• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film What's the Last Film You Saw? v. Tell Us What You Thought!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The issue with sci-fi movies is that somehow they need to be fantasy still they need a snap of reality, so it has to be balanced. Space exploration movies are meaninglessness, waste of money, waste of ppl efforts, waste of what you want, they shouldn't exist because what's the point of a space exploration movie anyway? I got to a point and I don't think am the first one, 99.99% of the films that I see, I watch 20m and then close them, mhm *raise shoulders* it's bullshit in purest form. There aren't any films that are entertaining anymore, except some adaptations based on the novels by Stephen King, Peter Straub, some Clive Barkers movies here and there , bla bla. The mistake, which most screenwriters bites is that they get burned at the script. They think there's some kind of deep meaning bullshit.
 
Cream Gravy? said:
I think a man like Ridley Scott or Kubrick has a vision in his mind of what the viewer should gather at the end. I think men like Nolan and that dude who made Arrival want the viewer to give THEM the answer, like they don't have the gumption.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting thought, cream. I don't think open endings are an exception to the point I was making. It's still indicative, the question is of what? And, there could be factors at play with messy stories that are like what you're saying.
 
Kubrick?

Kubrick, kubrick was the generation of kodachrome. He didn't do anything so you can say waw its mhm

its what?

No yo, as I was saying, movies are money, all people sell themselves, it's capitalism, it's where I live you live, where we live.
 
I'm not sure what you're getting at Shady but Stanley Kubrick is one of the only people on this planet (well, was I guess) whom I totally respect for their genius. He is the film equivalent of Einstein, for someone to surpass his genius in film making would require something truly miraculous. Literally every genre he tackles, he does better than others. Sci-Fi? He made THE sci-fi film, 2001 defines how we view anything after. Eyes Wide Shut was the best portrayal of the angst of monogamy ever. A Clockwork Orange completely obliterated what we felt was okay and acceptable in film while at the same time being a critique of that very thought. Barry Lyndon is the best period piece of all time, and always will be I really can't see it being surpassed.

I've studied the man's life and to say that he was just in it for the money is silly. Even if he enjoyed the financial success, he pushed all the boundaries of film. People walked out of his films. People banned his films. He kept working on his films till the day he died. No, he was not about the money, Mr. Frank (Shady) Zappa, he was a rare individual who challenged our very concepts of what film could be.


Anyways, I enjoyed Ad Astra, and Interstellar, and all these recent sci-fis, they just fall SOOOOO short of greatness and I question why there is no one left to create true art.
 
come on are we all stupid kids? what are you gettin at? for what reason you keep talkin bout him? Did you eat at the same table? People from National Geographic are far better at makin movies, even those from History.

There is no one left to create ''art'' because all ideas have already been tried and I dunno why would you wish something like this? I mean, why you consider that X can be labeled as ''art''?
 
I don't really understand what your're saying still (aside from the idea of the extinction of originality which is something I agree with).

If you don't enjoy movies any longer, why do you wana talk about them? I'm not saying cinema is dead (I still really enjoy Tarantino and Woody Allen flicks) I'm saying sci-fi is dead. Or something along those lines I guess.

Not sure what's going on in your life Shady, but you've been making less and less sense lately. I hope you are well.
 
Shady's Fox said:
The issue with sci-fi movies is that somehow they need to be fantasy still they need a snap of reality, so it has to be balanced. Space exploration movies are meaninglessness, waste of money, waste of ppl efforts, waste of what you want, they shouldn't exist because what's the point of a space exploration movie anyway? I got to a point and I don't think am the first one, 99.99% of the films that I see, I watch 20m and then close them, mhm *raise shoulders* it's bullshit in purest form. There aren't any films that are entertaining anymore, except some adaptations based on the novels by Stephen King, Peter Straub, some Clive Barkers movies here and there , bla bla. The mistake, which most screenwriters bites is that they get burned at the script. They think there's some kind of deep meaning bullshit.
Click to expand...

Alien? Aliens? Event Horizon? Gravity? Starship Troopers? You can't say those "space exploration" movies are bad or meaningless (although everything is meaningless in a way). Those are just off the top of my head, there are probably a lot more. And I'm not even a sci-fi fan, generally.
 
Cream Gravy? said:
I don't really understand what your're saying still (aside from the idea of the extinction of originality which is something I agree with).

If you don't enjoy movies any longer, why do you wana talk about them? I'm not saying cinema is dead (I still really enjoy Tarantino and Woody Allen flicks) I'm saying sci-fi is dead. Or something along those lines I guess.

Not sure what's going on in your life Shady, but you've been making less and less sense lately. I hope you are well.
Click to expand...

Nah, Shady NEVER made any sense. At least now s/he's somewhat coherent.
 
The concept of sci-fi is to tackle modern problems and see how we might solve them, or how they might become worse. It's my favorite genre because it's both whimsical and grounded. I consider sci-fi to be completely apart from fantasy though they get grouped together. Like I love Star Wars but it's fantasy, nothing sci-fi about it.

Star Trek series (pre Enterprise, ugh... Archer) do this best among television. Or maybe Babylon 5.
 
Of course I make less sense, how could I make more sense? When you kick someone right in the face with reality? You look like you've seen a ghost so for some people reality is a hard thing to accept.
 
^And... How was it? We're all aware it exists but the idea of the thread is to discuss what you thought of the last films you watched.

I watched Becket yesterday (1964) and was very pleased. Very good period piece about the conflict between King Henry II and his best friend/worst enemy. Worth a watch but a bit long winded. Peter O'Toole was amazing in it.
 
^some people are still waiting to be fascinated; some, however, are already, fascinating. 😊

 
That is just the worst place, apart from the sexual organs, or, the eye-.ball. 😕

...or, ear- hole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top