|
|
Post by LivingDeadGirl on Jan 30, 2008 19:33:05 GMT -5
Highlander- I'd only seen bits & pieces a long time ago, this is the first time I've actually sat down and watched the whole movie. Kinda cheesy, but not bad. Escape From New York- Been a long time since I watched this one, but still love it. There's just something about Kurt Russell wearing an eye patch. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Sybillness on Jan 31, 2008 9:56:41 GMT -5
Better late than never... BRAZIL It started to get painful to watch near the end. Just didn't hold my interest. 5/10 STRANGE INVADERS This one was camptastic! For what it was, it was somewhat entertaining. 6/10 WARGAMES Matthew Broderick was such a little cutie! What happened?  That Sarah Jessica Parker made him old! 8/10 THE TERMINATOR I still love this movie, after all these years! 10/10 COCOON It was cute. 7/10 NIGHT OF THE COMET I wanted to quit watching this one, but Heineken wouldn't let me! 2/10 |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Jan 31, 2008 10:34:54 GMT -5
NIGHT OF THE COMET I wanted to quit watching this one, but Heineken wouldn't let me! 2/10 Yup, gun to her head and everything.  E.T.: THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (1982) Not only the biggest sci-fi movie of the 80's, but the biggest movie in general of the 80's. Spielberg really struck a nerve with this one. The tale of a little alien who accidentally gets left behind and is befriended by a lonely boy. Everyone in the cast is great, with Henry Thomas giving one of the all-time best performances from a child actor, the story is both funny and moving, John Williams' score is perfect and E.T. himself is very believable, even to this day. If he wasn't, the movie probably wouldn't work as well as it does. 9.5/10 Okay folks, last day for this genre. Still time to get in one or two movies for inclusion. First thing tomorrow morning, I will add up the scores for January and post the genre/category for February. |
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Jan 31, 2008 16:29:49 GMT -5
Why'd you dock half a point? That's one of the most perfect movies of all time.
Incidentally, Heineken, I think I have to resign this game. This semester: there's no time to juggle this, the homework, and the stuff that I want to do, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Jan 31, 2008 20:23:17 GMT -5
Why'd you dock half a point? That's one of the most perfect movies of all time. It's just not quite a 10 in my eyes. Almost perfect, but not quite. However, Spielberg gets a 10 from me for JAWS and RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. Now those are perfect. Incidentally, Heineken, I think I have to resign this game. This semester: there's no time to juggle this, the homework, and the stuff that I want to do, too. Well, sorry to hear that, but I won't write you out completely. You might find yourself with some extra time for movie watching here and there and might want to pop in and participate. I'm sure there'll be months where even I won't be able to watch that many. Like I said early on, it's not just about seeing the most movies, it's about expanding movie watching horizons too. |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Feb 1, 2008 11:30:48 GMT -5
Well, that's it, the January Genre is officially closed. Good job to everybody who participated and hope to see a couple more of you who signed up in February. Here are the final scores for this month. January: 1980'S SCIENCE-FICTION Heineken Skywalker = 14 Sybillness = 7 Slayrrr666 = 6 ZapRowsdower = 6 Livingdeadgirl = 4 Since we had sci-fi for January, I thought we'd go in a completely opposite direction for the next one. The genre/category for February is... BASED ON A TRUE STORYThere have been tons of biopics and docudramas filmed over the years. From tragic events in history to inspirational tales of people overcoming incredible odds to the rags to riches stories of numerous celebrities. A few rules to follow: 1. The films can be based in any point in history, and they can have been made at any time, no limit like 80's sci-fi. 2. The films have to have been based on actual events or the life or lives of an actual person or persons in history. You have to diversify in your choices. All of your picks can't be the life stories of rock stars, for instance. The point is to see a variety of things. 3. Most biopics or docudramas include characters that are compilations of several people. This is usually done for dramatic effect or to compress certain events within a certain time frame. That's fine as long as they're only background or supporting characters. For the purposes of this, I would ask that we don't watch any movies that center around fictional characters set against a background of real events. For instance, TITANIC and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, both feature fictional characters whose tales are told during actual historical events, ie: the sinking of the Titanic and World War II. The Titanic existed and it actually sank, but there was no Jack and Rose.  4. All movies watched have to have been theatrical releases. No made for tv or made for cable movies, ie: HBO, USA, Showtime, etc., are not eligible. No television mini-series either. 5. Whenever you watch one, feel free to post it in "Just Watched Movies" like you normally would, or even write a review for "Review Hell" if so inclined, but post here also, so that I can keep track of what everybody's watching and can more easily calculate the final scores. Feel free to tell us what you thought of the film and score it using the 1 to 10 system, ie: 1 being just awful, 5 is average and 10 being perfect. Half points, ie: 8.5/10 are also allowed. 6. You have until February 29th, (Leap Year!) and then on March 1st I'll announce the next genre or category. After February 29th, any biopics or docudramas you watch are purely for your own enjoyment and no longer count towards your total score. 7. I will periodically update the scores for this genre so that everyone can see where they, and everyone else, is at. At the beginning of the following month, I will add the new scores to the previous month's scores, to get a complete tally and show the total scores for the year so far. 8. Like I mentioned in the original post, try to watch at least four, one per week, but the more you watch, the better your chances at being awarded the "2008 Movie Genre Of The Month Club Grand Prize"! But even better, hopefully at the end of it all, you'll feel like you saw a bunch of movies you might not have watched otherwise and actually enjoyed some of them. If there's something I forgot to cover or there are any additional concerns or questions, feel free to post them here so that I can answer for everyone to see. Also, if any other members of The Board decide to join us, no problem. Just post here that you're in or whatever. You might be a bit behind at first, but the more the merrier. Cheers and good luck everybody! |
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Feb 2, 2008 11:24:37 GMT -5
2 quick questions:
1. It can be based on something that really happened as long as there's real life characters and no fiction ones?
2. If a film is promoted as being based on a true story or inspired by a true story, which one is the more accurate one?
I've never gotten that last one myself, and always assumed they meant the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Feb 3, 2008 1:47:00 GMT -5
1. It can be based on something that really happened as long as there's real life characters and no fiction ones? That's kind of what Rule #3 covered. With most biopics or fact-based stories, you're going to get the main character or characters who ARE based on real people, but you'll also sometimes get certain secondary characters where the facts are kind of fudged with a bit. For instance, they might combine a few people into one character for the purposes of saving time or for dramatic effect. So you get a combo of real people and made up ones. That's okay, as long as your real people are the main characters, which is why something like TITANIC wouldn't count, because the main characters, Jack and Rose are fictional, while they interact with characters who are based on people who actually lived. 2. If a film is promoted as being based on a true story or inspired by a true story, which one is the more accurate one? "Inspired by a true story" usually means they took an idea and were "inspired" to write a fictional movie around that idea. Ed Gein was the inspiration for THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and PSYCHO, but his real story is vastly different from either of those movies, right? I don't think there's even a character named Ed Gein in either of them. Obviously, with most fact-based movies, writers and directors are going to take some liberties and change some things, but "Based on a true story" tends to stick a bit closer to the reality of what happened and is what I'm looking for here. The film "300" can be seen as a fantasy-adventure, but the main characters really did exist and that battle really did happen, it's just been "Hollywoodized" for dramatic effect. |
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Feb 3, 2008 11:34:10 GMT -5
Ok, I see what you mean. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by LivingDeadGirl on Feb 3, 2008 11:35:05 GMT -5
Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer 6/10- Based on the life of serial killer Henry Lee Lucas. Caught this on satellite the other night, still as disturbing as the first time I watched it. Michael Rooker does a good and spooky job portraying Lucas.
The Doors 9/10- Based on the life and drug-addled times of Jim Morrison and The Doors. Directed by Oliver Stone and starring Val Kilmer who does a superb & almost scary-real portrayel of Morrison. Also starring Kyle McLachlan (Ray Manzarek), Frank Whaley (Robby Krieger) and Kevin Dillon (John Densmore) as the rest of the band , Meg Ryan as Pam, Jim's girlfriend/wife and even a small role by Michael Madsen as porn star Tom Baker.
A lot of people I've talked to have complained that all the movie portrayed was the doom & gloom and sex and drugs. Well, you know what (and I'm saying this as a huge Doors/Morrison fan myself), Jim WAS obsessed with death, he DID do drugs, he DID sleep with a lot of women. But there's only so much you can put into one movie and I'm sure that the people who complained wouldn't have sat through 2 plus hours of the sensitive poetic side of Morrison, no they want to see the "rock star, bad boy" Morrison. There are numberous books out there written by his bandmates and the people who were closest to him and even by reading his peotry itself that will give you insight into ALL sides of who he was.
I also have a question along the lines of what slayrr was asking about. Would like, say, Apocalypto count b/c it's based on a race/culture of people (the fall of the Mayan civilization) as opposed to being based on a specific person?
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Feb 3, 2008 12:34:38 GMT -5
Ok, I see what you mean. Thanks. Glad to help. I also have a question along the lines of what slayrr was asking about. Would like, say, Apocalypto count b/c it's based on a race/culture of people (the fall of the Mayan civilization) as opposed to being based on a specific person? Wow, LDG got right in there with 2 movies. Nice. THE DOORS is on my "possibilities" list, if I have time. To answer your question, as much as I enjoyed it, I would say no to APOCALYPTO falling into this category. While most of the stuff on screen regarding their culture is pretty accurate, near as historians can figure, the story is based around fictional characters. In other words, you could go read things online or in history books about the Mayan civilization and its fall, but I would never find anything about Jaguar Paw, the hero. And the movie is pretty much about him and his adventure. |
|
|
|
Post by LivingDeadGirl on Feb 4, 2008 19:03:07 GMT -5
Goodfellas 10/10- Based on the life of mobster Henry Hill (played by Ray Liotta), one of the best mob movies ever, still one of my favorites.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Feb 6, 2008 10:45:09 GMT -5
I ended the last genre of the month with a Spielberg movie and thought I'd start the next one with a Spielberg movie as well.
MUNICH (2005)
A Palestinian terrorist group known as Black September murdered eleven Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympics in Munich, Germany. In retaliation, the Israeli government recruited Mossad agents (Eric Bana, Daniel Craig, etc.) to track and execute those responsible. Features many suspenseful scenes and raises questions about violence as revenge for violence.
8/10
|
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Feb 6, 2008 11:03:36 GMT -5
Apollo 13-1996
One of the few dramas I can sit through without feeling dull or bored, mainly due to the fact that it still rings with an action tone of keeping things going on to stay watchable. Lots of challenges, usually followed one after another, which is exactly what is needed. A tad too long, and times where it feels like the problems are invented to get more screen-time and padded out, but the special effects are nice, the comic relief is just that without being intrusive and the story is one that's pretty remarkable.
9/10
|
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Feb 7, 2008 11:10:59 GMT -5
Frida-2002
Still trying to decide what to think of this one. Kinda long for my tastes, and looking at Selma Hayek only goes so far to forgetting the run time. There's a healthy portion of her life that seems covered, but as I've never heard of her before, really isn't one I can say was accurate or not. The paintings themselves don't look half bad, and the scenes showing the inspiration were somewhat watchable, allowing for some scenes that offered something entertaining, and that tango scene itself is worth the watch. Just a little too long for my tastes.
7/10
|
|
That Sarah Jessica Parker made him old!
