Films/DVD Asylum

Disagree...

207.200.116.68

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

mkuller

(R)

In Reply to: The Life Aquatic. posted by tinear on May 15, 2005 at 17:01:49:

...I found it clever, ironic, mostly entertaining and at times even humerous. You kind of have to sit back, relax and just let it wash over you without expecting too much. I think you have to appreciate Bill Murray and his sense of humor first. Then it helps to have seen a Jacques Cousteau special or two in their day. The film's not for everybody. And some films acheive their effect more successfully on the big screen (where there are fewer distractions to upset the mood) than video.

Follow Ups:

I know Cousteau's programs quite well and this spoof - tinear 18:50:16 05/15/05 (12)
was poorly done.
But, I'm no Anderson fan...
- I suspect you... - mkuller 10:09:13 05/16/05 (2)
  ...hated "Lost in Translation", too.
  - WRONG! - tinear 16:26:45 05/17/05 (1)
    I have seen L in T three times and am looking forward to the next. These films, you must realize, have zero in common.
    - Bill Murray's deadpan humor in common...(nt) - mkuller 10:38:56 05/18/05 (0)
      (nt)
- Disclaimer required - jbmcb 05:54:36 05/16/05 (5)
  > But, I'm no Anderson fan...
  This would have been useful information in the original review. I know a lot of people who really like his work, and some who hate it. It's really a unique style, or at least emalgam, of directing, and not to everyone's taste.
  
  /*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/
  - Why? One can dislike an artist's previous - tinear 07:16:38 05/16/05 (4)
    efforts and favor the newest. I gave valid reasons for my dislike.
    - Valid reasons like... - PCL 07:22:24 05/16/05 (3)
      1) Angelica Houston looking like cadaver, and
      2) Bill Murray breezing through his lines?
      - Well, yeah. - tinear 12:00:18 05/16/05 (2)
        
        In Reply to: Valid reasons like... posted by PCL on May 16, 2005 at 07:22:24:
        
        They are two of the main actors so if they suck...Now, if Angelica was trying to look funny, ok. But her appearance had NO sense of irony, but:
        Neither did the movie and that's enough of a specific reason to discount it, for me.
        But, go ahead and buy it. Sometimes a work is so outrageously bad that one searches for reasons to prove it. Hey, you probably love Ishtar.
        
        Ishtar! - jbmcb 13:52:52 05/16/05 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Well, yeah. posted by tinear on May 16, 2005 at 12:00:18:
        
        For an example of the worst movie ever made, Ishtar is old and busted.
        New hotness: Manos, Hands of Fate.
        And I have the proof , too. C'mon, Ishtar isn't even on that list.
        
        /*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/
        
        Re: Ishtar - PCL 12:15:18 05/16/05 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Well, yeah. posted by tinear on May 16, 2005 at 12:00:18:
        
        You know...I caught it in the theatres when it was being universally panned. It really wasn't half as bad as people made it out to be. Sorta like Roeper calling 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' one of the worst movies of all time. C'mon, I mean has he even seen 'Eegah'?
- If Anderson would take out 45 minutes of his works they would be great . . . - mr grits 20:42:19 05/15/05 (2)
  Tannenbaums is a great example--it's like two movies.
  
  ----------
  This space available.
  - Anderson ain't no Bergman. Letting actors ad lib - tinear 16:29:46 05/17/05 (0)
    is harder than he might think. His films are thin gruel.
  - Well, watchable....perhaps. Now, to be great, they'd have - tinear 04:07:17 05/16/05 (0)
    to lose about 100 minutes.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Signature Sound

[ Signature Sound Lounge ]

You can not post to an archived thread.