TV/Movies Megathread

[Sophie Scholl]

The Hobbit:  The Battle of the Five Armies

4/7 stars. I enjoyed it as Jackson's take on his memory of reading The Hobbit 20+ years ago, but as a legitimate adaptation including the White Council v Dol Guldur addition via The Return of The King appendices, I found it wanting in the long run. There was a lot to enjoy about the overdone spectacle that Jackson had been building toward, but I cannot help but be disappointed as a fan of the original work. Far too much emphasis on the Elves, on the love angle, on the Master of Laketown and lackey, and other aspects I found adding needlessly to the time while not adding to the plot or the story.

I would never say Jackson lost his way on par with Lucas and the prequels, but he damn well has found himself as a "better" storyteller than Tolkien with each and every blockbuster he has put out. I will await the extended edition to lay full judgment upon the film, as Jackson's theatrical releases have never measured up to his extended editions, but there is only so much possible room for improvement. This is more of a fault of his Hobbit trilogy as a whole and what it has built toward than this final chapter. I do have to give a lot of respect to Billy Boyd for delivering what has become an amazing closing song the more I listen to it.

[Martinus]

What is there to put into the "extended edition" of the Hobbit adaptation? Bilbo on a crapper? I mean, they have already squeezed a short children's book into 10-hour long trilogy. 

[Sophie Scholl]

They flesh out certain scenes and plotlines that are given short shrift in the theatrical that deserve more added to them (as crazy as it seems).  A lot of it is material from the book edited down or out to fit Jackson's vision in the theatrical.  I've seen, and own, the first two Hobbit extended editions, and I think they're superior to the theatrical editions.  Not on par with the massive leap forward that Return of the King enjoys in the extended edition compared to the theatrical release, but still worth watching.

[mongers]

'Lost in Translation' - Meh, an OK film, but not great.

Though in retrospect over thus subsequent 12 hours, the story has grown on my somewhat.

Not too comfortable with the whole Japanese people not being able to speak English at all well, as nearly all the ones I've know have spoken impeccable English.

[The Brain]

Not too comfortable with the whole Japanese people not being able to speak English at all well, as nearly all the ones I've know have spoken impeccable English.

How much time have you spent in Tokyo?

[Grey Fox]

Not too comfortable with the whole Japanese people not being able to speak English at all well, as nearly all the ones I've know have spoken impeccable English.

What kind of Japanese people do you know?

The ones I communicate with(office in tokyo) are a disaster.

[mongers]

Not too comfortable with the whole Japanese people not being able to speak English at all well, as nearly all the ones I've know have spoken impeccable English.

What kind of Japanese people do you know?

The one I communicate with(office in tokyo) are a disaster.

Not any longer, but for instance I had dealing with people at a top Japanese merchant bank, but I guess nearly all of those were either educated at Oxbridge or at a prestigious US university. Later I'll be chatting with a friend who was married to a Japanese lady, so I'll ask his opinion on the film. 

I wasn't doubting the problems that a American/European might face in Tokyo, but questioning the uniformity of the poor spoken English and pronunciations he encountered.
I'm surprised  he never even encounter just one of the many obvious Western influenced people, who could speak English well.

[The Brain]

FWIW my experience is that their lack of English skills is one of the most obvious things you notice as a visitor to Japan. I think it's safe to say that the movie is realistic enough for fiction.

[Liep]

Noah. No.

[Ideologue]

The previous Star Trek films are 2001 and Blade Runner compared to the FF flicks though.

I'd say it's the other way around.

Lin's FF movies, anyhow.

[lustindarkness]

I wonder how he will destroy at least one classic muscle car in the Star Trek universe?

[Ideologue]

You know, it's actually kind of great. Lin has an established talent at dealing with an ensemble cast in the action-adventure genre. Would we rather see Darren Aronofsky's Star Trek. Sure. (Or how about Joe Kosinski or Duncan Jones' Star Trek. ) But this will be fine, and indeed almost certainly better now that Kurtzman and Orci are out of the picture....

Oh, Orci is still writing and producing? Lol fuck it then. Might as well have had him direct. I wanted to see the clysterfuck.

Should've replaced him with Ehren Kruger like Michael Bay did. Worked for Transformers, sort of. Orci has done like one solid movie in the past decade. It'll be another handsome piece of garbage, maybe enjoyable enough to be fun, but more likely one of the worst movies of whatever year it comes out.

[Admiral Yi]

I'm beginning to get the impression Ide doesn't really like movies; he just cares about directors.

[Ideologue]

I don't even use an strongly auteurist analytical framework. The director is often the single most imporyant person, but I'm not sure that's true even a majority of the time. That said, it's a useful shorthand when blue-skying about what kind of personality you'd like to see in a movie. (Especiallt in Kosinski's case, since presumably he would bring his DPand PD with him.)

[Ed Anger]

I look for Grips and the Gaffers.