General Movies Thread

[Vagrant]

Too fucking long, nigger.

[Fingolfin]

Worth it every time.

[Mattias]

Has anyone here seen In Bruges? That maybe qualifies as a little niche, but it's hands-down my favourite film ever; the dialogue is the best I've ever heard, and it's just generally a really great black comedy (slash... indescribable thing).

In Bruges is good, it kinda reminds me of KnK with all the talk about philospohy and existance, followed by an orgy or a gun fight. If you liked it, check out Seven Psychopaths which was written by the same guy and has Colin Farrel basiclly be him struggling to write another movie.

By the way, I saw The Judge last week. It's a pretty good movie and Robert Duvall shits himself on camera so I think he'll get an Oscar nod for it.

[SeiKeo]

For all the hype surrounding 2001: A Space Odyssey, I didn't find it as a satisfying film.

Maybe you didn't 'get' it.

[SeiKeo]

it definitely is.

- - - Updated - - -

Best 2014 Soundtrack Selection

lol

[Raven2785]

Maybe you didn't 'get' it.

Pay no attention to the hipster everyone.

Also, welcome back.

[Ivan The Mouse]

Maybe you didn't 'get' it.

Well, nobody will ever get it because the film is just a part of a larger verse where the monolith, the seemingly quasi-central figure of the film, turns our to be an alien machinery made by creatures from another galaxy. But you won't know that unless you visit the Wikipedia page or read the fucking novel.

Even then, that doesn't explain why Dave ends up in a living room after the acid trip dimension that is the atmosphere and landscape of Jupiter.

[instantcaching]

U Ready For It...Terminator Genesis.

[mewarmo990]

Doesn't it have some funny spelling? Genisys or something?

[SeiKeo]

Well, nobody will ever get it because the film is just a part of a larger verse where the monolith, the seemingly quasi-central figure of the film, turns our to be an alien machinery made by creatures from another galaxy. But you won't know that unless you visit the Wikipedia page or read the fucking novel.

That's not in the film; I don't know why you care about it.

[Raven2785]

Well, nobody will ever get it because the film is just a part of a larger verse where the monolith, the seemingly quasi-central figure of the film, turns our to be an alien machinery made by creatures from another galaxy. But you won't know that unless you visit the Wikipedia page or read the fucking novel.

Even then, that doesn't explain why Dave ends up in a living room after the acid trip dimension that is the atmosphere and landscape of Jupiter.

Being fair, it's not jus 2001. a lot of movies during that time period ended up in ways that made moviegoers go "... What?" the idea being that you would leave the movie theatre and be sit down with your friend to talk about "ok, wtf was that movie about?"

did it work? somewhat.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not in the film; I don't know why you care about it.

That is the point he is trying to make, he cares about because it's NOT in the film.

[Ivan The Mouse]

That is the point he is trying to make, he cares about because it's NOT in the film.

This. I mean, if you're going to give me a goddamn rectangular smooth slate planted in the Moon's surface by God-knows-who for some reason, you gotta give me the answers to the whos and whys of that, instead just leaving it alone to stare at fetus Dave's fucking face at the end of the film and not get answers.

And if you're going to give me bullshit about how I don't get it, excuse me, but I do. I do get it, just as any average viewer from the 60s with no knowledge to the books or an Internet connection gets it, which means nobody will. You say that it's not in the movie? Then there you fucking have it: It's not in the movie, therefore nobody will ever get it. If you say you did, you are fucking lying and being legit pretentious.

[SeiKeo]

No, it's legitimately obvious that you don't get 'it' since you think 'it' is the book plot. The book and the movie are not the same, for one.

[I3uster]

Except they were conceived as companion pieces?

Oh wait right "facts" aren't relevant, strict no-fact zone, carry on.

[SeiKeo]

Source your 'fact.'

[I3uster]

literally just google writing of 2001

this is one of the most well-documented film production efforts because its kind of a big deal movie

[Ivan The Mouse]

Why do you care about the material answers so much?

If a movie uses a door as a symbol for whatever reason do you need to know where that door was built, in how many days and using what materials?

Nope, but I have to know why that door is a central gleaming figure in the story, why is it there, who built it and how is it relevant. If you don't tell those things, whatever symbolism you invest in the damn door is bullshit because your story can go on without it.

[Ivan The Mouse]

No, it's legitimately obvious that you don't get 'it' since you think 'it' is the book plot. The book and the movie are not the same, for one.

Then what is the monolith for, then? And why is it titled "2001: A Space Odyssey", if the book of the same name is not a part of it?

I mean, if "it" isn't the book plot, then what is "it", a post-modern nonsense that only an elite few would understand? The whole film would then be an "art" film: It only makes sense to whoever created it, but incomprehensible to the rest. It has no vested meaning, so therefore whatever symbolism that was put there by the creator is useless.

- - - Updated - - -

realtalk ivan did you actually watch the movie

Yes. I wouldn't complain this much if I didn't watch it, more so get annoyed by it's tryhard efforts of reel the viewer in it's aura of whatever mystery it has.

All it was said about the monolith is that maybe aliens built it, it makes an earsplitting sound when someone is near it, it appeared at the dawn of man, it floated near Jupiter, and it showed up in the ending. Every fucking time it appears is a giant disconnect. So don't doubt if I watch the film, because I did it without anyone disturbing me.

[SeiKeo]

The Monoliths are God, c'mon man.

[I3uster]

Actually the intent of the ending isn't to be cryptic but intuitive. It's not postmodern but impressionist. It's not something to decode or understand, but something you're supposed to feel as pretentious as that sounds.

So don't worry if you don't "get" it, "getting it" is a dumb concept when applied to art that views everything as some kind of mystery to be decoded when the aim often is not a factual message but rather an impression or emotional response.