• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Chit-Chat: EVAN PETERS HAVE MY BABIES

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
Mr Dog, where do you make the time to see so many movies? Or really, how can you afford to? :o

I want to see lots and lots of movies (even though I have bad impressions of lots of them I still want to see them just to know for sure) but they either have short runs (or don't show at all) at my theatre so I never get a chance to see them, or they all come out at the same time and I can't afford to see them all.
I try and see something at least once a week, be it new release or something older. Indeed, most of the films I watch come around towards the end of the year, so there are often 3-film weekends that are great. There's also the advantage of having the London Film Festival every year, which crams about 20 films into 2 weeks. And I have lots of disposable income. *shrug*

According to my master list, I saw 59 2012 films. Up from 58 in 2011. Hopefully 2013 will be the year I break 60! :D
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
You should try getting your films through, uh, "surreptitious methods". :x I know I have to.

EDIT: Also Scarf, I looked up your last.fm. Sigur Ros <3
Sigur Rós ♥ yay
And by "surreptitious methods" you're referring to Netflix of course. ;]

I try and see something at least once a week, be it new release or something older. Indeed, most of the films I watch come around towards the end of the year, so there are often 3-film weekends that are great. There's also the advantage of having the London Film Festival every year, which crams about 20 films into 2 weeks. And I have lots of disposable income. *shrug*

According to my master list, I saw 59 2012 films. Up from 58 in 2011. Hopefully 2013 will be the year I break 60! :D
One a week? That doesn't sound so bad. I had the impression you were a walking encyclopedia of movie facts because you watched everything that came out. Now I know your secret
 

Rest

Showstealer Pro: Trial Version
353
Posts
12
Years
Sigur Rós ♥ yay
And by "surreptitious methods" you're referring to Netflix of course. ;]

They had a concert here in Malaysia weeks ago, but I couldn't come due to finals. I heard they did Staralfur and Agaetis Byrjun!

They'll never come back here again ;_; Well, at least we're getting Grimes in a month or so.

Yes, Netflix, totally
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
They had a concert here in Malaysia weeks ago, but I couldn't come due to finals. I heard they did Staralfur and Agaetis Byrjun!

They'll never come back here again ;_; Well, at least we're getting Grimes in a month or so.

Yes, Netflix, totally
They've been to so many places I could have seen them if I'd only known they were going to be there in advance and could have gotten tickets. :( I mean, some places were 4 or 5 hours aware, but that's still reasonable, right?

Oh, speaking of concerts. Since David Bowie is coming out with a new album (!!!) it's conceivable that he might have some live performances and I would have to see one.
 

antemortem

rest after tomorrow
7,481
Posts
12
Years
I would see movies more often if my friends ever had the money to see them with me, as I hate going to the theatre alone. I have a job of my own so it's fine in my respect, but nobody else ever has money and I am not paying for them. ): I would have seen a good ten more movies in the past couple of months alone if other people would stop being so lazy! I've missed out on many fantastic experiences.
 

Rest

Showstealer Pro: Trial Version
353
Posts
12
Years

Speaking of supporting performances, there wasn't a lot of good female supporting performances to cite for 2012, I thought. 2011 had a freak-load of amazing supporting performances by females (Bayat, Hatami and Farhadi in A Separation, Jessica Chastain in Take Shelter, Carey Mulligan in Shame, Mary Page Keller in Beginners, and some great turns by young actresses such as Elle Fanning and Shailene Woodley) and I would've easily compiled a top 5 or a top 10 favourite.

The few performances that I liked from last year was Adams in The Master, Isabelle Huppert in Amour, Jacki Weaver to a lesser extent... and that's it, and neither of them held up to any of 2011's quality performances. Of the five nominated for Best Supporting Actress this year, Hunt gave the best performance, but she's lead in the film in my eyes.

Anyways, Cat, you excited for that new Farhadi film? He's working with Tahar Rahim and Berenice Bejo. I exploded (in sheer excitement, of course).
 
Last edited:

antemortem

rest after tomorrow
7,481
Posts
12
Years
Well, I just returned from seeing Side Effects! What a fantastic movie, definitely one of the best psychological thrillers I've seen in awhile. It beat House at the End of the Street by a long shot, and even that was an alright movie. I feel like Rooney Mara, despite Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones' great performances, made that movie. She was excellent, superb; all those frivolous, complimentary adjectives! I love her so much and even moreso now.

Loved it!
 

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
I hate going to the theatre alone.
Honestly, after years of doing it, I now much prefer going to the cinema by myself. You don't have friends talking over you, you can be a complete pig in terms of refreshments without anyone you know judging you, you can find the best seat without having to worry about the people you're with, you can go and see the films you like as opposed to compromising and seeing something that'll appeal to everyone. All of these are entirely selfish reasons, but nowadays I find it weird going to the cinema with someone than without... but I'm aware I'll be in the minority on this one.
Speaking of supporting performances, there wasn't a lot of good female supporting performances to cite for 2012, I thought. 2011 had a freak-load of amazing supporting performances by females (Bayat, Hatami and Farhadi in A Separation, Jessica Chastain in Take Shelter, Carey Mulligan in Shame, Mary Page Keller in Beginners (!!!), and some great turns by young actresses such as Elle Fanning and Shailene Woodley) and I would've easily compiled a top 5 or a top 10 favourite.
Bolded the ones I agree with completely. Major props for mentioning Keller; Plummer got the Oscar but she was definitely best in show in that film.
The few performances that I liked from last year was Adams in The Master, Isabelle Huppert in Amour, Jacki Weaver to a lesser extent... and that's it, and neither of them held up to any of 2011's quality performances. Of the five nominated for Best Supporting Actress this year, Hunt gave the best performance, but she's lead in the film in my eyes.
I'd definitely agree with you on Hunt in the category (as well as all of the category fraud prevalent... along with Waltz who is not a supporting actor). And you're right in that great supporting female performances have been a lot more desolate this year. Off the top of my head, my favourite was Jennifer Ehle in Zero Dark Thirty, closely followed by Sarah Silverman in Take This Waltz, but when Huppert can come on screen for about 15 minutes and also deliver one of the best supporting perfs, that's not saying much in terms of the rest of the field this year.
Anyways, Cat, you excited for that new Farhadi film? He's working with Tahar Rahim and Berenice Bejo. I exploded (in sheer excitement, of course).
I'm always excited for a new Farhadi film. About Elly finally came out in the UK last year and that was amazeballs (not as amazeballs as A Separation, but what is?) and also featured one of the best supporting female performances last year in Golshifteh Farahani. I'll be interested to see how the language barrier affects this new one, but I'm definitely looking forward to it.
Well, I just returned from seeing Side Effects! What a fantastic movie, definitely one of the best psychological thrillers I've seen in awhile. It beat House at the End of the Street by a long shot, and even that was an alright movie. I feel like Rooney Mara, despite Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones' great performances, made that movie. She was excellent, superb; all those frivolous, complimentary adjectives! I love her so much and even moreso now.

Loved it!
I hate that I can't see this yet. Stupid month-long wait... but I'm glad you liked it, David!
 

Rest

Showstealer Pro: Trial Version
353
Posts
12
Years

About Elly...! I watched that last year and I agree, Golshifteh was spectacular in it (the ensemble was uniformly great as well). It really shows how good Asghar Farhadi is at directing his cast, big or small, and not to mention the well-executed story. I agree, A Separation was a finer piece, but both are equally compelling IMO. Needless to say, I cannot wait for The Past (and the lovely Berenice Bejo).

I watched two films last night; American dramedy Safety Not Guaranteed and Portugeuse drama Tabu. Safety Not Guaranteed was a fine film. I really enjoyed the trio of actors (especially Jake Johnson, whose performance I enjoyed immensely). It was light and really fun to watch, but it's nothing I've never seen before.

I enjoyed Tabu for its aesthetics; it was beautifully shot and scored, it's subdued, and I love the black-and-white experience. The film was cut into two different parts; I was very, very intrigued about the first (led by several great performances by the women), but I really did not care for the second (which was essentially a plot driven by all-monologue and camera). In the end, I really was more interested about the side characters from the first part. I probably would've enjoyed the film better if they expanded on the character Pilar. It was an alright film (taking into account I have never watched the original, 1931 version of the film).

I went out with my cousins just now and watched Bullet to the Head. Slept through half of it, and the parts I did watch were dumb. It was good to see Khal Drogo though!
 

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
Noooooo, GE Daily Chit-Chat, don't die on me! And just because I realised that I'm going to be away and not be able to watch the Oscars live next week due to being in Morocco! Nooooooooooo!
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
You can watch the Moroccan Oscars then. Tell us who wins the award for best... um... adaptation or Casablanca. Or something.

So, speaking of adaptations, which camp do we fall into? Stay faithful to the book and fans (who have proven that changes aren't really necessary for success) or make whatever changes and improvements are necessary to make a good movie (because books can be popular with a narrow appeal and a movie needs broader appeal)?
 

Mark Kamill

I like kitties
2,743
Posts
11
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen Jun 13, 2023
Man, I just saw Toy Story 3, brought a tear to my eye. Spanish Buzz is god-tier, so out there and random, yet it worked brilliantly.
"Now that I know about Buzz's spanish mode I'll be fine!"
"My what now?"
Best line EVER.
 

antemortem

rest after tomorrow
7,481
Posts
12
Years
So, speaking of adaptations, which camp do we fall into? Stay faithful to the book and fans (who have proven that changes aren't really necessary for success) or make whatever changes and improvements are necessary to make a good movie (because books can be popular with a narrow appeal and a movie needs broader appeal)?
Personally, I'm more of a supporter of sticking to the elements of the book as to appeal to the fandom that whatever is being adapted has garnered. I mean, really, consider the demographic that is likely to see the adapted movie. I would expect that the general consensus of said demographic will consist of those that are apart of the fandom and want to see their favorite book on the big screen, and the minority of such is made up of people that want to see a good movie to kill some time. I would be more willing to try and keep that fandom entertained with what they expect rather than switching things around.
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
Personally, I'm more of a supporter of sticking to the elements of the book as to appeal to the fandom that whatever is being adapted has garnered. I mean, really, consider the demographic that is likely to see the adapted movie. I would expect that the general consensus of said demographic will consist of those that are apart of the fandom and want to see their favorite book on the big screen, and the minority of such is made up of people that want to see a good movie to kill some time. I would be more willing to try and keep that fandom entertained with what they expect rather than switching things around.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but then at the back of my mind there is this little voice which says that it's good to get pushed out of your comfort zone. Like with the last Twilight movie they, briefly, made you think things weren't going to go the way you thought they were going to go and the movie was better (relatively) for changing that from the book.
 
14,092
Posts
14
Years
Most of the time people treat the book like a sacred cow and stay as literal to the book as possible, which is usually a good thing, but sometimes I feel that there are elements that would be better if changed or altered. The Lord of The Rings comes to mind, in a few scenes. The book isn't immaculate.
 

antemortem

rest after tomorrow
7,481
Posts
12
Years
I'm inclined to agree with you, but then at the back of my mind there is this little voice which says that it's good to get pushed out of your comfort zone. Like with the last Twilight movie they, briefly, made you think things weren't going to go the way you thought they were going to go and the movie was better (relatively) for changing that from the book.
Sure, sure, small alterations such as that are fine in my eyes, as they add a little flavor to the film, but it's also just that; a little flavor. It's not too much, and it's not too little that it's just a mirror image of the novel. It makes the audience feel like they are truly apart of a familiar-feeling adaptation of their favorite book, while at the same time giving it something that will make it more memorable than just what I said before, a mirror image of the novel.

Speaking of which, that was one fine twist that was added!
Most of the time people treat the book like a sacred cow and stay as literal to the book as possible, which is usually a good thing, but sometimes I feel that there are elements that would be better if changed or altered. The Lord of The Rings comes to mind, in a few scenes. The book isn't immaculate.
Some consider it a cardinal sin to not stay completely illiberal during the creation of the adaptation, haha.
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
I think we're all purists when it comes to the things closest to our hearts.

I still rage quietly about the adaptations of Earthsea.
 

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
I'm all about making the adaptation the best it can be. For the most part, what you like about a book won't be the same about what you like about a filmed version of the book: film allows for a much more visual approach to storytelling, whereas novels allow you to really get inside the characters' heads and really know what they're thinking. Because of that, I'm much more amenable to film-makers changing things up. If they treat the source material like it's a Bible or something, you might get a nice adaptation of a book, but it probably won't be appropriately cinematic in the same way that non-adaptation films often are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top