|
|
#22
10-12-2005, 12:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I liked it a lot. This is not a simple popcorn movie. If that's what you wanted, I can see how you might be disappointed. [/ QUOTE ] are you [censored] kidding? i was disappointed that it was a popcorn movie without the fun parts. i was expecting something deeper, more subtle, thought-inspiring, etc. instead i've got a bunch of crap like: - a guy who knows there is an immediate and mortal threat to his family and doesn't have them get the [censored] out of town immediately, but somehow cares after he walks to work - tough and smart outlaws. so tough they don't make references to 'casually' killing clerks at a motel, and don't even pay any mind to it after discovering it. so smart that they stay low in small towns. they're such good criminals that they have no money. but they can rob for it, right? and what's the best way to stay low? it's certainly not taking the money when offered and leaving. you've got to lock the door and make a production about killing people randomly to show that you "mean business." that way you'll...get the money that has already been given to you, with all of the risks of being there too long while somebody could have cell phoned the cops or could have seen what was happening from the street outside. - ridiculous fight scene after ridiculous fight scene. got a few heat-packing thugs in your front yard? no problem! just grab the one who has his gun out, hook his arm, and punch him in the nose for about fifteen seconds because the other ones will just stand there and watch for a while. fights like the high school one are very common as well. because everybody takes out multiple people with standing strikes, there's no wrestling around or anything. - a rich and successful criminal brother who brings you to his house to see you before killing you. understandable that he wants to see you. understandable that he doesn't want to mess up his house with gunplay and blood. not understandable that he doesn't have you taken somewhere outdoors where you could be shot, or have other people around with guns drawn incase you get loose, or can't quickly retrieve and gun and can't hit you within several feet of himself. it's also a nice touch that he goes for his keys instead of shooting the lock or even better running away, because going for the keys sure wouldn't have been a popcorn moment. this is maybe the most amazingly bad role i have ever seen a good actor take. - just killed a bunch of people in a beautiful mansion? need to clean off some blood? is it night-time? no problem. you shouldn't use one of the 800 bathrooms in the house. since it's a house you've never visited and you can see in the dark, you know that there's a lake in the backyard. you also have a time machine to make it become morning. instead of using the shower you should chuck the gun and then FALL TO YOUR OVER THE [censored] TOP DRAMATIC KNEES AND SPLASH WATER ONTO YOUR WOUND WITH ONE ARM FOR REDEMPTION OR SOMETHING. - some "message" of unwelcoming tolerance with the dinner scene at the end which wouldn't have even been poignant but becomes laughable when you consider the fact that there is roughly a 0.00% chance that the little girl is going to remain quiet for the 10 minutes it takes to draw out the scene and dramatically get a plate for you. this movie [censored] sucked, dude. to say it's anything other than popcorn is a joke. that's not what i was wanting or expecting, but i would have liked it better if it were MORE popcorn since it's obvious that this movie had no chance of ever bearing meaning. [/ QUOTE ] i love this this kind of retarted argument: "Dude, it was so unrealistic!" The whole movie is an allegory, a meditation on the nature of violence - what causes it, how is it manifested in man, can man overcome this base natural instinct? Take a look at the whole first part of the movie - after we meet the killers and before they show up at the diner. The "family" stuff. the dialogue, the acting, the pacing, even the framing - it's all UNREAL, a little bit off. It's a fairy tale. And that's the point. Life without violence is unreal, impossible to sustain and against our nature. The movie was not a documentary, nor a Steven Segal flick. It's fine if you don't like a film, but at least take a look and think about what the filmmaker is trying to say before blasting it. 
|
|
#23
10-12-2005, 12:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
- just killed a bunch of people in a beautiful mansion? need to clean off some blood? is it night-time? no problem. you shouldn't use one of the 800 bathrooms in the house. since it's a house you've never visited and you can see in the dark, you know that there's a lake in the backyard. you also have a time machine to make it become morning. instead of using the shower you should chuck the gun and then FALL TO YOUR OVER THE [censored] TOP DRAMATIC KNEES AND SPLASH WATER ONTO YOUR WOUND WITH ONE ARM FOR REDEMPTION OR SOMETHING. [/ QUOTE ] Any experienced mob hit man will tell you that its not wise to wash up after murder someone in the crime scenes bathroom. This is where forensic scientists get crucial evidence such as hair, blood, etc.
|
|
#24
10-12-2005, 12:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
It's fine if you don't like a film, but at least take a look and think about what the filmmaker is trying to say before blasting it. [/ QUOTE ] you actually think there is depth or meaning to the concept? all of the nature/nurture, ability/inability to change yourself, acceptance, etc can be summarized in about one sentence and i'm not going to offer that for your 'critique'. i watch and love all kinds of movies with all kinds of unrealistic moments. if every aspect of the film is going to be this over the top, though, i want to at least be entertained by how over the top it is. do you think i think about this kind of stuff if i see a vin diesel movie? i went into this movie knowing nothing about it other than the BASICS of the premise (guy defends diner and might be unusually skilled at fighting) and its high ratings on rotten tomatoes. i was expecting something thought-provoking. the concept is simple. somebody saying "[INSERT SUBJECT]: think about it..." is not an all-expenses paid trip to blowjobsville in my book. the unrealistic moments were so utterly and distractingly awful that they could not be looked over in the context of what is supposed to be a purposed film. i truly do not nitpick over this kind of stuff, it was like somebody setting off an airhorn in the theater every time it happened. i did bring up stuff that was just about being awful too, like the lake scene. that has more to do with the director jerking off on camera and pandering to idiot audience dramatism than it does with a lack of realism. you're an idiot if you think i'm incapable of "discovering" the "meaning" or that i would harpoon an otherwise great movie over a lack of realism. i deserve a lot more credit than that.
|
|
#25
10-12-2005, 01:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
Any experienced mob hit man will tell you that its not wise to wash up after murder someone in the crime scenes bathroom. This is where forensic scientists get crucial evidence such as hair, blood, etc. [/ QUOTE ] his hair, blood, fingerprints, and etc are all over the house including the study where bloody murders occured. there's nothing he could do to prevent them from locating data everywhere, it's just a matter of whether he's been booked before or not.
|
|
#26
10-12-2005, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Any experienced mob hit man will tell you that its not wise to wash up after murder someone in the crime scenes bathroom. This is where forensic scientists get crucial evidence such as hair, blood, etc. [/ QUOTE ] his hair, blood, fingerprints, and etc are all over the house including the study where bloody murders occured. there's nothing he could do to prevent them from locating data everywhere, it's just a matter of whether he's been booked before or not. [/ QUOTE ] Well maybe he cleaned it all up and that's why it's morning now. ???
|
|
#28
10-12-2005, 01:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's fine if you don't like a film, but at least take a look and think about what the filmmaker is trying to say before blasting it. [/ QUOTE ] you actually think there is depth or meaning to the concept? all of the nature/nurture, ability/inability to change yourself, acceptance, etc can be summarized in about one sentence and i'm not going to offer that for your 'critique'. i watch and love all kinds of movies with all kinds of unrealistic moments. if every aspect of the film is going to be this over the top, though, i want to at least be entertained by how over the top it is. do you think i think about this kind of stuff if i see a vin diesel movie? i went into this movie knowing nothing about it other than the BASICS of the premise (guy defends diner and might be unusually skilled at fighting) and its high ratings on rotten tomatoes. i was expecting something thought-provoking. the concept is simple. somebody saying "[INSERT SUBJECT]: think about it..." is not an all-expenses paid trip to blowjobsville in my book. the unrealistic moments were so utterly and distractingly awful that they could not be looked over in the context of what is supposed to be a purposed film. i truly do not nitpick over this kind of stuff, it was like somebody setting off an airhorn in the theater every time it happened. i did bring up stuff that was just about being awful too, like the lake scene. that has more to do with the director jerking off on camera and pandering to idiot audience dramatism than it does with a lack of realism. you're an idiot if you think i'm incapable of "discovering" the "meaning" of the movie or that i would harpoon an otherwise great movie over a lack of realism. [/ QUOTE ] wow...i understand you didn't like the movie, but I can't imagine why it has provoked such a strong reaction from you...but to each his own. I enjoyed the film. I found it interesting and thought-provoking, and I enjoyed the filmmaking. I'm a Cronenberg fan. Guess we're just on different trains of thought here.
|
|
#29
10-12-2005, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anybody else seen \"A History of Violence\" (Possible Spoilers)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Any experienced mob hit man will tell you that its not wise to wash up after murder someone in the crime scenes bathroom. This is where forensic scientists get crucial evidence such as hair, blood, etc. [/ QUOTE ] his hair, blood, fingerprints, and etc are all over the house including the study where bloody murders occured. there's nothing he could do to prevent them from locating data everywhere, it's just a matter of whether he's been booked before or not. [/ QUOTE ] Um, who are the cops going to go look for? Joey or Tom? You forget that the hero has as a new identity, so unless "Tom" has been fingerprinted before, they wouldn't be looking for him. But again, who cares? It's not a police procedural.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
