Re: Recently watched
Posted by ReNo on Fri Mar 11th at 8:40pm 2005
A typical Segal film gets 1 and a half!? What about a Chuck Norris film?
[addsig]

ReNo
member
5457 posts
933 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 22nd 2001
Location: Scotland
Occupation: Level Designer
Re: Recently watched
Posted by Kage_Prototype on Fri Mar 11th at 9:26pm 2005
Watched Alone In The Dark out of curiosity...bleh. Worse than RE.
[addsig]

Kage_Prototype
member
1248 posts
165 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 10th 2003
Location: Manchester UK
Occupation: Student
Re: Recently watched
Posted by Crono on Sat Mar 12th at 4:47am 2005
Oh God, The Crappicles of Riddick. The game is cool though.
Oh man, I wanted to see Alone in the Dark so bad. Just because it looked so terrible. And it had one of the best psuedo-elit-b-list-actors: Stephen Dworf.
[addsig]

Crono
super admin
6628 posts
633 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 19th 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Re: Recently watched
Posted by Adam Hawkins on Sat Mar 12th at 9:12am 2005
Watched 'The Grudge' (US version) last night. Nothing special but some nice tension build-up throughout. It's always better when they only give you glimpses of the big bad.
[addsig]

Adam Hawkins
member
858 posts
333 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 25th 2002
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Occupation: Specialty Systems Manager
Re: Recently watched
Posted by Joe-Bob on Sun Mar 13th at 3:10am 2005
I don't think that Hollywood makes one movie, and I said that I'm happy they don't. I think that critics review one movie.

Joe-Bob
member
180 posts
48 snarkmarks
Registered: Dec 3rd 2004
Re: Recently watched
Posted by Monqui on Sun Mar 13th at 5:28pm 2005
I own Mulholland drive, have seen it several times, and still have no freaking clue what the hell is going on in some parts. If you liked that, you may be interested in one of Lynch's other films, Lost Highway. I personally think it's one of my favorite films, but it's incredibly abstract and random. But, if you dwell on it enough, it really does make sense.
You have to realize though, that Lynch doesn't make movies in a normal manner. Basically, he has starts with characters, and various abstract images of what the characters do. Certain visions if you will. He then worries about tying everything together with a storyline, as opposed to most directors who have a storyline in mind first, and create situations based on that.
Once you understand that, things get a bit easier to disect- simply look at the individual parts as being completely atomic first- try to understand the symbolism on that level, then work your way up through the chain, and try to see where everything comes together. If you want, I can give you the basic rundown on Mulholland based on my analasys.
[addsig]

Monqui
member
743 posts
94 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 20th 2002
Location: Iowa, USA
Occupation: Poor College Student