Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





I do want to take a moment to single out this paragraph. A (most) films primary goal is to entertain. There can exist other goals, but mostly it is this above all. I understand most of these goals as well as most here, but not everyone will accept these goals as being accomplished nor accept these goals at face value.
It’s called a difference of opinion. To me, it didn’t meet its goals in it’s entirety.
Film can do virtually anything. Entertain is among the more popular goals but it is not the primary or sole goal nor should it be.

Night and Fog doesn’t exist to “entertain.” If one were to say they were “entertained,” they would be morally and intellectually questionable at best. It is one of the most successful films at accomplishing its goals, confronting the world with images of the atrocities of the Holocaust.

Believing all films exist to serve this singular purpose is part of what leads to categorical mistakes, such as the one you’ve made with this film.



This is rich. You’re the one who seemed to take the criticism of the film more personally. Who’s more outraged here? The person taking a criticism of the film personally, or the person who felt attacked because he was criticized the film itself? (Not the Viking Culture for the last time).

Stop using the Viking Saga to explain away the defects of the film structure. It makes no sense. Sheesh.
You’re reading a personal slight into my thinking you’re wrong.

It makes sense if you’ve read a Saga or studied Viking culture. It doesn’t make sense to you due to the ignorance on the subject that this conversation has continually proven you have.



The trick is not minding
Film can do virtually anything. Entertain is among the more popular goals but it is not the primary or sole goal nor should it be.

Night and Fog doesn’t exist to “entertain.” If one were to say they were “entertained,” they would be morally and intellectually questionable at best. It is one of the most successful films at accomplishing its goals, confronting the world with images of the atrocities of the Holocaust.

Believing all films exist to serve this singular purpose is part of what leads to categorical mistakes, such as the one you’ve made with this film.
If you even read my whole post I already covered most of what you have already posted here. At no point did I insist all films adhere to that and even stated as much. I stayed most, as I’m not all, and the implication of that it’s obvious.
The only one who’s categorically making a mistake is you, insisting that your view of The Northman is the correct one.



If you even read my whole post I already covered most of what you have already posted here. At no point did I insist all films adhere to that and even stated as much. I stayed most, as I’m not all, and the implication of that it’s obvious.
The only one who’s categorically making a mistake is you, insisting that your view of The Northman is the correct one.
Not correct. More informed.



The trick is not minding
You’re reading a personal slight into my thinking you’re wrong.

It makes sense if you’ve read a Saga or studied Viking culture. It doesn’t make sense to you due to the ignorance on the subject that this conversation has continually proven you have.
The personal sight was your unnecessary comments on my criticisms towards the film, which, if you weren’t being so disingenuous, you would have recognized with your comments of “naval gazing and lazily pontificating”.

Just one of my issues with the film: The Nightblade does not exist in the original source. It was entirely not needed for this film. You haven’t even tried to defend it, nor explain its existence, ourside of citing Viking Saga, which, as I’ve pointed out, it doesn’t exist in.



The trick is not minding
Not correct. More informed.
Which I highly doubt now, since you still haven’t addressed any issue I actually have with many of the scenes outside of Viking Saga!

You haven’t proven anything of being supposedly informed.



The personal sight was your unnecessary comments on my criticisms towards the film, which, if you weren’t being so disingenuous, you would have recognized with your comments of “naval gazing and lazily pontificating”.

Just one of my issues with the film: The Nightblade does not exist in the original source. It was entirely not needed for this film. You haven’t even tried to defend it, nor explain its existence, ourside of citing Viking Saga, which, as I’ve pointed out, it doesn’t exist in.
You initially responded with a pithy dismissive “um not really” and continued to describe my every response with some form of disparagement. Don’t get precious when you don’t enter in good faith.

Ambale’s Saga exists in various forms and while the primary influence on this story, Egger’s is clearly wanting to create something anthropologically complex in capturing Viking society and the nature of Sagas, which heavily delve into magical realism. The Night Blade is an element that Egger’s uses to capture that magical realism as well as tap into an element of many Sagas in which someone uses a mystical or defining weapon. It’s a means to weave more Viking culture into the narrative than adapting that single saga would provide, just like adding Odin’s ravens and valkyries.



The trick is not minding
You initially responded with a pithy dismissive “um not really” and continued to describe my every response with some form of disparagement. Don’t get precious when you don’t enter in good faith.

Ambale’s Saga exists in various forms and while the primary influence on this story, Egger’s is clearly wanting to create something anthropologically complex in capturing Viking society and the nature of Sagas, which heavily delve into magical realism. The Night Blade is an element that Egger’s uses to capture that magical realism as well as tap into an element of many Sagas in which someone uses a mystical or defining weapon. It’s a means to weave more Viking culture into the narrative than adapting that single saga would provide, just like adding Odin’s ravens and valkyries.
The “um not really” was a response to your willful misrepresentation of the criticisms.
The disparagement is imagined on your part, and didn’t come until later.
The only part I think you could have misinterpreted as such was an earlier
“That….doesn’t explain anything” which wasn’t intended as as such. If that is the case, I apologize for that, as it wasn’t it’s intent.

Please don’t act high and mighty here. I’ve seen you act quite the blow hard when people give a film you liked a negative review and you treat it like some sort of slight.

Again, I’m willing to drop it. We’ve taken enough time out of this.



I’ll try to respond to each paragraph in order:1. The sword and his side quest to retrieve it doesn’t exist in the original source. It isn’t even preoperly explained why it is even needed to fulfill his vengeance to begin with. Seems quite unnecessary, and just put in there for the sake of more magical moments.
Necessity is a tricky thing in literature, right? We can always write our story in a manner that the X is not necessary (e.g., if we change things so our hero doesn't need to hop of out of the plane, we don't need to explain the parachute).

In terms of pure invention was it necessary? No, but then again nothing is really necessary in literature. Authors are gods and may create any world they please.

Was it necessary in terms of the source material? No. That stated, is it fitting to have such a weapon in such a tale? Is it genre appropriate? Absolutely.

Was it necessary in terms of Amleth proving his true love for Olga? No, but it was a nice touch.
WARNING: "Yep, details." spoilers below
The sword limited (because of magical rules) his ability to fight when she was in danger, and so he exposed himself to mortal danger to save her.
Here we learn that Amleth is not a mindless brute and that he is honorable in the chivalrous sense of self-sacrifice (and not just bone-crushing).

Was it necessary in terms of explaining how he got a weapon as a slave? No. When it is demonstrated that he can climb out of the roof, we could have had him just steal a weapon from the armory or pillage the first guard he murdered with his bare hands. However, the blade does help explain how he can take on so many people with seeming impunity (it levels him up as a character for the wrath/revenge where one man take on an entire encampment).

Did the inclusion of this weapon subject us to another witch with more instructions? Yes.
WARNING: "Gads! More spoilers!" spoilers below
We get a sort of Yorick scene with the skull of DeFoe's Jester and then we have to follow the Vixen's tail to the barrow and then have a sort of contest for the weapon.
Is that a feature or a bug? You decide.

In short, could it have been left out? Yes. I think it could have been left. Did it result in the end feeling a bit rushed? Yeah, I think so. It's a mixed bag. It adds a little, it takes away a little.

2. Rushed, yes that’s a better word for it.
There's a special alchemy to pacing. Editors should not be underestimated in this regard.

3.skipping to the Beaowulf comparison, I find such comparisons unnecessary. What May work in one film, May not in another and is judged on a case by case basis. In here, it doesn’t work for me in some cases.
If it did not work for you, then it didn't that much is inarguable.

4.*I have no issue with her appearance, but rather the placement. I think her appearance could have come at better time, and not so soon after plundering a village. It felt rushed.
I disagree. He just helped destroyed that village, troubling the waters of fate, the spirits that inhabit that place, the local gods, etc. The local principalities had a vested interest in Almleth's success (the joining of houses with Olga) and it was now time for him to be on his way. The pieces were in place. Olga is one of those pieces. It was time for his tear to be returned to him.

5. It was bizarre and unneeded. On the other hand, I do feel the ravens appearance were more warranted and handled better. Even the rescue. It felt right, while the insane dogs did not. I’m nitpicking, I guess, but it’s just how I felt.
Gotcha.

6. 300, Revenge of the Sith, what ever. It wasn’t filmed that great to me.
I thought it was fine. Different strokes.



The “um not really” was a response to your willful misrepresentation of the criticisms.
The disparagement is imagined on your part, and didn’t come until later.
The only part I think you could have misinterpreted as such was an earlier
“That….doesn’t explain anything” which wasn’t intended as as such. If that is the case, I apologize for that, as it wasn’t it’s intent.

Please don’t act high and mighty here. I’ve seen you act quite the blow hard when people give a film you liked a negative review and you treat it like some sort of slight.

Again, I’m willing to drop it. We’ve taken enough time out of this.
Assume mildly amused dispassion as my tone when I post and it’ll solve a lot of what you read as feeling slighted.*

It’s all good, man. Have a swell Sunday!



The trick is not minding
Assume mildly amused dispassion as my tone when I post and it’ll solve a lot of what you read as feeling slighted.*

It’s all good, man. Have a swell Sunday!
You as well.



I’ll try to respond to each paragraph in order:

1. The sword and his side quest to retrieve it doesn’t exist in the original source. It isn’t even preoperly explained why it is even needed to fulfill his vengeance to begin with. Seems quite unnecessary, and just put in there for the sake of more magical moments.

2. Rushed, yes that’s a better word for it.

3.skipping to the Beaowulf comparison, I find such comparisons unnecessary. What May work in one film, May not in another and is judged on a case by case basis. In here, it doesn’t work for me in some cases.

4.*I have no issue with her appearance, but rather the placement. I think her appearance could have come at better time, and not so soon after plundering a village. It felt rushed.

5. It was bizarre and unneeded. On the other hand, I do feel the ravens appearance were more warranted and handled better. Even the rescue. It felt right, while the insane dogs did not. I’m nitpicking, I guess, but it’s just how I felt.

6. 300, Revenge of the Sith, what ever. It wasn’t filmed that great to me.
the movie is available on HD i deff gonna watch it this weekend



the movie is available on HD i deff gonna watch it this weekend

Definitely worth the watch.



American Ninja (Sam Firstenberg, 1985)
5/10 Camp Rating 7/10
The second one is worth a watch. More Steve James. More tin drums on the soundtrack.


The director also made Ninja III: The Domination, which is one of the most out there Cannon flicks. Highly recommended.



I forgot the opening line.

By May be found at the following website: StandbyforMindControl.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1063609

Before Sunset - (2004)

I didn't have to wait 9 years - I only had to wait 24 hours. All the same, I was desperate to know what had happened to Ethan Hawke's Jesse and Julie Delpy's Céline in the interim, but don't feel like giving anything away at all here. It shares the first film's tone, only in a slightly different key, if that makes sense. One thing that really surprised me was it's running time. I had no idea - I hadn't checked. So when the credits started rolling, I thought I was being faked out - and that something would interrupt the credits and the film would continue. I guess if telling the story only takes 70-odd minutes (the film runs 80 minutes including credits) then there you go. Fair enough. Kurosawa always said he used as much time as it took to tell his story, no more and no less. This was still enjoyable, but I have a slight preference for the first film.

8/10


By Derived from a digital capture (photo/scan) of the Film Poster/DVD Cover (creator of this digital version is irrelevant as the copyright in all equivalent images is still held by the same party). Copyright held by the film company or the artist. Claimed as fair use regardless., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39228791

Before Midnight - (2013)

Seeing as Before Sunset ended about an hour earlier than I thought it would, I had plenty of time last night to catch the third film in the trilogy. This time, instead of 9 years I only had to wait around 9 minutes to see what had happened after the conclusion of the second film. This entry differs a lot from the first two, but digs in deeper and takes in many more points of view - there is more soul-searching going on, and our two characters are less scattered and more sure of what they want from life. I know many people have seen these films, but I still feel like saying anything about what's going on might spoil things for people who haven't started the journey from the first film on. I'd say I enjoyed Before Midnight more than Sunset, but less than Sunrise.

8.5/10
__________________
Remember - everything has an ending except hope, and sausages - they have two.
We miss you Takoma

Latest Review : Le Circle Rouge (1970)



The director also made Ninja III: The Domination, which is one of the most out there Cannon flicks. Highly recommended.

Featuring "Special K" from Breakin' - the unmemorable Lucinda Dickie.



Victim of The Night
Movies I watched for the first time recently:

The Rocky Horror Picture Show -


Finally got around to this, and it was pretty good fun!
YESSSSSS!!!



Featuring "Special K" from Breakin' - the unmemorable Lucinda Dickie.
How dare you, sir.