recommend/do not recommend

Sofia Coppola won the Best Original Screenplay Oscar for Lost in Translation. But she lost Best Director to Peter Jackson (The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King).

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

Oh, Thanks Holden. Anyway, you get the point.

__________________
"Like all dreamers, Steven mistook disenchantment for truth."

Will gladly recommend

The Boondock Saints
Bourne Identity
Bourne Supremacy
Breakdown
Cape Fear (remake)
Collateral
Crimson Tide
Die Hard 1 and 2
Duel (1972)
Executive Decision
Fargo
Frequency
GoodFellas
Halloween
The Incredibles
The Italian Job (remake)
Jurassic Park
King Kong (1976)
L.A. Confidential
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
Master and Commander
Meet the Parents
Misery
Mission: Impossible (1996)
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation
October Sky
Panic Room
Phone Booth
Psycho (remake)
Pulp Fiction
Reservoir Dogs
The Ring
Rounders
Rudy
The Rundown
Saving Private Ryan
Scream
Se7en
The Shawshank Redemption
A Simple Plan
The Sixth Sense
Snatch
Spiderman
Startrek: First Contact
Startrek: The Voyage Home
Starwars Episodes 4 and 5
Starman
Stir of Echoes
Terminator 1 and 2
The Thing (remake)
True Lies
U-571
Unbreakable
The Usual Suspects
What Lies Beneath
What about Bob?
X-Men 1 and 2


Do not recommend

Popcorn
Van Helsing
12 Monkeys
Hardware
Natural Born Killers
Napoleon Dynamite
The Fog (remake)
The Ice Harvest

I recommend Hellraiser and Saw II - if you like horror films.

I don't recommend Just Friends, unless you're a big Anna Faris fan, because she stole the whole movie. Actually, she stole about half of it, because they stopped showing her in it much after the first part. She plays a Britney Spears/Paris Hilton/Ashlee Simpson type character named Samantha James, and without her the movie is totally deceased. Not even worth it to see Ryan Reynolds, who in some scenes is dressed in a fat suit.

12 monkeys is a great movie....

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I agree with 12 Monkeys!

__________________
James Sparrow's Rented Reviews!

The Reaping 7/10
Transformers 8.5/10
Flight of the Living Dead 6/10
The Invisible 6/10
Return to House on Haunted Hill 1/10
Planet Terror 8/10
A Mighty Heart 7/10

...being An Awesome Movie!

That's what I was hoping before I first viewed it cause I heard quite a few good comments about it. But after I saw it, it just did nothing for me.

Don't fret. to each his own. In fact, no post-Python Gilliam movie that I've seen has done much for me.

Uh...Okay I recommed Ace Ventura or Bruce almighty. Now to what matters:

I DON'T ONLY DON'T RECOMMEND BUT I WARN YOU TO DON'T SEE FOR YOUR EYEBALLS SAKE

-"Signs": Dumbest and boringiest movie made in all human hystory.
-That dumb nonsense about Joan of Ark or whatever.
-Any new horror movie: Horror isn't what it were in the old days (In the old days it was a nighmare making machine so don't watch the old school horror too)
-War of the worlds:It made no sense at all the entire dammed alien invasion (And alien weakness is just as dumb as "signs")
-Matrix: If you see the first you will want to see the second to understand and then the third to get the second and at the end you'll continue don't understanding anything from the entire trilogy.

__________________
My avatar is the evil doctor whom tried to test if his dumbness potion he put in the water had worked. So he created a movie to defy the inteligence of the most lesser minded human beings he decided to call this movie "signs".

The time traveling in Gilliam's 12 Monkeys (1995) actually follows its own internal logic very well. I guess you didn't get what was going on, and I'd be happy to explain it to you if you care to learn what, exactly, the Hell. Jump over to THIS thread if'n you wish. Or don't.


"I want the future ot be unknown."


Admittedly it's not as air-tight a premise as Bruce Almighty.

Which one are you talking about.
Answer carefully.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

This one?

If you look closely you can see Joan waving from behind the distressed rhino...

__________________
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how the Tatty 100 is done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves." - Brendan Behan

UOTE=Holden Pike]The time traveling in Gilliam's 12 Monkeys (1995) actually follows its own internal logic very well. I guess you didn't get what was going on, and I'd be happy to explain it to you if you care to learn what, exactly, the Hell. Jump over to THIS thread if'n you wish. Or don't.




Wow...I didn't know you cared. Well...I admit I am not an expert of movies okay? But...It was my opinion at the time. Time travelling movies are almost all nonsense. You didn't need to be so evil and have me look an imense post where is what I want. At least now I know much more things I didn't want to know about Gilliam like:
-he made a movie with the title of my country and paid no copyright that I am aware of.
-Oh he also made that film with...Uh...robert de niro no? Cape fear. Suggestive name, no?
-Ah! There..."Cole (Bruce Willis) is one of a handful of survivors from a man-made virus that wiped out most of the human population of the planet. The scientists who are in charge of the small society cannot get a pure enough strain of the mutating virus to combat it well, so they live underground. But they are starting to get a handle on time travel. Their plan is to send one man, Cole, back to the Baltimore and Philadelphia of 1996 to where the virus seemed to have originated, in hopes of finding the source. They do not want to change history by stopping it from being unleashed, they simply want more information about thevirus so they can combat it effectively in their present, and return to the surface and start repopulizing the planet. But they don’t quite have time travel perfected yet, and they send Cole back too far by a few years. There he is of course thought to be insane, but one psychiatrist at themental institution, Kathryn Railly (Madeline Stowe) can’t shake the sincerity of his ramblings. He also and blah blah balh"

Okay I already copied what I wanted. Sorry if it's insulting but what I meant is that he CAUSED the tape that made himself go to the past. What means that before he goes to the past he goes to the past to make himself goes to the past. Which means...how he gone to the past the first time to make himself go to the past? I mean to him to cause himself to go to the past he had to got to the past but he couldn't go to the past if he didn't caused himself to go to the past.
If you got what I tried to mean, please understand that I don't.
Time travel movies are almost all nonsense.

Admittedly it's not as air-tight a premise as Bruce Almighty.
[/quote]

That is for sure. It's good to relax the brain from those complicated sci fi movies (like matrix, if you have posts explaining it please send me links) with simple plot movies like Bruce almighty. I knew you liked it too.

I was giving it a shot. That was a few posts ago, in my own defense. I probably wouldn't make an offer to actually go into the details of a movie with you now. It's clear that is pointless.


You had us fooled for a while.


Yeah, my mistake. Again, at that slightly earlier point in your what will I'm sure be brief time on the board here I was assuming that you might actually want to discuss movies and talk about them in detail. Silly me.


See, this is another of example of you TRYING to be funny, but not succeeding.


No.

That was Scorsese. But very close, good guess.



OK, I'm done with Lucky Luke. I miss you already, Kid.

Seacrest...out.

Yeah 12 Monkeys was great...

__________________
instrumental rock band that I am in.

First thing:
Sorry about that. But which director made which movie don't change if its good or bad. So I really don't care so much if war of the worlds was made by Steven Spielberg as It won't make I like war of the world as much as Indiana Jones. I Have no need And no desire to read about a director life (Unless it's auto byography and such).

And about scorcese.Yeah I saw that. Sorry. Missed that in the post.

Okay. My post isn't smart alright. No need to talk about this...buuuuut you didn't talk about the most important part! The why I think 12 monkeys is nonsense like many time travel movies. Look It seems my theory was too complicated but time Travel IS complicated. That's why not many persons actually can do it. (One which I could believe is the first movie of the Trilogy with a space travel machine mixed with a car, I didn't knew how to read or speak in english at the time so I don't know the english title. But was really believable). Okay here it is what really matters in why 12 monkeys is nonsense (In MY OPINION, if you disagree feel free to say why you don't think it is instead of making my post seems dumber than it really is).

-Okay first step: Bruce willis character was the reason that made him go back in the past. (I won't say why since I know you saw it.)
-Second: To him be able to go back in the past like he did he needs that reason.
-Third: To him be able to be the reason to him go back at the past he needs to have that reason.
-Fourth: How he traveled back at the first time to make himself go later? If he needed himself to go back and to go back he needed himself to be the reason...
-Fifth: Then he by no means could have started the chain of events that he needed to go back without going back first.
-For instance: I go back in time and became my own father. To me to go back I need to be born...and to me be born I need to go back. But I couldn't go back If I didn't have been born, am I right? So nothing of this could never happen.
-Same thing with 12 monkeys.
-And in that beliaveble movie, the guy go back in past because a scientist friend of his died. In the past he warned him of that. Then the scientist would die and nothing of this would happen at all? No! The scientist feing his death so that his friend that don't traveled in time can go back and warn him of that. While the guy that traveled discover that and Tada! the end. A believable ending.

That movie is called Back to the Future. If the time traveling in Back to the Future seems more believable to you, God bless. It is no more or less plausible there than in 12 Monkeys...though tonally, one is primarily a comedy while the other is a psychological drama. Both use the Science Fiction plot device of time travel. Because Back to the Future is a comedy, time travel is made fairly simple. Because 12 Monkeys is a pschological thriller, time travel is a bit more complex, and at the very least there is a current strand of questioning whether or not it is even happening because our main character is questioning it.


It's tough to know just what you're trying to say about Gilliam's film, but here's an attempt to explain....


I truly don't know what you mean by this. The reason Willis' character was sent back to the past was to gather as much information as possible on the man-made virus that has killed most of the Earth's population. In his present the virus has mutated to a point where they can't figure out its primary essence. However, they have stumbled upon time travel (though they haven't perfected it), so they send Willis' Cole backward to get information they cannot figure out in the present.


Say what? I'm not sure if I'm losing something in the translation, but what in the Heckfire are you on about here?


Everytime he traveled backward was for the same reason, as far as the scientists who sent him are concerned anyway: gather information on the pure strain of the virus. Emotionally the Willis character wants to return on the subsequent visits for a number of reasons, including that he doubts his own sanity and doesn't know which reality he's experiencing is the "real" one, whether or not he's crazy he definitely likes the world of the "past" more than the underground world of the present (our future, to us) and he is falling in love with Dr. Railly (Medilne Stowe).


He didn't start the chain of events, they have already happened. The man who unleashes the virus, Dr. Peters (David Morse), was going to unleash the virus whether or not Willis was sent back to the past. He wasn't there to stop him, only to discover more about the origin of the virus.


Well, that's not what happens in 12 Monkeys or in Back to the Future, but something similar does happen in The Terminator, where the future son sends his own father back to impregnate his mother and thereby create him. Yes, this is one of the complexities and conceits of time travel as a plot device. That same complexity is in Back to the Future, it's just handled differently. And again, no such scenario is used as you described in 12 Monkeys. Not even close.


No, it isn't. Would you care to explian what details you are referring to? I am going to guess it's something about him witnessing his own death. Bruce Willis as Cole, who lives in the "future", is haunted by the memory he had as a child (the boy we see in the airport) of seeing a man shot and killed. This man is him and the boy is him. The older character as played by Bruce Willis has already experienced the event of his own death years before. The witnessing of it has already happened to the boy, though it hasn't yet happened to the man until he is actually shot. His adult "future" self being shot would not cause him not to exist as a boy watching it happen. 12 Monkeys is careful not to play with that, to keep that idea of watching yourself die the central concept (as it was in the short French film La Jetée, on which Gilliam's movie is based).

If you want to see a time travel movie where the consequences of time travel become much more complicated and the film has trouble following its own internal logic, look at Timecop (1994). That thing is a mess.

There are many time travel movies out there, including The Time Machine (1960), A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (1949), Slaughterhouse-Five (1972), Time After Time (1979), Time Bandits (1981), The Terminator series (1984, 1991, 2003), several of the Star Trek flicks in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986), Star Trek: Generations (1994) and Star Trek: First Contact (1996), Orlando (1992), Donnie Darko (2001), Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989), Army of Darkness (1993), The Final Countdown (1980), The Philadelphia Experiment (1984), 12:01 (1993), Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002), Kate & Leopold (2001) and at least a dozen others.

They all handle the traps and problems of logic when dealing with the concept of time travel differently. Some are much more successful at following an internal logic than others. For my money 12 Monkeys is the very best. By far.

First of all...the time travel system of both seemed likely the same for me (And in all movies that I saw it were). A strange hi-tech machine that make people go forward or backward in time-space.
And yes. I knew one was a psichological thriller and the other a comedy and I wasn't comparing the movies just saying that in my humble opinion the time travelling is more beliveable because they don't have been sent to the past because of something they changed in it.



I really tried to say clearly but like I said it's dificult to explain time travel theories. So I'll say what I didn't revealed so I didn't spoil it all if someone didn't see the movie. The reason that the Scientists sent Bruce Willis to the past was indeed to study the virus. But was a call recorded in tape that the scientists used to determine in which time he had to be sent and that they discovered about the 12 monkeys, didn't they? (If not just say it and I'll rewatch the movie and say how much you're right and I'm wrong. Really. It isn't a joke, I based all my theories on that. If it's wrong so you won.). And that call was made by Bruce Willis himself as he was in front of the 12 monkeys'...what seemed a pet shop. If Willis was sent in a general past time or didn't know about the 12 monkeys he wouldn't make the call to warn the scientists about the 12 monkeys. And thus he wouldn't be sent to the right time and wouldn't know about the 12 monkeys.



I'm saying that for him to go back to the right time and know about the 12 monkeys. He need to make the call. And for him to make the call he need to go back at the right time and know about the 12 monkeys. Therefore...It cannot have happened.


The chain of events I'm refering is:
-The tape he hears in the future.
-I think, but ain't sure, that he makes the son of that guy wants to produce a virus (But then again, dunno if the virus was created by his order or something else.)
-The tape he hears in the asylum.
-He be dead in front of himself (Just to be sure you know...I ain't saying that if he didn't see himself die he wouldn't go to the past just that if he hadn't followed the chain of events he wouldn't end up dying in the middle of the airport).


The be your own father thing was an example. Of course I ain't saying that twelve monkeys had anything about sons. I'm talking about that chain of events created by Willis so the chain of events happens (i. e. If, for example he hadn't made the call stated before he wouldn't be there to make it in the first place) as I would've created myself.


No of course not! He seeing himself die isn't and by no means would be even close to the most important part of the plot! And how would that cause him to stop exist? I'm not talking of existence there. Maybe next time I be more careful with examples. I believe if you read what I written before you'll get what I mean by the example. If you not I don't think I can explain more clearly than that. (Not saying you're dumb just that I ain't that good in explaining time travel).

I expect this post explains it all and you understand my position.

No. Not so surprisingly you have that all wrong.

The phonecall he makes in 1993 (his first time traveling experience) to the apartment full of children is not why they originally had the plan to send him back to 1997. They were sending him to 1997 because they know from history that is when the virus started. They have also been able to scientifically pinpoint that it started in Philadelphia, then the rest of the cities around the world within days (which we learn by the end of the movie is because that's where David Morse's character is traveling, with the purpose of infecting the entire globe).

The reason they are investigating the "Army of the Twelve Monkeys" is because they knew that their logo started mysteriously appearing around Philadelphia in the days leading up to the unleashing of the virus. They are assuming, incorrectly of course, that the two events are linked. As we find out by the end of the movie, they are not. Jeffrey Goins (Brad Pitt) and his organization wanted to stir things up by locking his famous scientist father (Christopher Plummer) up in the zoo and releasing the animals from their cages. It's a coincidence that the two events happen on the same day, and that the scientist who does unleash the virus also happens to be working for Jeffrey's father.


Say what now? As I explained already, they already knew about the Army of the Twelve Monkeys before Willis ever set foot in the past. That phonecall you're talking about just kept them going in the wrong direction a while longer. At that point Willis' character is convinced Jeffrey Goins is responsible. He learns later that they are not.


I'm saying you have no idea what you are talking about and need to watch the movie again, and more closely.


That recording is the one Madeline Stowe's character made to the carpet cleaners, that's the one he hears in the "future" (well, present for him). That's what is played for him.


You aren't sure of anything. As I already explained, they assumed it was Jeffrey. They were wrong.


What tape? He doesn't hear a tape. In 1993 when he's at the asylum they call the number he's supposed to call, but it's too early in time (they mistakenly sent him to 1993 instead of the target of 1997).


No, he not be. The phonecall he makes at the airport they reconstruct and travel back to meet him, since he finally knows who had the virus and where it was first unleashed.


If only. It explains you don't know this movie you hate the logic of very well, but not much else.