TV/Movies Megathread

[Ideologue]

You're so emotionally closed off.

[Berkut]

OK, for cel--because JR has no ears to hear--this is why Snake Eyes is great:

1)That 12-minute trick shot that opens the movie--actually several steadicam shots stitched together, but pretty close to flawlessly, particularly given the limitations of 1996 cinematography and editing--is somewhere in the upper echelons of the most complex visuals ever staged in a movie.  That BDP pulled it off at all is wonderful.  What makes it brilliant, though, is that it does so much work.  All at once, it establishes the character of Rick Santoro (our good friend Nic Cage) as an affable scumbag, along with nearly all of the other characters that populate the film; it creates a clear sense of geography (and claustrophobia!); and it sets up the flashback structure that will fill in the blanks that are purposely left in, due to the camera's replication of Santoro's subjectivity.
2)It is the most untroubled depiction of BDP's great obsession, the technology of surveillance.  It's surely less twisted than Body Double in this regard; and yet it's no less interesting for it.
3)It's a pretty swell story about redemption, and Nic Cage is great as Santoro (even if his Cagisms are easy to mock, they fit the character and he's tremendously entertaining to watch).  What makes him even more interesting is how clear Cage makes it that he just fucking hates discovering that he has a moral code after all.  He despises having to do the right thing, if it means betraying his friend.  That he pays dearly for his reluctant heroism fits right in with BDP's bleak worldview--the film essentially argues that no good deed goes unpunished.  It's not as good as Blow Out in this regard, but, hell, not many things are.
4)The formal elements throughout are all pretty inspired: frequent BDP collaborator Stephen Burum is one of our great cinematographers, and he knows how to light the hell out of things; I always appreciate some well-deployed splitscreen; the thriller editing is top-notch; I love the crane shot of the hotel rooms.  Meanwhile, the production design of the whole arena and casino is amazing, both gorgeous and very dense with detail.
5)I like the villain.  Gary Sinise is superb at creating his conflicted antagonist.  He maintains an aura of decency, despite his willingness to murder; and he actually has a noble, if oddly-specific, motivation to assassinate the Secretary of Defense (ensuring that a missile defense system is funded).  However, I suppose this inner conflict might have made him seem like a less-effective villain than he actually is.  (Likewise, I'll be the first to admit he says the word "AirGuard" way too much.)  I used to think the rationale beneath the assassination was the weakest part of the movie, but I've really grown to appreciate it.
6)The original ending probably would've been rad, and the one that was forced on De Palma and David Koepp is a little abrupt, but it's still perfectly fine, and staged with De Palma's usual thrillmaking hypercompetence.

But agree or disagree with that, I just don't get why Snake Eyes gets shit on so hard.  Femme Fatale, Raising Cain, Mission to Mars?  Man, I understand why people don't like those.  They're totally fucking weird, and their plots take some outrageously stupid turns.  Snake Eyes, on the other hand, is a glossy little thriller with a big budget, some very engaging themes, and a lot of theoretical populist appeal.  Yet everybody hates it like it carries cholera.

I get where you are coming from. Except not.

That is the only movie I ever walked out on, as it was pretty clear that I had already wasted an hour of my life, and the rest would be a net negative to my overall enjoyment of life.

It is a fucking terrible movie.

[Josquius]

I'm continuing my accidental re-watch through of DS9 at a rapid pace. I've reached the fourth series.
Boy I wish I had been old enough to fully get this show when it was new.
Even its filler episodes are great.
In TNG as soon as it becomes clear its a "holodeck malfunction of the week" episode I cannot help but groan inside, "Oh jeez, here comes one of those crappy episodes that are probably in the actor's contracts to let them show off their range."
In DS9...well half of the filler episodes are Ferengi-related (awesome when I was a kid, even better now) and the Bond episode was just marvelous. The only bad ones are so far are the klingon ones- though time will tell in the later series, I'm sure I remember the prophet related, black history month episodes being dull.
With DS9 I have really come to understand how the ST universe works on a new level too. It finally makes sense. Mostly.

[Syt]

It's a fun movie, but it's nowhere near as seminal as Alien/Blade Runner were.

The Academy disagrees.

Best Picture
Best Actor in a Leading Role (Russell Crowe)
Best Visual Effects
Best Costume Design
Best Sound Mixing

It was not exactly a strong field that year:
Gladiator
Chocolat
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Erin Brockovich
Traffic

And let's not forget that Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love or Fargo to The English Patient. Or that Godfather III was nominated for Best Picture. Oscars are a crap shoot.

[crazy canuck]

Unbroken.  Way too long and the ending fizzled.  I liked the premise but it could have used a better editor or whatever the person is called who cuts out needless or overly long sections of the movie.  The most remarkable part of the story of Unbroken is what the guy did after the war but the movie only shows that in text as the movie ended.  I think the movie would have been much better if it had cut down the minutes devoted to merely surviving and more on how the experience did not break him and he went on to reconcile himself with the Japanese.  I liked the Railway Man a lot more for that reason.

[crazy canuck]

And let's not forget that Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love or Fargo to The English Patient. Or that Godfather III was nominated for Best Picture. Oscars are a crap shoot.

What didn't you like about the English Patient?

[Capetan Mihali]

Saw Psycho again last night, but on the big screen this time. Anthony Perkins is as enjoyable as ever, and some of the sequences are just fantastic, camera-wise.

Next, I want to catch that new Pedro Costa movie (even though I haven't actually seen anything by him yet ), which is playing near me.  Living in a real city again with at least a few (semi-)independent theaters is bringing back out the film devotee in me.

[The Brain]

Shakespeare in Love is a lot better than Saving Private Ryan.

[Valmy]

Shakespeare in Love is a lot better than Saving Private Ryan.

Damning with feint praise.

[Ideologue]

Saw Psycho again last night, but on the big screen this time. Anthony Perkins is as enjoyable as ever, and some of the sequences are just fantastic, camera-wise.

Next, I want to catch that new Pedro Costa movie (even though I haven't actually seen anything by him yet ), which is playing near me.  Living in a real city again with at least a few (semi-)independent theaters is bringing back out the film devotee in me.

I wanted to go see Psycho (it played in Pittsburgh) but I didn't feel like it, plus it's sort of hard to justify spending $20 for me and my girlfriend to go see a movie she barely wants to watch and which I own.  Also, I did go see Rear Window, and the presentation was probably of lower quality than if I'd just popped in the BD.

I did get to see Phoenix, which was nice, although it sucked.  (I'm actually pretty sure it played in Columbia anyway.)

[Eddie Teach]

Shakespeare in Love is a lot better than Saving Private Ryan.

Damning with feint praise.

Saving Private Ryan is a LOT better than The Breakfast Club.

[crazy canuck]

Shakespeare in Love is a lot better than Saving Private Ryan.

Damning with feint praise.

Saving Private Ryan is a LOT better than The Breakfast Club.

The Breakfast Club is a LOT better than Jupiter Rising.

[katmai]

Jupiter Rising is better than Snake Eyes.

[viper37]

Jupiter Rising is better than Snake Eyes.

No way.

[katmai]