releasing six to eight individual nuclear warheads. Obviously once that happens, it's a lot harder to knock down six to eight warheads rather than just one.

3. I don't know of a single sub carrying nuclear warheads that still carries one warhead per missile. Inefficient in limited space of a submarine.

4. Any atomic or thermonuclear device does not detonate upon impact with the ground or a structure. They are ALL designed for airburst of 1,500 feet or higher. You get a broader blast radius and the power of the bomb means it doesn't have to touch the ground to destroy everything for miles.

If they had detonated it before its free fall, then it would have simply fallen to earth. It would still have been red hot from re-entry and would have done a lot more damage even grazing a building.

Damn, you know your nuclear weaponry, huh?

LOL

yeah.

If they had disarmed it while it coasted through space (another peeve, it didn't look like it got high enough as an ICBM (Intercontinental ballistic missile) but I was willing to give them that) then when it re-entered the earth's atmosphere it would have merely been a blazing hunk of space debris. It's radioactive core would have made it easy to track.

The impact with the building would have done a lot more damage to the building and the warhead should have disintegrated scattering radioactive material over downtown San Francisco not bounced. Even a glancing blow at the speed it would be moving would disintegrate it.

it was filmed, it's on dvd, it was in theatres, and has bonus scenes. i'm considering it a movie.

(and i saw it in person more than once)

and it's KYLIE...so bow down!!

[img:$uid]http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTM0ODk3MjM1MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzc1MDIwNA@@._V1._SY317_.jpg[/img:$uid]

7/10

Christian Bale gets a clear 10/10.

I was "forced" to watch this (hell, I paid for it) but I must admit that I ENJOYED the film. Not as good as Shrek I & II, but better than parts III and IV. Very good prequel, anyway. Banderas nails the role and Humpty Dumpty was both disgusting and cool. Action packed and kiddie friendly, but still enjoyable for adults...

Watched this documentary, Tabloid, last night....

What an odd woman. I have no doubt that she's guilty, but she talks so damn much that you get mesmerized and start to believe her. Definitely recommended viewing. 7 out of 10 - could have been a little higher but there's not a lot of production to it.

Edit: I guess you can't link to IMDb photos anymore.

[Edited 12/31/11 9:46am]

[img:$uid]http://www.filmposter-archiv.de/filmplakat/1979/apocalypse_now.jpg[/img:$uid]

10/10

[Edited 1/1/12 4:53am]

[img:$uid]http://cdn-7.nflximg.com/en_us/boxshots/gsd/70123257.jpg[/img:$uid]

The Art of the Steal

This was so good! 4.5/5 stars, only because I didn't like the final real-life outcome.

Albert Barnes, who made a fortune in chemistry, managed to amass one of the finest post-Impressionist and modern art collections (Barnes Foundation) in the world, worth billions of dollars. His will was very clear about what should happen to it upon his death - that it should never be sold, lent, or relocated. But upon his death, a decades old grudge between Barnes and the Annenberg family set in motion a plan by the Philadelphia movers and shakers - politicians, cultural tycoons, etc. - to move the collection to Philadelphia. Some of the legal (and illegal) maneuvers were really outrageous...ambition, quest for power, and spite can make people do crazy things.

.

[Edited 1/1/12 7:49am]

Yeah. I know. Give me as much crap as you like. I enjoy looking at Mila Kunis - not much more logic behind the decision to watch this than that.

I'll give he movie a 5 our of 10 (which means it was very average). Nothing new or undexpected, but nothing so annoying as to be unwatchable. Saw the flash mob ending coming three train stops away, though.

PurpleJedi said:

The Dubai scenes made it worthwhile.

The "nuclear-terrorist-about-to-destroy-the-world" plot was done better by James Bond back in the 80's.

Saw this yesterday. I say your assessment of is correct. As far as the action piece goes, it's one of the best action movies I've seen in recent years. As far as the plot goes, well it was Bond meets The Transporter to me. Even though people make a big fuss over Paula Patton, she was dry to me and basically not that good an actress. The woman is very beautiful, but I wasn't convinced at all during the scene where she supposed to seduce the Billionaire playboy in Dubai. I was like huh? That's it, that's all she had to offer during this scene? Tom could have seduced this man better than she did. Just sayin'.

I watched this movie probably for the 5th time today because my gf never saw it and found it in my DVD collection. After the 5th time, it's still my favorite film by Guillermo del Torro. A classic.

The Guard (2011) - an unorthodox Irish cop teams up with an FBI agent to take down an international drug-smuggling ring. hysterial and charming. one of the year's best. 5/5

Rayan said:

The Guard (2011) - an unorthodox Irish cop teams up with an FBI agent to take down an international drug-smuggling ring. hysterial and charming. one of the year's best. 5/5

Damn Don's in this? I gotta check it out then.

missfee said:

PurpleJedi said:

The Dubai scenes made it worthwhile.

The "nuclear-terrorist-about-to-destroy-the-world" plot was done better by James Bond back in the 80's.

Saw this yesterday. I say your assessment of is correct. As far as the action piece goes, it's one of the best action movies I've seen in recent years. As far as the plot goes, well it was Bond meets The Transporter to me. Even though people make a big fuss over Paula Patton, she was dry to me and basically not that good an actress. The woman is very beautiful, but I wasn't convinced at all during the scene where she supposed to seduce the Billionaire playboy in Dubai. I was like huh? That's it, that's all she had to offer during this scene? Tom could have seduced this man better than she did. Just sayin'.

I saw The Artist over the holidays. It.Is.AWESOME!

[Edited 1/3/12 8:33am]