Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Yeah, for years I had assumed that it was the type of movie that I would never care for, but recently out of embarassment, I decided to watch it.
Do you also plan a review for Gone with the Wind? I love this film, as well, but the length makes it tough to get through in one sitting. By the way, I know how much you love Lawrence of Arabia. It's been over 15 years since I've seen it, and I wasn't in the same state of mind regarding movies at the time. I found a copy on DVD for $9.44 and bought it. I can't wait until I get a chance to watch it.
Originally Posted by Garrett
Are you taking a break for a while, Slay? What do you think your next review will be?
|
Cast: Groucho Marx, Chico Marx, Harpo Marx, Kitty Carlisle, Allen Jones, Walter Woolf King, Sig Ruman, and Margeret Dumot Director: Sam Wood Writer(s): George S. Kaufman, Morrie Ryskind, and James Kevin McGuinness Country: USA Length: 96 min MPAA Rating: Not rated Released: 1935 moviereviews4fun.com rating: C+ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________
Cast: Gene Kelly, Leslie Caron, Oscar Levant, Georges Guétary, and Nina Foch Director: Vincente Minnelli Writer: Alan Jay Lerner Music: George Gershwin Country: USA Length: 113 min MPAA Rating: Not rated Released: 1951 moviereviews4fun.com rating: A You're absolutely right Mark! I wrote a couple more reviews for our favorite Marky Mark...I guess I'm part of his funky bunch now. :yup: Click on the title of the film you'd like to read the review for. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
A Night at the Opera
___________________________________________________________ An American in Paris |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
I saw Casablanca for the first time Friday and have seen it a total of 6 times now. I guess I kind of liked it.
Originally Posted by Mark
Do you also plan a review for Gone with the Wind? I love this film, as well, but the length makes it tough to get through in one sitting.
BTW, your reviews are terrific Bri ;) |
Originally Posted by T-850
I'm not really sure about this, but wasn't there a sequel Mark? :confused:
There was a mini-series called "Scarlett" in 1994. I know nothing about it other than what I just read at IMDb.com |
Casablanca is one of my favourite films, and I too assumed it would be to schmaltzy before I had seen it, but it's full of great characters and it has a superb cast - Ingrid Bergmann is beautiful andHumphrey Bogart's Rick is just too...cool (how I hate to use that word).
I agree with you, that Chico is under-used in A Night at the Opera, and that other Marx Brothers Films are funnier, but at least they got rid of Zeppo. :D Unlike you, the first films I remember seeing - when I was maybe three or four years old - were musicals, mostly with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, and so I still have a fondness for that kind of movie, and Gene Kelly undeniably was the most energetic dancer to ever grace the silver screen. |
Originally Posted by Mark
There was a mini-series called "Scarlett" in 1994. I know nothing about it other than what I just read at IMDb.com
Classic line right there. |
Originally Posted by Mark
There was a mini-series called "Scarlett" in 1994. I know nothing about it other than what I just read at IMDb.com
although the book does follow margaret mitchell's version of gwtw, and the miniseries followed the film more if i remember right |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
I wrote a couple more reviews for our favorite Marky Mark...I guess I'm part of his funky bunch now. :yup: |
Originally Posted by nebbit
Hey, I have been part of Marky Marks bunch loooong before you :kiss:, I saw him first, so I am top of the bunch, aren't I Marky :goof:
|
Originally Posted by nebbit
Hey, I have been part of Marky Marks bunch loooong before you :kiss:, I saw him first, so I am top of the bunch, aren't I Marky :goof:
|
Originally Posted by Mark
Yes, Nebbit, you can be on top. ;D
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
An American in Paris
As I said in Sparky's thread, this is one of my favorites. Not long ago I saw Leslie Caron in an interview and she had some interesting tidbits about this movie. One being, she only did this film to please her mother. She really didn't have any interest in becoming an actress. Also...in the beginning dance number where Henri Baurel describes Lise to Adam...when we see her dancing each part of her personality...there is a part when she dances with a chair, amazingly enough this was considered too risque by some censors. Caron seemed honesty perplexed why some of the censors would find this objectionable. And as an interesting side note...Cyd Charisse was originally slated to star in this. However she learned she was pregnant and was replaced by Leslie Caron. Hope this wasn't too long. Carry on with your funkiness. :) |
Originally Posted by Aniko
Well, I'm not apart of your funky bunch, but I just wanted to tell you I really liked your review Bri. Well done again. It's nice to see some he-men like and appreciate musicals. ;)
Hope this wasn't too long. Carry on with your funkiness. :) LordyLord is a he-man!, when did this happen :D |
Originally Posted by nebbit
You are a Funkie catagory all of your own, :love: Thanks for interesting onfo.
LordyLord is a he-man!, when did this happen :D You're a sweatheart....and you made me feel wuv'ed~~ :kiss: :kiss: He-man status...Hmmm....welll Mable told me... ...it happened when he discovered he had to prune his ear hairs. :D |
Originally Posted by Aniko
He-man status...Hmmm....welll Mable told me...
...it happened when he discovered he had to prune his ear hairs. :D |
Originally Posted by Aniko
Well, I'm not apart of your funky bunch, but I just wanted to tell you I really liked your review Bri. Well done again. It's nice to see some he-men like and appreciate musicals. ;)
Originally Posted by Aniko
Hope this wasn't too long. Carry on with your funkiness.
|
Hey everybody.
I appreciate all the interest I get in my review thread and wouldn’t dream of abandoning it completely; I enjoy the attention far too much for that to happen. Yet, I have a large project that I’m working on for the thread and am focusing all my energies on it at the moment. My plan is that I will go through every year of cinema and figure out my favorite ten movies for each of them. After I’m done with that I will figure which ten movies of each decade are my favorites, then from there, I will be able to make a more definitive top 100 list than my previous one. My main goal for this project is to make a post of the top 75 with comments and small pictures for each one, then for my top 25 of all time, post a review for each one for the next twenty-five days. As of tonight, I have made a staggering list of films beginning with 1921’s The Kid and ending with the most current film I’ve seen which is this month’s Envy. I’ve learned that I’ve seen one helluva lot of movies, and that it will not be entirely easy to make a conclusive list, but I’m going for it anyway because, like I said, I just might get some attention. :) I want to finish all twenty-five reviews before I begin my post (I’ve written two that I knew would be in the 25) so I can post it daily like I planned without any time constraints to deal with. Thanks again everybody for showing interest and I promise that I will make this a worthwhile project. BTW: The ideas for this post is partially due to Holden Pike, because this is how he figured out his top ten. Thanks Sir Holden of Pike. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Hey everybody.
I appreciate all the interest I get in my review thread and wouldn’t dream of abandoning it completely; I enjoy the attention far too much for that to happen. Yet, I have a large project that I’m working on for the thread and am focusing all my energies on it at the moment. My plan is that I will go through every year of cinema and figure out my favorite ten movies for each of them. After I’m done with that I will figure which ten movies of each decade are my favorites, then from there, I will be able to make a more definitive top 100 list than my previous one. My main goal for this project is to make a post of the top 75 with comments and small pictures for each one, then for my top 25 of all time, post a review for each one for the next twenty-five days. As of tonight, I have made a staggering list of films beginning with 1921’s The Kid and ending with the most current film I’ve seen which is this month’s Envy. I’ve learned that I’ve seen one helluva lot of movies, and that it will not be entirely easy to make a conclusive list, but I’m going for it anyway because, like I said, I just might get some attention. :) I want to finish all twenty-five reviews before I begin my post (I’ve written two that I knew would be in the 25) so I can post it daily like I planned without any time constraints to deal with. Thanks again everybody for showing interest and I promise that I will make this a worthwhile project. BTW: The ideas for this post is partially due to Holden Pike, because this is how he figured out his top ten. Thanks Sir Holden of Pike. |
Originally Posted by poeman
ill be waiting for the list, and your review on OUATITW. BUT I I HOPE envy is not on your top 100 list. that movie is baD with a capital D.
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Hey everybody.
I appreciate all the interest I get in my review thread and wouldn’t dream of abandoning it completely; I enjoy the attention far too much for that to happen. Yet, I have a large project that I’m working on for the thread and am focusing all my energies on it at the moment. My plan is that I will go through every year of cinema and figure out my favorite ten movies for each of them. After I’m done with that I will figure which ten movies of each decade are my favorites, then from there, I will be able to make a more definitive top 100 list than my previous one. My main goal for this project is to make a post of the top 75 with comments and small pictures for each one, then for my top 25 of all time, post a review for each one for the next twenty-five days. As of tonight, I have made a staggering list of films beginning with 1921’s The Kid and ending with the most current film I’ve seen which is this month’s Envy. I’ve learned that I’ve seen one helluva lot of movies, and that it will not be entirely easy to make a conclusive list, but I’m going for it anyway because, like I said, I just might get some attention. :) I want to finish all twenty-five reviews before I begin my post (I’ve written two that I knew would be in the 25) so I can post it daily like I planned without any time constraints to deal with. Thanks again everybody for showing interest and I promise that I will make this a worthwhile project. BTW: The ideas for this post is partially due to Holden Pike, because this is how he figured out his top ten. Thanks Sir Holden of Pike. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Hey everybody.
I appreciate all the interest I get in my review thread and wouldn’t dream of abandoning it completely; I enjoy the attention far too much for that to happen. Yet, I have a large project that I’m working on for the thread and am focusing all my energies on it at the moment. My plan is that I will go through every year of cinema and figure out my favorite ten movies for each of them. After I’m done with that I will figure which ten movies of each decade are my favorites, then from there, I will be able to make a more definitive top 100 list than my previous one. My main goal for this project is to make a post of the top 75 with comments and small pictures for each one, then for my top 25 of all time, post a review for each one for the next twenty-five days. As of tonight, I have made a staggering list of films beginning with 1921’s The Kid and ending with the most current film I’ve seen which is this month’s Envy. I’ve learned that I’ve seen one helluva lot of movies, and that it will not be entirely easy to make a conclusive list, but I’m going for it anyway because, like I said, I just might get some attention. :) I want to finish all twenty-five reviews before I begin my post (I’ve written two that I knew would be in the 25) so I can post it daily like I planned without any time constraints to deal with. Thanks again everybody for showing interest and I promise that I will make this a worthwhile project. BTW: The ideas for this post is partially due to Holden Pike, because this is how he figured out his top ten. Thanks Sir Holden of Pike. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
The ideas for this post is partially due to Holden Pike, because this is how he figured out his top ten.
Well, not the whole "review" thing, but still, you know... |
Originally Posted by John McClane
Can't wait!! Just keep up your wonderful work and you'll do fine. That shouldn't be too hard for you.
|
Cast: Joanne Woodward, David Wayne, and Lee J. Cobb Director: Nunnally Johnson Writer(s): Corbett Thigpen, Hervey M. Cleckley, and Nunnally Johnson Country: USA Length: 91 Min MPAA Rating: NR Released: 1957 moviereviews4fun Rating: B- My next review for Mark's review site has just been posted. Click on the title to read the review. |
another great review..thanks for the info...it's been a long time since i've seen this...
|
Thanks and as always, good work.
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
|
Troy
Cast: Brad Pitt, Eric Bana, Orlando Bloom, Brian Cox, Brendan Gleeson, Diane Kruger, Siri Svegler, Sean Bean, and Peter O’Toole Director: Wolfgang Peterson Writer(s): Homer (poem) & David Benioff (screenplay) Country: USA Length: 163 min MPAA: Rated R for graphic violence and some sexuality/nudity Released: 2004 movieforums.com rating: C+ I knew I was in for a real treat when the audience, during the first ten minutes of the new mega-blockbuster epic Troy, began chuckling at the humorous dialogue between King Agamemnon (Brian Cox) and the King of the last rival Greek Statehood. Of course they were chatting about the legendary, and damn near super human Achilles (Brad Pitt), and how he could win the war by fighting the opposing army’s greatest fighter. It was also kind of funny how thousands of computer generated men had to wait around because Achilles was too busy sleeping with two, yes that’s right, two, beautiful women, in order trouble himself with the pesky battle at hand. God, I love epics. Except, as I found out, the epic is dead. Whether you liked Braveheart or not, it is arguably the last authentic epic ever made.
Greece was once a country with many kingdoms until King Agamemnon and his brother King Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson) decided to unify the country under one ruler, which is of course Agamemnon. After that’s accomplished, Menelaus holds a ceremony where the two princes of Troy attend in order to establish peace between the two great nations. The princes’ are Hector (Eric Bana) and Paris (Orlando Bloom). Unfortunately for the citizens of Troy, Paris has an affair with Helen (Diane Kruger) and they fall in love. When the princes’ leave Greece to return home, Paris sneaks Helen aboard Hectors ship so they can live happily ever after. Too bad Helen is King Menelaus’ wife, and he has a short fuse. Menelaus runs to his brother and begs that they go to war so he can have his vengeance. King Agamemnon thinks that’s a splendid idea because he hates the fact that there is a neighboring country that isn’t under his leadership. Oh yeah, and because of his brother too. Three days later, they send 1,000 computer generated ships across a computer generated ocean to wage war against a computer generated city and army. God, I love epics. Okay, that’s enough about Helen, actually, it really is. She’s more or less relegated to eye candy duty for the rest of the flick, except of course, when Brad Pitt isn’t showing his bum for the ladies who’re sick of the battle scenes. Like I said earlier, the bulk of the movie is about Achilles. Now, I like Brad Pitt a lot. Most of his movies I’ve paid good money to see in the theaters, but I realized something while watching Troy; I like him a whole lot better when he’s playing a psychotic character. 12 Monkeys, awesome. Snatch, excellent. Kalifornia, stupendous! Troy, ZZZzzz… He’s boring. Very boring. I found myself frustrated that I was liking Eric Bana more than Pitt. I haven’t really seen Bana do anything significant in the past, but here he is, outshining the guy who gets to sleep with Jennifer Aniston. God, I love epics…no, wait…I mean…God, I hate Brad Pitt.
a) Tons of extra’s b) Sweeping cinematography c) An emotional punch Troy managed to deliver only one of those things, and most of that is because they have powerful computers. All but three central character’s within the film had crying scenes or speeches that were supposed to invoke emotions. None of them phased me, or the audience I watched this with. There was actually a scene where Achilles’ breaks down and I could hear laughter throughout the theater. Personally, I didn’t feel like laughing because I was concentrating on a meatloaf recipe I wanted to try out. God, I love epics. Now I know that it sounds like I hated the movie, but that isn’t entirely true. I just didn’t love it. It had its moments, like when Achilles and Hector have their duel, and when Helen showed her lovely fanny, and it’s always a pleasure to see O’Toole and Sean Bean play decent roles, but the good was outweighed by the mediocre and bad too often. Another thing that pleasantly surprised me was the minor role
|
Fantastic review Slay, I've been looking forward to this, but my expectations have just dropped, Damn CGI, Damn it to Hell
|
Great review as always, Brian. I haven't seen this film but I have seen some trailers and clips on tv, and judging from these clips I have already decided that Brad Pitt can't act in this film. I have always believed that he is a fairly limited actor. Too bad he doesn't seem to realize this himself.
One thing I think is pretty amusing... This woman that you said was reduced to eye candy. That is something I have been reflecting over as well when looking at the movie posters all over my town. There is one with Diane Kruger (I think) and Orlando Bloom passionately embracing each other. I don't know why but I just sensed this kind of 50's view on women in cinema. Looking at that poster I thought to myself: "I wonder if she'll have any purpose in this film besides being vulnerable and desirable". That poster looked so uninspired and dusty.. fake in some way. |
Thanks Lordylord, had a few chuckles, may see this one when it comes out on DV. If you want to see something exceptional that Eric Banna has done, get CHOPPER out and watch that, I would love to see what you think of it. :yup: :yup: :yup: :yup:
|
Thanks guys. Don't not see it on my account, you may like it. Like I said, I didn't think it was awful, but I'll take Ben-Hur any day of the week over this one.
|
Always great reviews, Slay. I was beginning to have my doubts about this one.
|
Grrrr...the server was too freaking busy and I lost my first post! :furious:
Lemme try this again... :p Great review Bri. Thanks for pointing out all of the CGI that use used to make this....and that Troy lacked an emotional impact. I hate that. I just watched an epic last night, Musa The Warrior, and it also lacked and emotional impact. I guess these filmmakers get caught up in the action scenes...I dunno....but I want to care whether someone important gets their head lopped off, or split in two or gored in the middle with a spear or sword. It seems the action becomes a supporting character these days. Thanks again for the review Bri, well done. I think I'll wait for it to come out on DVD. |
Great reviews Slay... I'm happy your "dry spell" seems to have passed... :)
|
If this sucks, it will be Wolfgang petersons mess. I hate this guy...
Great review Slay i like it alot. Did you feel the movie was too long or too short? |
Excellent work, and I had a feeling about this one. Get this Bana character of the the screen, he stinks....
Good work Slay! _S |
Originally Posted by Hondo333
Fantastic review Slay, I've been looking forward to this, but my expectations have just dropped, Damn CGI, Damn it to Hell
Originally Posted by Piddzilla
Great review as always, Brian. I haven't seen this film but I have seen some trailers and clips on tv, and judging from these clips I have already decided that Brad Pitt can't act in this film. I have always believed that he is a fairly limited actor. Too bad he doesn't seem to realize this himself.
One thing I think is pretty amusing... This woman that you said was reduced to eye candy. That is something I have been reflecting over as well when looking at the movie posters all over my town. There is one with Diane Kruger (I think) and Orlando Bloom passionately embracing each other. I don't know why but I just sensed this kind of 50's view on women in cinema. Looking at that poster I thought to myself: "I wonder if she'll have any purpose in this film besides being vulnerable and desirable". That poster looked so uninspired and dusty.. fake in some way. The women in this film aren’t particularly weak, but they’re certainly not the focal point. They have lines and drive the plot, but only so Pitt and Bana can do their stuff. The love story between Helen and Paris is just a footnote in this movie about warriors and Kings.
Originally Posted by Nebbit
Thanks Lordylord, had a few chuckles, may see this one when it comes out on DV. If you want to see something exceptional that Eric Banna has done, get CHOPPER out and watch that, I would love to see what you think of it.
Originally Posted by Garrett
Always great reviews, Slay. I was beginning to have my doubts about this one.
Originally Posted by Aniko
Great review Bri. Thanks for pointing out all of the CGI that use used to make this....and that Troy lacked an emotional impact. I hate that. I just watched an epic last night, Musa The Warrior, and it also lacked and emotional impact. I guess these filmmakers get caught up in the action scenes...I dunno....but I want to care whether someone important gets their head lopped off, or split in two or gored in the middle with a spear or sword. It seems the action becomes a supporting character these days.
Thanks again for the review Bri, well done. I think I'll wait for it to come out on DVD.
Originally Posted by Caitlyn
Great reviews Slay... I'm happy your "dry spell" seems to have passed...
Originally Posted by poeman
If this sucks, it will be Wolfgang petersons mess. I hate this guy...
Great review Slay i like it alot. Did you feel the movie was too long or too short?
Originally Posted by Sedai
Excellent work, and I had a feeling about this one. Get this Bana character of the the screen, he stinks....
Good work Slay! |
Thanks for the review, bud. I have a feeling I'll like it just because of the vastness of the armies. Thanks again. I'm falling behind with my reviews.
|
thanks for the review..excellent as always....i am looking forward to seeing it this weekend
thanks to you though i'll know what to expect and what not to... thanks again |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
You might like it still. I’m hypercritical because my favorite movies tend to be old fashioned epics. These CGI ‘epics’ just aren’t the same. I wasn’t transported to Greece or Troy at all. There was no amazing cinematography because all the widescan shots were all CGI. There’s nothing majestic about that. Look at the last picture in my review, that’s entirely fake.
|
Very nice review Brian there on Troy. I planned on seeing it this weekend but I had second thoughts. Yes, you did say don't not go on your account but you have a great taste in films.......
Well, I already made plans with my friend a long time ago to see thing anyways. I will let you know what I thought of Troy when I get back. |
I'm really glad you reviewed this, Brian, but as always, I don't want to read any reviews until after I've seen the film. Hopefully I'll see it this weekend or next (my wife really wants to see it right away [Brad Pitt and Orlando Bloom] ;) )
I see you gave it a C+, which is good because I won't go in with high expectations. |
Originally Posted by Sedai
Excellent work, and I had a feeling about this one. Get this Bana character of the the screen, he stinks....
Good work Slay! _S :( I liked Bana. He was the character I felt the most emotion towards. I much prefered him to the movie hero/main charcter, Achillies. |
Thanks everybody. :)
Originally Posted by John McClane
Thanks for the review, bud. I have a feeling I'll like it just because of the vastness of the armies. Thanks again. I'm falling behind with my reviews.
Originally Posted by susan
thanks for the review..excellent as always....i am looking forward to seeing it this weekend
thanks to you though i'll know what to expect and what not to...
Originally Posted by Garrett
That's exactly the type of thing that I was afraid of. CGI should only be used in very small doses.
Originally Posted by jrs
Very nice review Brian there on Troy. I planned on seeing it this weekend but I had second thoughts. Yes, you did say don't not go on your account but you have a great taste in films.......
Well, I already made plans with my friend a long time ago to see thing anyways. I will let you know what I thought of Troy when I get back.
Originally Posted by Mark
I'm really glad you reviewed this, Brian, but as always, I don't want to read any reviews until after I've seen the film. Hopefully I'll see it this weekend or next (my wife really wants to see it right away [Brad Pitt and Orlando Bloom] )
I see you gave it a C+, which is good because I won't go in with high expectations.
Originally Posted by Sidewinder
I liked Bana. He was the character I felt the most emotion towards. I much prefered him to the movie hero/main charcter, Achillies.
|
I was too deeply scarred by Bana in the Hulk. I was ready to claw my eyes out watching him in that film. Seems he has gained some respect here though....
|
Originally Posted by Sedai
I was too deeply scarred by Bana in the Hulk. I was ready to claw my eyes out watching him in that film. Seems he has gained some respect here though....
|
Okay, I just came from seeing Troy, and a ton of things ran through my head as I read through Slay's review. I hope I can remember and address them all.
I liked Troy. I liked it quite a bit. Not as much as Braveheart, any of TLotR films, and maybe not quite as much as Gladiator, but I liked it quite a bit (I already said that). I can't compare these newer films to the old epics like Spartacus or Ben-Hur. That would be like comparing great baseball players from different eras. The CGI in this film didn't bother me in the least. In fact, it was much less noticeable to me than in TLotR films, Star Wars: Ep. I & II, or even Spiderman. I actually thought they (the filmmakers) did a great job making the CGI look more realistic than any other film I've seen. In one of Slay's replies, he writes, "The 'vastness' of the armies is all fake," as if that's a bad thing. The making of films has been "fake" since the beginning of filmmaking. Mattes, backdrops, falsefronts, studio sets, sound stages, lens filters, etc. have been aiding the look of "reality" on film since the beginning of filmmaking. I see CGI as just another tool, and in my opinion, they're getting better at it. One thing I don't understand, however, is how everyone is talking about the cost-effectiveness of CGI. If CGI is so cost-effective, why did Troy cost $185 mil to make? Most of the other CGI films are also well above $100 mil. These high budgets make Braveheart's $72 mil budget look low-budget and don't seem very cost-effective to me. This film was certainly one of Brad Pitt's lesser achievements regarding acting. However, the character Achilles was interesting enough that Pitt's failure to evoke any Oscar-worthy clips more than made up for it. As mentioned already by Slay, Bana's character, Hector, had the most depth. Hector, I believe, had the audience's sympathy. However, I believe there was a little confusion regarding the natural feeling of "who am I supposed to root for? Who is the hero, who is the villian?" Throughout the film, I didn't know if I was supposed to have been rooting for Achilles and his band of warriors (but that meant rooting for the Greek armies most of the time), or should I have been rooting for Hector and the Trojans? Hector seemed to be the most honorable, wise, and heroic. The fight between Hector and Achilles was terrific! By this point, I had long been rooting for Hector over Achilles. The other thing that interests me about this film is the original story. As an English major in college and a Language Arts teacher now, it's always nice to see the classic literary works on film. By the way, I'm not trying to point out mistakes in the review, but Homer's Ilyad is an epic poem, not a play ;) Not a big deal. Anyhoo, that's all I got for now. Not sure if I addressed everything that went through my head, or not. Oh, yeah! I did want to mention one more thing. People at theaters are so funny. Remember in Mission Impossible when Tom Cruise was suspended above the guy in the room with the heat sensitive floor? As the sweat started rolling down his forehead, the entire theater began whispering to each other, "Sweat," as if they had just figured out something that the person next to them couldn't figure out for themselves. "Sweat" swept through the theater when I was watching Mission Impossible to the point that it was very comical. Well, the same thing happened with the audience in the theater where I watched Troy. This time, instead of "Sweat" sweeping through the whispered voices of my movie-viewing comrades, "Achilles' heel" was on their lips during the appropriate scene. If you haven't seen the movie yet, resist saying it yourself, and pay attention to the people around you. You'll know when to listen for it, and you should get a little chuckle. ;D |
Originally Posted by Mark
The other thing that interests me about this film is the original story. As an English major in college and a Language Arts teacher now, it's always nice to see the classic literary works on film. By the way, I'm not trying to point out mistakes in the review, but Homer's Ilyad is an epic poem, not a play ;) Not a big deal.
|
Originally Posted by Mark
I actually thought they (the filmmakers) did a great job making the CGI look more realistic than any other film I've seen. In one of Slay's replies, he writes, "The 'vastness' of the armies is all fake," as if that's a bad thing. The making of films has been "fake" since the beginning of filmmaking. Mattes, backdrops, falsefronts, studio sets, sound stages, lens filters, etc. have been aiding the look of "reality" on film since the beginning of filmmaking.
Originally Posted by Mark
I see CGI as just another tool, and in my opinion, they're getting better at it. One thing I don't understand, however, is how everyone is talking about the cost-effectiveness of CGI. If CGI is so cost-effective, why did Troy cost $185 mil to make? Most of the other CGI films are also well above $100 mil. These high budgets make Braveheart's $72 mil budget look low-budget and don't seem very cost-effective to me.
Originally Posted by Mark
The other thing that interests me about this film is the original story. As an English major in college and a Language Arts teacher now, it's always nice to see the classic literary works on film. By the way, I'm not trying to point out mistakes in the review, but Homer's Ilyad is an epic poem, not a play ;) Not a big deal.
Listen, I knew I would be in the minority when writing my review, but I’m staying loyal to my original statement. (I know you’re not being argumentative because you always respect other people’s opinions.) The acting, for the most part, was sub-par, the CGI was used too much, the story was convoluted, and it was emotionally empty. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
I just copy/pasted IMDb’s writing credits.
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
I have never read Homer, though I have looked for the Iliad at the library.
Homer's Iliad By the way, the filmmakers take a lot of liberties with the original story. I guess that's why they call it Troy instead of The Iliad. The film actually combines several Greek myths and legends, not just Homer's. Characters have been combined, who kills whom has changed, how, when, and where has changed, things have been sped up (Helen was gone 9 years before the Greeks came with 1000 ships). The gods are a big part of Homer's Iliad, as well, but they've been left out completely (other than their mention). Aphrodite actually comes down and saves Paris from Menelaus, but in the film it's Hector who saves him. Okay, enough of the literature lecture :laugh: That's all for now ;) |
Originally Posted by Mark
I'll have to take it up with the people at IMDb, then. :laugh:
|
Originally Posted by Mark
Homer's Iliad
By the way, the filmmakers take a lot of liberties with the original story. I guess that's why they call it Troy instead of The Iliad. The film actually combines several Greek myths and legends, not just Homer's. Characters have been combined, who kills whom has changed, how, when, and where has changed, things have been sped up (Helen was gone 9 years before the Greeks came with 1000 ships). The gods are a big part of Homer's Iliad, as well, but they've been left out completely (other than their mention). Aphrodite actually comes down and saves Paris from Menelaus, but in the film it's Hector who saves him. I knew that there were a lot of liberties, but there were so many that I wasn't sure of that I didn't want to speak of them in my review. There were a couple of deaths that I questioned, but didn't do the research. I was pretty sure that Achilles |
Hey thanks for posting that link to the Iliad, Mark. I had to memorize the entire first paragraph of that in Latin when I took that language in school. It's nice to be able to read the rest now.
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
I was pretty sure that Achilles
WARNING: "Achilles" spoilers below
In the film, the arrows in the chest would have done nothing, and should have been left out of the film to avoid confusion regarding what really killed him. One arrow to the heel was sufficient, but it should have been poisoned.
|
Here is a couple of famous art pieces depicting the death of Achilles. Sorry about the size. The vase is circa 460 BC. The painting is by Peter Paul Rubens.
http://www.beloit.edu/~classics/Troj..._c.460BCE).jpg http://www.courtauld.ac.uk/sub_index...prov375MAX.JPG |
The length of the poem is 13,500 words; rounded. We read parts of it in school.
|
Originally Posted by John McClane
The length of the poem is 13,500 words; rounded. We read parts of it in school.
There are nearly 13,000 paragraphs. |
Woops my mistake, I meant lines.
|
Originally Posted by John McClane
Woops my mistake, I meant lines.
|
That's what it says in our book.
|
Weird. Are you sure it's not The Odyssey you're thinking of? I really have no idea because I haven't read either. I'm just going by what the word count using Word says. What book exactly are you talking about anyway?
|
I'm just going by what the book says. Don't blame me, blame the book.
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Weird.
|
I looked at the document in Word again and saw that I missed something, it's actually counting each 'line' as a single paragraph, so you are right, or your book is, I was just reading it wrong.
|
Wow, it was right. Good, I can cancel my letter.
|
thanks for putting up the link to the iliad...we just went out to the bookstore after the film and bought both the iliad and odyssey.....i wish i knew that it was online..i wouldn't have bought both
|
since the iliad ends with hector's death, i've put up the rest of the story called the fall of troy which includes the trojan horse ..
the fall of troy |
Dam it ive just posted on the troy thread about my thoughts on the film. I absoloutly loved it, but Marks rights, its pretty inaccurate towards the Illiad, had to read it for one of my modules in my first year of uni. Brilliant story. I for one would like to have seen maybe a bit more of the supernatural in it, like Aphrodiete rescuing Paris. Some of that wuld have been good. I suspect they ahd to change some deaths and who does what etc to Hollywood-ise the film a bit more so more poeple would like it. Like Aggamemnon's fate for example, its pretty different from what happens in the film. Much cooler in the book :yup:
Originally Posted by Mark
Every account I've seen, the arrow was poisoned and Appollo guided it to the heel, his only vulnerable spot
WARNING: "Achilles" spoilers below
In the film, the arrows in the chest would have done nothing, and should have been left out of the film to avoid confusion regarding what really killed him. One arrow to the heel was sufficient, but it should have been poisoned.
WARNING: "Achilles" spoilers below
Is that true? i didnt realise it was poisoned. I just thought that his heel was the only place he could be killed becuase it was the only part of his body that was mortal
|
Originally Posted by blibblobblib
WARNING: "Achilles" spoilers below
Is that true? i didnt realise it was poisoned. I just thought that his heel was the only place he could be killed becuase it was the only part of his body that was mortal
WARNING: "Achilles" spoilers below
I read that the arrow was poisoned in about five different places (all on-line). It makes sense, though, that it needs to be poisoned, doesn't it? If you or I, or any mortal, were hit in the heel, it wouldn't kill us, so why would it kill Achilles? It would wound him, unlike any other part of his body. Because it's his only mortal area, a poisoned arrow would only be fatally effective in his heel. A poison arrow anywhere else would do nothing.
|
There's this injury they nicknamed after Achilles's "injury." I can't remember the name of it though. It involves the "mortal" place though.
|
It's called an Achilles heel.
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/pro...226.1010.A.jpghttp://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/pro...228.1010.A.jpghttp://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/pro...227.1010.A.jpg Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind **** Cast: Jim Carrey, Kate Winslet, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Wilkinson, and Elijah Wood Director: Michel Gondry Writer: Charlie Kaufman Country: USA Length: 108 min MPAA Rating: R (language, some drug and sexual content) Released: 2004 His realization that losing memories of Clementine will take away from who he is as a human being is poignant and equally sad, though because Carrey is so good at what he does, there is humor in the sadness as well; just like in life. Thank you Mr. Kaufman. |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
It's called an Achilles heel.
|
Thank you very much for that amazing review. Making an epic film requires more than just eye candy, as you mentioned you would expect more from the combination of all that CGI and the fact that throwing a bunch of actors that can carry a story of magnitude such as this history lesson; it's just not fair, directors and hollywood just gamble on such great expectation instead of delivering a good movie, that's all we ask.
Great review, I might wait until the DVD , comes out. ;) |
I don't know if any of these have been discussed, but I wanted to mention some changes to the story that I recognized (from what I remember of the poem, at least).
WARNING: "Menelaus" spoilers below
I'm pretty sure Menelaus wasn't killed in the Trojan War by Hector or anyone else, and I don't think he ever dueled with Paris at all. In fact, I remember Menelaus going to kill Helen (after he had snuck in via the Trojan Horse), but he couldn't do it, so he took her back to Sparta. Is that right?
WARNING: "Agamemnon" spoilers below
I know Agamemnon wasn't killed in the Trojan War, because he returned to his wife, Klytemnestra, after Troy had been destroyed. While he was home, Klytemnestra murdered Agamemnon for sacrificing their young daughter Iphigenia to Athena to get the winds blowing and his ships moving off to Troy.
WARNING: "The Trojan Horse" spoilers below
I'm pretty sure Menelaus was in the Trojan Horse, but I don't remember Achilles or Odysseus being there with him. Were they actually there, or was that a change?
|
Originally Posted by CrazyforMovies
Thank you very much for that amazing review. Making an epic film requires more than just eye candy, as you mentioned you would expect more from the combination of all that CGI and the fact that throwing a bunch of actors that can carry a story of magnitude such as this history lesson; it's just not fair, directors and hollywood just gamble on such great expectation instead of delivering a good movie, that's all we ask.
Great review, I might wait until the DVD , comes out. ;) I started to wait until it came out on DVD but ended up going to see it and am glad I did… I enjoyed it even though I felt it was a little drawn out in several places and was a bit lacking in the emotional department… the CGI didn’t really bother me and I thought all the actors did a great job… especially Bana… I had reservations about Pitt in this but IMO, he nailed Achilles (and no, not for the bum shots Slay… ;D ) … Bloom was rather annoying, but then I never liked the character he was portraying at all… so I doubt if it would have mattered who played him… and I’d have to agree that the females were all reduced to ‘eye candy’ … but all in all, I’d still give it a B… |
For most of what you have written there sleezy your right. Apart from Menaleus fighting Paris. They do fight in The Illiad but i think Aphrodiete comes down and rescues him before anything can happen to him. Also in The Illiad Helen goes back to Sparta with Menelaus after the fall of Troy and if i remeber rightly they live happily ever after...i think :D
|
Just by hearing about this from my friends I know it's off a bit. Personally I think that Helen of Troy, the one made by and show on USA, is the best make of the Trojan War.
|
Hey Sleezy, are you sure you didn't watch History Channel's special last night. ;D
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Hey Sleezy, are you sure you didn't watch History Channel's special last night. ;D
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Hey Sleezy, are you sure you didn't watch History Channel's special last night. ;D
No, I just remembered what I could. I loved the story, so I really got into what was going on. I can't remember much of the boring parts, just who died, and who fought who, and where everyone ended up. Plus, I watched the Helen of Troy miniseries a while back, which was pretty accurate (yet incredibly dull). |
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
MONSTER ****
http://romanticmovies.about.com/libr...onsterpubk.jpg Monster the ever lovely Theron turns in her most powerful performance to date. Not only does this role prove that she has the chops to play the meatier roles, but it also shows how Oscar worthy she really is. in this movie she is a powerhouse. |
All I can sya is that Slay's reviews rule!
|
Originally Posted by dillskies88
All I can sya is that Slay's reviews rule!
|
Originally Posted by nebbit
I second that :D
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Whether you liked Braveheart or not, it is arguably the last authentic epic ever made.
I saw this [Troy] today, It was very mediocre, Most of the dialogue was terrible and was Pitt and Blooms acting. I got the feeling that Achilles was supposed to be some sort of hero as was Paris, but I hated them both. Hector and Priam where the only real heroes. |
Originally Posted by Hondo333
Slay, What about Saving Private Ryan.
|
Originally Posted by projectMayhem
Ok, yeah. Some of this did seem a little exaggerated.
|
Originally Posted by Escape
The part where one got shot in the gut and kept fighting is not unrealistic at all. I hear stories everday when sombody is knifed or shot and doesn't even realise it. The adrenaline alone is what keeps you from feeling it so untill the blood loss is dramatic enough which can take time, then it is possible to keep fighting.
|
Brian , write a review for a one of the summer blockbusters. ;)
|
yea that would be nice i would read it
|
Me too, bub. ;D
|
Originally Posted by LordSlaytan
Compare bullets of today to the organ shredding bearings of that time and say it's still realistic.
Now if he continued to do so without a head then I would probably get a little suspicious. :D |
Originally Posted by Escape
I remember reading in the paper where a kid got his arms amputated in a farming accident but still managed to drag himself to his bathtub untill help arrived. Can you imagine that with the amount of blood he lost he was still worried about getting blood all over his mothers carpet. What I'm saying here is that all injuries are not automatically fatal especially when you have human will and raw adrenaline as weapons. So I don't just count out a gunshot wound of that magnitude as being phony cause he was still able to fight.
Now if he continued to do so without a head then I would probably get a little suspicious. :D |
Originally Posted by John McClane
Ok...Umm the bullets back then were fraggers. They brust apart when they hit anything. Example. So if it hit you it in the chest it'll spread out and you'd be screwed.
|
Shawshank Redemption isnt in the Top 100's of your Movies Slay?
that was a great movie |
Originally Posted by Psion
Shawshank Redemption isnt in the Top 100's of your Movies Slay?
that was a great movie |
I liked Shawshank quite a bit. Wouldn't put it in the top 100 though. :nope:
|
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:51 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums