Last Movie You Saw

[Trevelyan]

King of Kong: A Fist Full of Quarters"

An absolutely hilarious yet also very compelling documentary.

[Trevelyan]

"Atonement" ***1/2 out of four.

[PrezLeefun]

Horton Hears a Who. Three out of Four stars. It was hilarious.

I hated the dig at Homeschoolers. I loved the Pro-Life message.

[Trevelyan]

"Eastern Promises" ***1/2 out of four.

[PaulRevere]

No Country for Old Men.

Great if you like watching a psychopath on a mass-murdering rampage.
Otherwise, some things about the movie were well-done, some didn't make a lot of sense.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Horton Hears a Who. I hated the dig at Homeschoolers.

Thanks for the heads-up, I won't waste my dollars.

Recently rented:
Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium -
Enjoyed it. Very whimsical. 'Course, I'm a sucker for toy stores, since I'm still a kid at heart.

The Invisible -
What a waste of money. Had promise because of a good plot, failed miserably because they didn't take the time to develop the characters, answer key questions, and the ending was stupid.

The Bee Movie --
Saw this in theaters -- was as good watching it at home as it was at the movie house. We will probably buy this one at some point, because everybody in the family wants it (even my 19 year old son).

The other two were teen-angst movies my daughter wanted to watch. Blech. :smirk:

[PrezLeefun]

^^^Homes Horton hears a Who only makes one joke but it didnt sit well with me.

But the rest of the movie was really good and like I said the pro-life message was good. If you are curious you can watch it online at
watch-moviesdotnet for free. (Yes it is really free)

[Trevelyan]

"Ed Wood" **** out of four.

"The Lookout" ***1/2 out of four.

"Gone Baby Gone" *** out of four.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Gothica

Thought it was OK.

[RogerFGay]

I'm trying to watch Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan again, because I thought Star Trek: Nemisis (which I watched recently for the first time) is kind of a remake. But I have tried late at night twice now and keep falling asleep.

This is a week without TV so I'm just throwing movies at myself from every direction. Watched Bender's Big Score again (I really enjoy Futurama). And John Carpenter's They Live - just because. And The Bourne Ultimatum (for the first time).

[RogerFGay]

Target Earth (http://www.amazon.com/Target-Earth-Richard-Denning/dp/B00008G96N/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1206812643&sr=8-1)

[ThomasMore]

No Country for Old Men.

Great if you like watching a psychopath on a mass-murdering rampage.
Otherwise, some things about the movie were well-done, some didn't make a lot of sense.

Here is why I liked No Country:

True films noir have an overarching moral sense of good to be sought, something greater than ourselves, in the face of overwhelming evil.

No Country falls into this mold. Killer Anton Chigurh represents nihilistic evil at its worst and most direct. He enjoys terrorizing his targets. He enjoys the power of killing those who he chooses to kill, for any reason or no reason at all. Even his own severe injuries don't faze Chigurh; his well-being means nothing to him. He is devoid of anything human.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/twhalliii/NoCountryForOldMen3.jpg

Hunter Llewellyn Moss demonstrates both the honorable, and dishonorable: He is tough as nails and Chigurh's nemesis. He demonstrates remarkable courage in the face of abject, capital-E evil. At the same time, he is motivated wholly by greed. That cupidity causes him to recklessly endanger his family as Chigurh leaves a trail of death, and to refuse to cooperate with the police, which allows Chigurh to continue his rampage.

Carla Moss, Llewellyn's wife is honest, courageous and speaks truth to evil in one case -- but accepts evil in another.

Bounty hunter Carson Wells knows exactly what Chigurh is. Wells is tough and smart, but arrogant. (Woody Harrelson's portrayal of Wells was the one performance I did not care for).

Fate lays Chigurh low, leaving him weak and ready for apprehension. But human greed and fear open the door for his escape.

Sheriff Tom Bell is the one consistently moral presence: he is desperate to protect the endangered, even when the endangereds' own sins confuse the situation and put them in mortal danger. And because of the confusion created not only by Chigurh, but also by the evil in those who are Chigurh's targets, Bell is frustrated in his efforts to get ahead of the situation.

Many people were unsatisfied with the movie's ending. I am certain that it was precisely the Coen brothers' intent. It was human flaws that establish the ending.

[Trevelyan]

"Forgetting Sarah Marshall" ***1/2 out of four.

[ThomasMore]

I am Legend. ** (out of 4).

Not bad, not good. Will Smith is always likeable. Special effects often take the place of plot development. Pacing is slow, but deliberately so. Surprisingly pro-American, pro-hope and pro-Christian ending, at odds with the book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Legend)'s more provocative, darker conclusion.

[PrezLeefun]

"Forgetting Sarah Marshall" ***1/2 out of four.

I saw it too. and I agree with your rating. I did totally freak when they showed his dick though. And to think I had my 13 year old cuz with me. :noggin:

[Trevelyan]

"Iron Man" ***1/2 out of four.

[hosl]

Iron Man: 4/5
Forgetting Sarah Marshall: 4.5/5
Harold and Kumar 2: 3/5

[hosl]

Lars and the Real Girl- 5/5

[Neil Peart]

Expelled - 5/5

Great movie, and it makes much the same points that have been made in the Evolution forum.

[DesertFox]

Just watched Gladiator for the 1200th time. It's still good.

[Neil Peart]

I saw Prince Caspian last night. It was quite good, and remained faithful to the book. I think I'll watch The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe on DVD today.

As a side note, that girl who played Susan was HOT!!! (She's 19, so it's OK for me to say that.)

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Expelled - 5/5
Great movie, and it makes much the same points that have been made in the Evolution forum.

I concur, :thumb:


Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian - :fruit: :fruit: :fruit: :fruit: -1/2 out of five
Wonderful sequel to the first, but you can definitely tell it is the "middle" movie. Quite obvious there's going to be another (reminiscent of LotR #2). As my daughter said, a lot more action a little less clear story line, but certainly worth the price of the ticket at the theater. I wish we would have watched the first one (we have it on DVD) before we went to see the second, but all in all, I was very pleased. Can't wait til the next one!

[Neil Peart]

Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian - :fruit: :fruit: :fruit: :fruit: -1/2 out of five
Wonderful sequel to the first, but you can definitely tell it is the "middle" movie. Quite obvious there's going to be another (reminiscent of LotR #2). As my daughter said, a lot more action a little less clear story line, but certainly worth the price of the ticket at the theater. I wish we would have watched the first one (we have it on DVD) before we went to see the second, but all in all, I was very pleased. Can't wait til the next one!You know, the one I'm REALLY looking forward to is The Magician's Nephew.

[hosl]

Raiders of the Lost Ark-- 4/5

[GreatDredScott]

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian; Grade: A

[Neil Peart]

The Ten Commandments: 10/10

A true classic. Heston was GREAT as Moses.

[TeenageRepublican]

Ronin: 5/5
An excellent spy thriller and no computer graphics were involved in it for the car scenes. An unfortunate rarity these days.

[PrezLeefun]

CON: Prince Caspian

Four out of Four Stars. It was great. Now really it was 3 and a half (I had a little trouble following towards the middle) but it gets the other half star because its fun to look at Ben Barnes and William Moseley for 2 and a half hours. Its really fun.

[TeenageRepublican]

Four out of Four Stars. I was great.

And people think I'm self-absorbed. ;)

[PrezLeefun]

LOL.... oops. My bad. :lol:






I am though.... just a bit..... in small quantaties I can be....

[Wyatt_Junker]

Children of Men: 2/5

Stupid ending.

I would have much preferred to see the pregnant chick at the end be all pro-choice and be like SCREW YOU and get an abortion just to spite the director and all those bad actors.

She aborts. The world ends. Simple.

My favorite scene was when Michael Caine asked the revolutionaries to pull his finger and they just blow it off instead. That scene had potential.

Another good ending would have been the black chick with child gets picked up by the boat that says TOMORROW on the starboard side. Now, follow me. Number one, she's kind of cute. Sailors like that. Number two, they need to figger out why her womb is so badass. So? How about a sailor gang bang?

She gets on the boat and they take turns. I mean, its for a good cause right? They need to populate the earth again and only her womb works. So, party-time.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Prince Caspian

4 out of 4

Great story, wonderful effects...kept a 7 and a 10 year old enraptured for the entire thing. Kept the 5 year old pretty well entertained for 1/2...and that takes A LOT to do!!

[DesertFox]

Kill Bill I & 2. Both 4 of 5. If you like blood and guts and special effects, this is your flick.

[ThomasMore]

Just watched Gladiator for the 1200th time. It's still good.

Fox, did you ever see Anthony Mann's "Fall of the Roman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire_%28film%29)"?

About a year after "Gladiator" hit the theaters, I saw FotRE on late-night television. Ridley Scott obviously got his inspiration for "Gladiator" from it; at least 80% of it came from FotRE; it was a well-made epic.

http://bp2.blogger.com/_fiomqo2yKYU/RortsRtpP7I/AAAAAAAAADE/88euMCDukLk/s400/Sophia+Loren.jpg

A luscious Sophia Loren portrayed Lucilla, Alec Guinness was Marcus Aurelius, and Christopher Plummer was the charismatic, but mad Commodus. Omar Sharif, James Mason, Mel Ferrer and Anthony Quayle also performed. Steven Boyd's wooden Livius (reformulated in Gladiator as Russell Crowe's Maximus) was the film's weak spot.

[Trevelyan]

"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" *** out of four.

Fun, but it is the weakest of the four movies.

[TeenageRepublican]

"16 Blocks" *****/*****
A great movie with a great message delivered at a fast pace.

[hosl]

"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" *** out of four.

Fun, but it is the weakest of the four movies.

I have to agree, however I give it 4.5/5

[TeenageRepublican]

I'm going to see the new Indy flick after going out for Chinese on Monday.

[Big Coffee]

Indiana Jones and Crystal Skull

[Trevelyan]

"Braveheart" ***1/2 out of four.

[Neil Peart]

Ben Hur: 10/10

[PrezLeefun]

"Braveheart" ***1/2 out of four.

Have you only just seen that?

[Trevelyan]

Have you only just seen that?

Hah, somehow yes.

[PrezLeefun]

That is so surprising to me. You seem to know all the great films. lol

[hosl]

Boogie Nights (5/5)
Zohan (2/5)
Kung Fu Panda (3.5/5)

On the "to watch" list:
Get Smart
Wanted
Falling Down
Hoop Dreams
Red Dawn

[Neil Peart]

On the "to watch" list:
Red DawnYES. You MUST see this movie.

[PrezLeefun]

Wanted 2 and half stars.

It was good. Didn't make much sense but it was good.

[Neil Peart]

Get Smart: 7.5/10.

[MaximumSam]

Wall E - 4 out of 5. Pretty darn good kids move.

[hosl]

Hoop Dreams- (4.5/5). That's the way to make a documentary.

[M.C.]

Saw two movies in the same day

Wanted-3/5
Good solid action. However it has perhaps the most predictable plot twist in the history of mankind as well as tons of holes in it. The action is good but it is also somewhat rediculous in what otherwise was a seemingly possible movie

The Incredible Hulk-3/5
Despite having who I think is the world's greatest actor Edward Norton, it was draggy. It all lead up to the ending which was really good and action packed, but it took too long to get there. Makes me wonder why Ed isn't still making 5/5 movies like Fight Club, American History X, and 25th hour.

[ThomasMore]

9|11 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312318/).

Simply amazing. French brothers Jules and Gedeon Naudet had planned to make a documentary film about the making of a New York firefighter, following a FDNY "Probie" through his probationary period.

After finding the right academy graduate, they followed him as he started his career in New York's Battalion 1 (which included the WTC). On 9/11, one of the filmmakers was answering a minor call with the station's chief. Hearing a jet far too low overhead, he turned his camera upward and obtained some of the only film of the first aircraft slamming into the World Trade Center's North Tower.

The brothers accompanied the firefighters of Battalion 1 into the North Tower, filming the horrifying events through the firefighters' eyes and describing, but tastefully refusing to film, the gore unfolding around them.

Although the South Tower was struck second, it collapsed first: its collapse gave the firemen of Battalion 1 the warning they needed to evacuate, in the nick of time to escape before the North Tower collapsed, too.

The Naudets' footage is the only surviving film from inside the World Trade Center on 9/11.

The next day, the firefighters were back on site, trying to rescue survivors.

This movie shows New York's Bravest, from the moment the first plane struck the WTC, through the buildings' collapses, to the beginning of the rescues, recovery and cleanup. It brings the horror and evil of the day unmistakably to the viewer, without once disrespecting the deceased.

A masterpiece.

[hosl]

Wanted- 4/5
True Lies- 3.5/5
Falling Down- 4.5/5

[Neil Peart]

Hancock - 4/10

[TSawyer2112]

Flyboys 3.5/5

I watched it one night after I took a flight in a 1929 Travel Air 4000 Biplane. It was worth renting, but there were parts that seemed unrealistic to me.

[TeenageRepublican]

"We Were Soldiers" 5/5
A great and realistic film about Vietnam and the soldiers in it.

"Stranger than Fiction" 5/5
This is one of those movies that brought tears to my eyes. Highly recommended, even if you hate Will Ferrell's guts. This is a good performance for him.

"Strange Days" 3/5
An odd thriller that takes place around Y2K. It has a plot that's sort of believable but not believable at the same time. Cheesy at times. This movie proves that you don't want to get a black chick angry and also proves you just can't trust a stripper.

[TeenageRepublican]

Hancock - 4/10

I knew that would suck. Will Smith is a good actor, but the super-hero world is not for him. Compared to Tom Jane and Christian Bail, he doesn't stand a chance in the hero genre.

[hosl]

The Paper Chase- 4.5/5, I highly reccomend this movie if you consider/want to be an intellectual.

[LivingDeadGirl]

No Country for Old Men - 1/4 - I don't know...I just didn't like the movie...seemed to have no point...

[Maggie_T]

I just came back from seeing Wall E. Delightful film. Made by Pixar, the same guys who made another remarkable film, Ratatouille. Yes, it's pro-envrionmentalism. Yes, it's against consumism. And yes, it is also romantic and sweet. And in the end, they also send the message that progress is impossible without machines and technology.

Anyway, don't let the usual suspects in Hollywood prevent you from seeing a truly magic and sweet film. Even if they manage to slink their lefty message in, they are still capable of making good, wholesome films. I do recommed it.

And you all know me. NO apologies for liberals allowed in MY book.

[Trevelyan]

No Country for Old Men - 1/4 - I don't know...I just didn't like the movie...seemed to have no point...

You seem to have no point! :)

[DesertFox]

I just saw Kill Bill I and II for maybe the 52d time. Both still five stars. Part II's better'n I.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Mystery Science Theater 3000: 'Red Zone Cuba'" 3/5
This was one of those funny but not funny episodes from MST3K. The movie was awful and I think that had an effect on the commentary given during the film. It had no plot (like most movies on MST3K) but some of the commentary was funny as hell.
Favorite Line:
Crow T. Robot: I want to hurt this movie but I can never hurt it in the ways that it has hurt me.

[hosl]

No Country for Old Men - 1/4 - I don't know...I just didn't like the movie...seemed to have no point...

The entire point in "No Country" is the same in "Pulp Fiction": Life is unexpected; you can't predict fate, but you can follow where it takes you.

[ThomasMore]

"My dinner with Andre (http://www.amazon.com/My-Dinner-Andre-Wallace-Shawn/dp/6305069743)," a wet-dream for people with pretentions of artistic intellectualism, but who really don't have a clue.

Actor/screenwriter Wallace Shawn meets with avant-garde screenwriter Andre Gregory for dinner, and Louis Malle films the result (the dinner is actually staged and a summary of real conversations the two screenwriters had previously had). Gregory had dropped out of society for several years to pursue The Meaning of Life and Art, through drugs, meditation, nudism and navel-gazing. To Gregory, everything and everyone (including himself) is Fascist, and western society insulates us from reality, which he cannot actually define except through his fantasies. A highlight is when he joined the Findhorn group to seek the essence of reality, which they decided was to meditate so the extraterrestrials would know that they were a safe group of Earth people to contact. As far as I could determine, no extraterrestrials actually answered their meditations.

Shawn is taken aback by Gregory's drug-and-nihilism addled ruminations, but eventually gets up the guts to challenge him on them, extolling the virtue of electric blankets.

Self-defined intellectuals have fawned over this film ever since it was released in 1981, for its "existentialism" and "deep thoughts".

It is utterly meaningless except to expose how unmoored the artistic elites have become from reality, and how the gullible will buy anything, and think themselves smart, if they are told that something is "elevated."

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jOZ0l-uir6s&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jOZ0l-uir6s&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object>

[Trevelyan]

I just saw Kill Bill I and II for maybe the 52d time. Both still five stars. Part II's better'n I.

I completely agree.

[M.C.]

No Country for Old Men - 1/4 - I don't know...I just didn't like the movie...seemed to have no point...
I'd give that movie a 9/10 easily.

I just watched Boondock Saints for the 4000th time

Still a 9.9/10

Nothing is perfect, but that is one hell of a movie, I wish the Saints were real.

[hosl]

People vs. Larry Flynt- 4/5.

While I will never read Hustler, and despite numerous articles detailing child molestation in said magazine, I will always have a newfound respect of Larry Flynt because of this movie. He is Edward Meese's enemy, and he helped stretch laws so that magazines (and such) can make fun of public figures. The film was also beautifully directed, and I especially liked the last few lines of the first scene.

[TeenageRepublican]

How good is "Kill Bill"?

[ThomasMore]

People vs. Larry Flynt- 4/5.

I will always have a newfound respect of Larry Flynt because of this movie. He is Edward Meese's enemy, and he helped stretch laws so that magazines (and such) can make fun of public figures.

hosl, please understand that the movie was a hagiography by the left (Leni Riefenstahl did the same for the Nazis). It deliberately spun facts to make Flynt look better than he was, and his opponents were made out to look worse than they were. In other words, the movie paints a dishonest picture.

Under American law, public figures could not complain if they were lied about. Hustler, which is an open sewer (I suggest you look at a copy, then tell me what is good about it), did a fake advertisement for alcohol, featuring prominent (and politically active) minister Jerry Falwell, describing his first sex experience in an outside toilet with his mother.

Falwell sued (not because he was protected from lies -- under American law, it is acceptable to lie about famous people -- why, I am not sure), but because the lies were so sick and obscene that it was offensive. The Supreme Court said, no, it is OK to lie and to claim very sick things that are false about famous people, if the person then says "ha ha, it was all a joke."

Here is the alcohol ad that features the minister having sex with his mother in a toilet. A matter of great pride, this:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/campari.jpg

Please tell me how this makes America better. I would like to hear how this is good.

And what did Attorney General Edwin Meese do that was wrong or improper, and why was it good to be "his enemy?" The real Ed Meese, not the fictional movie version?

I have never seen anything worth respecting in Larry Flynt. For just one small point, he turned his wife into a heroin addict and let her die of heroin addiction. Nice guy.

[hosl]

ThomasMoore:

Edwin Meese wasn't directly his enemy, it was that Meese merely published a commission, hired by one of my favorite presidents: Ronald Reagan, against pornography, Flynt's business. Therefore, I just assumed (and yes, I do know what that makes me and you)...

One of the questions you posed was "how does this make America better?", referring to the parody of the ad. This makes America better because it stretched the limits of the 1st amendment to protect all cartoonists and magazines that wanted to paint public figures as terrible people (like Larry Flynt. BTW, When I said I respected him, I didn't mean his life as a pornographer. I meant as a man who stood up for his 1st amendment right) using untrue information that spiraled into hyperbole. If a cartoonist were to write "Bob Barker had sex with a neutered pig," "Huster Magazine Inc. vs. Jerry Falwell" would constitutionally protect the said cartoonist from legal punishment because it was too much of a hyperbole to be taken seriously.

And plus, the movie did not glorify Larry Flynt as much as "Raging Bull" glorified Jake LaMotta. Larry Flynt, in the film, wears the American flag as a diaper, throws an orange at a judge, meets with a Carter and constantly causes a ruckus in court. And plus, they didn't portray Rev. Falwell as that bad of a guy in the movie. He reads the Bible, he preaches on TV, he seems nice to his students at Liberty University (and yes, I know he found out about the ad during an interview).

All I was trying to say that, while I think that a lot of what Flynt does is reprehensible (like re-hiring a child molester after said molester gets out of jail), I still respected him for doing something, as he puts it, meaningful with his life (didn't consider the magazine meaningful?!? That was a joke).

[ThomasMore]

This makes America better because it stretched the limits of the 1st amendment to protect all cartoonists and magazines that wanted to paint public figures as terrible people (like Larry Flynt. BTW, When I said I respected him, I didn't mean his life as a pornographer. I meant as a man who stood up for his 1st amendment right) using untrue information that spiraled into hyperbole. If a cartoonist were to write "Bob Barker had sex with a neutered pig," "Huster Magazine Inc. vs. Jerry Falwell" would constitutionally protect the said cartoonist from legal punishment because it was too much of a hyperbole to be taken seriously.

And plus, the movie did not glorify Larry Flynt as much as "Raging Bull" glorified Jake LaMotta. Larry Flynt, in the film, wears the American flag as a diaper, throws an orange at a judge, meets with a Carter and constantly causes a ruckus in court. And plus, they didn't portray Rev. Falwell as that bad of a guy in the movie. He reads the Bible, he preaches on TV, he seems nice to his students at Liberty University (and yes, I know he found out about the ad during an interview).

All I was trying to say that, while I think that a lot of what Flynt does is reprehensible (like re-hiring a child molester after said molester gets out of jail), I still respected him for doing something, as he puts it, meaningful with his life (didn't consider the magazine meaningful?!? That was a joke).

Everything we do has meaning. Every position we take, every action we perform, and every word we utter from our mouths has meaning. It adds something to the world. What that "something" is will either be good or bad. Larry Flynt's words, actions and his work product, Hustler, add something to the world. They come from one mind, and they are applied to a purpose.

Here is my issue with the way the U.S. Supreme Court has treated the First Amendment:

A company which lies about its products can be fined, and its officers put in jail for false representation. Is this a good or a bad thing? I think it is a good thing, but it "chills free speech." If the "free speech" is used to spread a lie, the courts say that there is no value in spreading lies, and for every right there is a responsibility (to the truth). I have no problem with that.

If I spread a slander or a libel about you, e.g., I tell a story that says that hosl has sex with underage children (an obvious lie), then I can be punished for the same reason. The speech is used to hurt people, and it does not serve the truth in any way. Of course, if it is said truthfully about someone, that is OK. The First Amendment does not protect libels and slanders.

But if the person is famous, or if it is a political matter, the courts have said that the First Amendment protects peoples' right to speak falsely and even in a sick, perverted way. Many people draw their opinions from outright lies. If Joseph Goebbels lived in 21st Century America, he would be legally protected in spreading "the Big Lie." The idea is that free speech makes political discourse better: but when person A says the truth, but persons B and C are legally protected in saying "Liar! You were bought off by X!" (When A's claim is true, and B and C knew it, and are trying to destroy A), then is the truth served? Is the public better off? Civil discourse is improved when different ideas are compared and considered. But what about when someone intentionally spreads lies, is that good, even if the courts say it is?

Is it ALWAYS good to say that there are NO limits in what people can say? Should the First Amendment say that it is OK to walk into a movie theater and yell "Fire!", just to see what happens?

Would it be good if 5 or 10 cartoonists who don't like Angela Merkel started painting cartoons of her taking money from Putin, and saying over and over that this happened? One story can be laughed off, but it is not unprecedented even in the U.S. for a lie to be told over and over until it is believed by most people.

In fact, when people know that they can lie about a victim without paying a price for doing so, and one person starts the lie, others who also dislike the victim will join in the lies.

Shouldn't the victim have the right to say: prove it's true, or stop saying it. Shouldn't the victim have the right to make a claimant prove it in court, not only to protect herself, but also to make sure that the public isn't told lies over and over? How does the public know what is true, except by what it is told?

In the specific case, what was the purpose of Flynt's "parody" advertisement? Was it funny, or was it to trash and insult a man -- not for having wrong ideas (Flynt didn't debate Falwell's ideas or policies), but by suggesting that the minister has sex in toilets with his mother while drunk. The purpose of doing so is to spread unthinking scorn and hostility against the minister.

Saying that "pushing the envelope" so more people can do this does not make American society richer, in my view. It separates discourse from the truth: people can lie freely. This is what Flynt defended, and what the Supreme Court said was right. For what it was worth, I think what Flynt did, and what the Supreme Court did, has a name:

Evil.

[hosl]

The entire point made was that there was visible hyperbole. If someone actually believed that Falwell, no less in a porn magazine in an alcohol ad, actually had sex with his mother when both of them were drunk. I guess it is all a matter of hyperbole. But now the real question is, what constitutes hyperbole purely for a comical reason?

Oh, by the way:

Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie- 3.5/5.

[TeenageRepublican]

Oh, by the way:

Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie- 3.5/5.

I remember that one! What movie did they mock? I remember that this one had the line: "That's not a rock, that's an alien turd!"
My favorite episode so far is either "Touch of Satan" or "Boggy Creek II".

[hosl]

TR, they mocked "This Island Earth".

[TeenageRepublican]

Thanks hosl. You know, if I can't remember a movie, then it's probably best left forgotten.
Any way, I've been on a MST3K craze lately (I develop a craving every couple of months). So, here are the episodes I watched so far.
"Mystery Science Theater 3000: 'Manos: The Hands of Fate'" 5/5
All MST3K fans agree that this is the worst film ever shown on the show. I thought it kind of had a cool plot, but it was poorly written and horribly done. You know, it takes brains to do horror, if you don't have the talent, then don't do it. For example, if you're a fertalizer salesman *cough, cough, cough* don't do a horror film!
Favorite Quote:
[watching the women wrestle in the desert in Manos the Hands of Fate]
Tom Servo: I'm guessing this is the whole reason this movie was made.

"Mystery Science Theater 3000: 'Touch of Satan'" 5/5
Overall one of the best episodes out there. This film is at least halfway bearable and they rip this to shreds.
Favorite Quote:
Jodie Thompson: Does your father mind if I skip rocks across his pond?
Melissa Strickland: You'll have to ask him. Is that your car?
Jodie Thompson: Yeah.
Mike Nelson: [as Melissa] Mind if I skip rocks across it?

[hosl]

Shhhh! The "Manos: Hands of Fate" episode is number one on my Blockbuster queue!

[TeenageRepublican]

I'm warning you, do not have any sharp objects near you while watching it. You'll want to stab your eyes out.

[Neil Peart]

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: 8.5/10

[Etaoin]

I don't go to movies...haven't been to one in about 30 years. On DVD the last was FLT. 93 BY TWO FRENCHMEN. Well done, good pictures, lauds the NYFD. I have an excellent collection of the 9/11 fiasco and everytime I look through it, I'm ready to Glaze the mid-east.

TV: St. Pats Day Maybe "The Quiet Man"
The Dirty Dozen
Both: The Seven Samuri @ the Yul Brenner's The Magnificent Seven. 30 Seconds over Tokyo: My Commanding Officer was the
CO-PILOT on the B-25 that almost went into the water on take-off.
He mis-set the flaps for take-off, but they staggered out, bombed
Tokyo, crashed on the China coast and walked (with chinese assistance)
to Burma from where they were able to re-join the war.
It is a matter of public record that his name is/was Dean Davenport. a Nice guy and a good poker player!

Free Conservatives and the Internet are far more interesting than the garbage put forward as ENTERTAINMENT.

[Taylor1]

Journey to the center of the earth, my head is overly conservative and since it was a book on science fiction and it apparently was real they discovered it, then well... I somehow related it to scientology thinking they will have a movie coming out on that soon.

[TeenageRepublican]

Taylor, "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is just a fun adventure written by Jules Verne (I think I might have the name wrong.) He also wrote "Around the World in 80 Days" and "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea". It has nothing to do with Scientology, it's just adventure.

[Trevelyan]

"The Mist" **** out of four.

Wow......

[TeenageRepublican]

"The Mist" **** out of four.

Wow......

Didn't that have one of the most unexpected endings? That was one of those movies that caught you by surprise and made you think after the credits rolled.
In my opinion, it's saying that man shouldn't play God and he can't possibly play God because he doesn't know what's going to happen. I also like the crazy "Christian" lady who has this holier-than-thou attitude even though she doesn't know that much about the Bible or even God.

[hosl]

Speaking of people who I respect in a legal sense:

Erin Brockovich- 4/5

[Timberwolf]

I finally saw 300...got one word for that flic.

WUFF!! :thumb:

[ThomasMore]

hosl, let me apologize in advance. It's going to seem like I am picking on you. Really, it's nothing personal.

Erin Brockovich (the person, as well as the movie) is a fraud.

Is Chromium-6 the carcinogen that Brockovich claimed?

Chromium-6, derived from ubiquitous chromite ore, is considered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other regulators as a human carcinogen within certain limits. Its connection is only to two types of cancer, that of the lung and of the septum (the piece that separates your nostrils). Further, as one might guess from these two cancers, it's only a carcinogen when inhaled. Even then, research indicates it takes massive doses over many years and according to William J. Blot, head of the International Epidemiology Institute in Rockville, Md., "It appears the problem has been associated with production of the compounds, not the actual use."

According to the EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), updated in September 1998, "No data were located in the available literature that suggested that [chromium-6] is carcinogenic by the oral route of exposure." Since most of us drink rather than snort water, this would appear to be a significant distinction.

Cancer aside, exhaustive, repeated studies of communities living adjacent to landfills with huge concentrations of chromium-6, including that detectable in residents' urine, have found no ill health effects. A report out of Glasgow, Scotland, in January indicated exposed residents showed "no increased risk of congenital abnormalities (birth defects), lung cancer, or a range of other diseases."

Earlier, a panel evaluating exposed residents near a New Jersey landfill "estimated that the plausible incremental cancer risk to individuals at residential sites would be substantially less than one in 1,000,000." In a town like Hinkley, with fewer than 1,000 residents, that's less than a tenth of one percent of a tumour. In a town like Hinkley with fewer than a 1,000 residents, the odds are astronomical that even one chromium-6 cancer would show up.

Coincidentally, a study by Blot and others just published in The Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine evaluated almost 52,000 workers who worked at three PG&E plants over a quarter of a century. One was the Hinkley plant, another is near Kettleman, Calif., where Miss Brockovich's firm is also rounding up plaintiffs. The researchers found that not only was there no excess of cancer when compared to the general California population, but that the overall PG&E worker death rate was significantly much lower than those of other Californians.

Are we to believe that something causing no harm at the plant itself is nonetheless wreaking havoc on those living nearby?

...

Miss Brockovich's small firm had brought in an Iowa-class battleship in the form of Thomas V. Girardi, a specialist in toxic pollution suits who makes everybody's short list of the most powerful attorneys in the United States.

Then ABC's Primetime Live aired a show on the controversy, eschewing medicine and science in favour of heart-wrenching quotes from unidentified residents as, "Whole families are dying of cancer." Girardi made several appearances. ABC also baldly prevaricated that, "According to the U.S. Public Health Service, at certain levels chromium-6 can cause diseases of virtually every organ in the body."

MichaelFumento.com (http://www.fumento.com/erinpost.html)

But many plaintiffs in the Hinkley case say the movie misrepresents what happened. Far from being the populist victory the movie depicts, the Hinkley lawsuit was a case study in how the rise of private arbitration, as an alternative to costly public trials, is...open to potential conflicts of interest and cronyism. The case never went to trial, because Pacific Gas & Electric, the utility accused of polluting Hinkley, and the plaintiffs' lawyers agreed to private arbitration before a panel of for-hire judges, some of whom had socialized with the plaintiffs' attorneys.

...

After the settlement, the Hinkley plaintiffs' attorneys took some of the arbitrators in the case on a steeply discounted Mediterranean luxury cruise. The fraternization between the private judges and the plaintiffs' lawyers led California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George to begin a study of the business of arbitration. And while Brockovich appears on "Oprah," some townspeople are preparing for a new round of lawsuits -- this time against their former lawyers, including Brockovich's firm.

...

"The movie is mostly lies," said Carol Smith, one of the real-life plaintiffs. "I wish the truth would come out because a lot of us are upset. I understand the movie is going to make Erin and the attorneys out to be heroes.

...

In the early 1990s PG&E undertook a $12.5 million cleanup effort, approaching the owners of three farms and 10 houses in the area and offering to buy their properties.

Roberta Walker was one of the people approached by PG&E, which offered to buy her house (valued at $25,000 at the time)...she [demanded] $250,000. A few weeks later, the company agreed.

The quick acceptance made her suspicious. That's when she started searching for a lawyer. Through a friend, she found Masry & Vititoe, a personal-injury firm in Westlake Village, northwest of Los Angeles. At the time, Erin Brockovich worked as a clerk at the firm. Ed Masry drove out to talk with Walker, and eventually brought Brockovich.

Other townspeople later heard about the visiting attorney and called Masry's office. He soon placed an ad in the local newspaper, announcing a "town meeting" to collect clients to mount a lawsuit.

Masry told the residents that he believed that PG&E's chromium had poisoned the water, and that this was responsible for their ailments. He offered to represent them in a suit against the giant utility. Throughout 1992, he and Brockovich continued to drum up clients.

...

By the spring of 1993, Masry had collected 47 clients. The signed retainers specified that he would collect 40 percent of any award. Masry filed a suit, claiming PG&E had discharged toxic wastewater into the area.

...

[Plaintiffs' attorney Thomas] Girardi had ties to at least three of the private judges in the PG&E case: Jack Tenner, John Trotter and Jack Goertzen. Had this occurred in public court, judicial rules would have forced the judges to recuse themselves from the case due to a conflict of interest. But no such ethical standards bind participants in private arbitration.

Tenner, a retired Los Angeles Superior Court judge, officiated at Girardi's second wedding, in September 1993.

...

Girardi dispenses gifts as well. "Girardi is a very generous man and very kind," said Ralph Drummond, a former judge in Monterey County Superior Court, who used to work for JAMS and now arbitrates disputes for Girardi. During the 1989 World Series, Girardi used his Gulfstream jet to fly Schoettler and Morgan to San Francisco for the games; at the time, Schoettler was a sitting judge in Los Angeles Superior Court. Schoettler stresses that such gifts never affected his judgment.

...

As the case unfolded, residents say, they began to feel increasingly removed from it. "We had no idea what was going on and weren't allowed to watch," said Lynn Tindell, a plaintiff. (The rules for viewing depend on how the lawyers and arbitrators structure each case, according to a spokeswoman at the American Arbitration Association, the State Bar and lawyers.)

Some plaintiffs attended the hearings, while others who called their lawyers' offices to find out the location of the private trials were discouraged from attending. "They wouldn't tell me," said resident Ron Gonzales. When he found out, he said, the attorneys changed the venue. "I told them it was against the law to keep this stuff from me." Plaintiffs relied on the attorneys' letters for details of the case.

Since no law governs procedures in these closed-door cases, pretty much anything goes -- even things that would not be allowed in court. There are no public records of the case. This is another troubling aspect of the system, said Chemerinsky. "In these kinds of cases, the court system has many protections -- some of which are absent in arbitration." Indeed, as the PG&E cases continued to be heard behind closed doors, the Hinkley victims felt left out of the process.

...

Many of the residents had a hard time reconciling the small amount of their checks with the enormous legal fees. Arbitrated cases are supposed to be quicker and cheaper than court trials. In this case, Masry, Girardi and Lack took 40 percent, or $133 million...But then the clients were billed an extra $10 million for expenses, which weren't detailed. "I wrote Girardi a letter, asking for a statement of his accounting of the case," said Gonzales. But Girardi didn't provide one.

[T]he plaintiffs [received] an average of about $300,000 [each].

Salon.com (http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2000/04/14/sharp/index.html)

[Erin Brockovich is] now up to her old tricks. Her firm is suing a vast number of oil companies, the City of Beverly Hills and its school district. It accuses them of causing three types of cancer among the approximately 11,000 alumni who attended between 1975 and 1997 by exposing them to oil well fumes on the property of Beverly Hills High School.

"These statistics are 20 times higher than the national average for these specific cancers," Brockovich told a credulous media, creating hysteria among both former and current students. "I have 300 cancers staring me in the face and an oil-production facility underneath the school," Brockovich also claimed, "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the two fit together."

Well then, how about a cancer expert? Under a contempt of court threat her firm admitted it had no data regarding excess cancers at the school. Further, the Beverly Hills Courier reported that long after Brockovich's "300 cancers" assertion her firm had filed only 216 complaints of which only 94 concerned cancer. University of Southern California epidemiologists also found no unusual rate among former students.

Brockovich also insisted that air samplings collected by a lab she'd hired showed massive levels of benzene, a human carcinogen. "When they came back I said, 'I can't believe this.' So we went four times, five times, six times," Brockovich claimed. "And each time we were getting the same results."

But the regional air quality authority conducted its own tests and found no high levels of any toxic pollutant. As it happens, neither had she. Her lab's data, which the city was forced to subpoena, showed benzene levels ranging from low to unmeasurable.

I know personally of Brockovich's not only foul but forked tongue. She told the New York Times Sunday Magazine that she challenged me "a million times" to debate her. Try zero. In fact, when Vassar College tried to arrange a debate I instantly said yes and waived any honorarium; she demanded a fee she knew the school couldn't afford. When Australia's 60 Minutes flew me to L.A. for a segment on Brockovich, I suggested they try to arrange a joint appearance. She refused them.

The American Spectator (http://www.americanprowler.com/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8874)

For what it's worth.

[hosl]

ThomasMoore, it's okay. I do have to counter:



Breathing high levels of chromium(VI) can cause irritation to the nose, such as runny nose, nosebleeds, and ulcers and holes in the nasal septum.

Ingesting large amounts of chromium(VI) can cause stomach upsets and ulcers, convulsions, kidney and liver damage, and even death.

Skin contact with certain chromium(VI) compounds can cause skin ulcers. Some people are extremely sensitive to chromium(VI) or chromium(III). Allergic reactions consisting of severe redness and swelling of the skin have been noted.



Source: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts7.html

A lot of the people in the movie (and in real life) had symptoms exactly like what the ATSDR describes above.


Even miniscule amounts of chromium 6 can cause cancer. Blame that do-gooder nutrient, vitamin C.

Brown University researchers have discovered that naturally occurring vitamin C reacts inside human lung cells with chromium 6, or hexavalent chromium, and causes massive DNA damage. Low doses of chromium 6, combined with vitamin C, produce up to 15 times as many chromosomal breaks and up to 10 times more mutations - forms of genetic damage that lead to cancer - compared with cells that lacked vitamin C altogether.



Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/65146.php


Researchers have announced that there is strong evidence a chemical referred to as hexavalent chromium, or chromium 6, causes cancer in laboratory animals when it is consumed in drinking water.

The two-year study conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) shows that animals given hexavalent chromium developed malignant tumors.

"Previous studies have shown that hexavalent chromium causes lung cancer in humans in certain occupational settings as a result of inhalation exposure," said Michelle Hooth, Ph.D., NTP study scientist for the technical report. "We now know that it can also cause cancer in animals when administered orally."

The study findings were announced at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) after the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors Technical Reports Review Subcommittee completed its independent peer review of the sodium dichromate dihydrate research report. Sodium dichromate dihydrate is an inorganic compound containing hexavalent chromium that was used in the NTP studies. The NTP is located at the NIEHS, part of the National Institutes of Health.

Hexavalent chromium compounds are often used in electroplating, leather tanning, and textile manufacturing and have been found in some drinking water sources.

Male and female rats and mice were given four different doses of sodium dichromate dihydrate in their drinking water ranging from 14.3 mg/l to 516 mg/l for two years. The lowest doses given to the animals in the study were ten times higher than what humans could consume from the most highly contaminated water sources identified in California.

The researchers report finding significant increases in tumors at sites where tumors are rarely seen in laboratory animals. Male and female rats had malignant tumors in the oral cavity. The studies conducted in mice found increases in the number of benign and malignant tumors in the small intestine, which increased with dose in both males and females.

"We found that hexavalent chromium is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract," said Hooth. "After it is orally administered, it is taken up by the cells in many tissues and organs."

Hexavalent chromium has been brought to the public?s attention in many ways, most notably in the movie "Erin Brockovich." Eleven members from the California Congressional Delegation sent a letter to the NTP Director requesting the NTP conduct the studies. Nominations for studying this compound also came from the California Environmental Protection Agency and the California Department of Health Services. The NTP began work on this compound after gaining input from the public and a panel of scientific experts about the study design.


Source: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=25252

[ThomasMore]

Good on you, hosl.

I will have to check into that. Your information and mine don't square.

[Beowulf]

Just saw over the weekend with my son:
"Journey To The Center Of The Earth."

Not a bad movie.

[hosl]

Coming Soon to the My Opinion Theatre:

L.A. Confidential
The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeroise
The Last Picture Show

[Naturalized-Texan]

The last movie I saw in a theater was Expelled - a great movie.

[ThomasMore]

LA Confidential is a pretty good flick.

[Charity]

Went and saw the Journey to the Center of the Earth in 3D.

[Elgalad]

I saw Hellboy 2: the Golden Army (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0411477/) today.

It was a decent and enjoyable movie and I felt I got my money's worth. It helped that I went to the matinee of course. :D

Ron Perlman's over the top gunslinging good (cough) demon (cough) stole the show as usual, but Doug Jones' reprisal of Abe Sapien was also very good. The action sequences were great, particularly those involving the 'big bad boss' character and his incredibly acrobatic spear/sword play. After seeing That performance, I'm hopeful that someday Some producer with guts will give R.A. Salvatore a call with the intent of putting a certain dark elf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden) on the silver screen..

Anyways, Hellboy 2 is a good alternative if any of you find Dark Knight sold out this weekend or next. I give it 3.5 out of 5 stars.


-Elgalad

[Trevelyan]

"The Dark Knight" **** out of four.

Best movie of the year thus far. Ledger's performance is Oscar worthy, and that is not at all because he died, it's legitimate.

[Maggie_T]

Ok, don't laugh. Mamma Mia!

Just came back from the cinema and I LOVED IT! It was fun, located in a Greek island (who could ask for more), and the Abba songs took me right back to my youth. Jim was mad at me because I sang along the whole time. Well, nobody else complained. Not loudly enough for me to hear, anyway. :evilgrin:

Anyway. I thoroughly enjoyed it. And I highly recommend it.

[Trevelyan]

"Funny Games" *1/2 out of four.

I should have expected nothing less from the guy who was responsible for "Cache." God, I'd like to punch that pretentious asshat in the face...

[Elgalad]

Ok, don't laugh. Mamma Mia!

Just came back from the cinema and I LOVED IT! It was fun, located in a Greek island (who could ask for more), and the Abba songs took me right back to my youth. Jim was mad at me because I sang along the whole time. Well, nobody else complained. Not loudly enough for me to hear, anyway. :evilgrin:

Anyway. I thoroughly enjoyed it. And I highly recommend it.

Thanks for the review, Maggie! :D

I certainly won't laugh, not when I'm an unashamed Abba fan as well. I've actually been looking forward to this movie, and not because it's a chick flick (which I mostly can't Stand), but for the music, which I Love.

I've been a little apprehensive, since (it seems like) all the pointy headed reviewers have been panning it.. but then they'd pan any movie with Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan, and Skellan Skarsgard that wasn't a serious snoozefest. Forget them! :rotflmbo:

Can't wait now. :thumb:


-Elgalad

[DesertFox]

Since my wife took our copies of Kill Bill I and II and ran off to Phoenix to be with our pregnant daughter, I've been stuck watching Pulp Fiction. It's still funny as all getout.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Funny Games" *1/2 out of four.

I should have expected nothing less from the guy who was responsible for "Cache." God, I'd like to punch that pretentious asshat in the face...

Trev, how many times must I explain this? Avoid indie horror movies like Rosie O' Donnell avoids salad.
Was it even an indie flick?

[Trevelyan]

I don't know.

Anyway,

"Heat" **** out of four.

It should have at least been nominated for if not should have won Best Picture.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Scanners" 3.5/5
Impressive, David Cronenberg does have talent and it reflects on the screen. Here is one of my problems with this movie, the film was advertised as a horror movie, when, in my opinion, it was more of a supernatural thriller.
Some parts dragged, in my opinion.
A good flick to watch, but don't watch it expecting to be scared, watch it expecting to be entertained. This movie absorbs you in to the plot and rarely lets go.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Batman - Dark Knight - 3 1/2 out of 4

Good movie, definitely not one that I would take younger children to. 11/12 ish would be good. It is rather dark and intense, which is fine for teans and adults, but might be a but much for kids. Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker is haunting...he captured it SO well. Very disturbing!




X-Files - 3 out of 4
There were times I felt it was more of a romance movie for Mulder and Scully than it was a SciFi. Pretty good though. I would watch it again.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street" 5/5
Best musical I've seen so far. The story just hits you and leaves you with your jaw dropped. It shows what revenge really does to people. I plan on seeing the 1930's version of it (non-musical, it was actually an urban legend until Stephen Sodheim did a musical version of it in the 80's).

[TeenageRepublican]

"Stand By Me" 5/5
A great story that portrays childhood (for boys) accurately. A real heart-gripper.

"Prophecy" 2/5
A leftist movie about those evil lumberjacks and their polluting ways. They end up creating a monster thanks to their evil actions. :rolleyes:
I'll give credit where credit is due and say that the monster was fairly well done.

[Trevelyan]

"Apocalypse Now" **** out of four

[TeenageRepublican]

My brother's computer crashed (:() so I had to wait to get home to type on this.
Any way, here's my list of recently viewed movies.

"Dirty Harry" 5/5
"Magnum Force" 5/5
"The Enforcer" 5/5
"Sudden Impact" 5/5
"The Dead Pool" 2/5*
"American History X" 5/5
"Beerfest" 4/5
"Tears of the Sun" 5/5

*The first four Dirty Harry films are classics. They talk about REAL society issues and the way it treats criminals. "The Dead Pool" didn't talk about society issues and it was a cheesy piece of crap.

[PrezLeefun]

The Dark Knight. 4/4. It was utterly fantastic. Heath was amazing just as I thought he would be. He should get an Oscar.

[Neil Peart]

Vantage Point: 5.5/10

No Country for Old Men: 9/10

[Elgalad]

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor: 4.5/5, I liked this movie a lot, the only weak point(s) were Maria Bello assuming the Rachel Weisz role, and the few moments when the film got a little too 'precious' with flashback references to the earlier movies. To be fair, Maria Bello did a fine job, but it's always hard to jump into an established character and 'sell' it as the original.

The Dark Knight: 5/5. This movie provided all of the action and drama promised in the trailer and the months of buildup beforehand, and Then some. It is very refreshing to find that this 'rebooted' Batman takes the much higher (or lower, perhaps) road in portraying the character, diverging from the obnoxious camp of the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher films. My only (MINOR) complaint requires a spoiler alert:

I was a little disappointed with the short-lived career of "Two Face" as well as his tragic demise. I don't know if it will be possible to 'resurrect' him in a future installment, but that character deserved so much more..


-Elgalad

[ThomasMore]

I have been taking in the "Sharpe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharpe_(TV_Series))" series of movies originally made for British TV.

They are set in the Napoleonic Wars between Britain and France, based on Bernard Cornwell's historical novels. Sharpe is a British rifle sergeant serving in Spain and Portugal, who is elevated from the ranks to officer at the beginning of the series.

The series obviously centers around the military conflict against Napoleon's France, but it also deals with politics, military discipline, class structure, and social mores. There is usually a love interest, and it has enough of the romance novel about it to keep women interested. It has enough politics, strategy and war to keep men interested. The ideas are well-developed and the acting is good. On the down side, the production values occasionally suffer (especially the music, which is overwrought and instrumentally inappropriate).

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wxdiz8Qmunc&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wxdiz8Qmunc&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object><object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4SIFhkCgbHY&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4SIFhkCgbHY&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object>

Author Cornwell had originally reservations about actor Sean Bean's casting as Richard Sharpe: the character in the novels was a Londoner of the lower classes and had dark hair, whilst Bean is light-haired and has a northern accent. But Bean has made the role his own and even Cornwell is thrilled with the job Bean does.

A number of well-known actors and actresses show up in various roles in the series, including Brian Cox, Elizabeth Hurley, Pete Postlethwaite, Alice Krige, and Daniel Craig.

[Kylester1987]

Blue Collar Comedy Tour: The Movie 5/5....i have this movie on vhs <yes, i have a vcr and a dvd player>, and honestly i can watch this movie again and again, mainly becuase of the comedy stylings of bill engvall and ron white, but this is a good stand up comedy flick that helps pass the time.

[TeenageRepublican]

"The Exorcism of Emily Rose" 5/5
There's one basic fact in the horror field: Christain horror usually only entertains Christians and aren't scary. This is one of those rare gems in the rough that entertains everyone watching it and is scary.
I don't know why Christians can't make more movies like this. This challenges you to question your beliefs about good, evil, God, the Devil, and faith.
Thanks to those members (*cough, cough* ThomasMore) who recommended this movie.

[Beowulf]

Step Brothers

*holds back giggling*

[PrezLeefun]

American History X 4/4

Excellent film. That ending just made my heart burst.
it shows how easy a good philosophy can quickly become irrational poison.

[Neil Peart]

The Dark Knight: 8.5/10

[PaulRevere]

Get Smart. Hilarious - two thumbs up. Steve Carrol was perfect, and a lot of actors like the Rock had a lot of their own funny lines; it wasn't just about Steve Carrol. Everyone got a piece of the comedy just like in 40-year-old Virgin.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

I just went and saw Tropic Thunder.

It was pretty funny. Of course there were a couple of flaming homo parts, one right at the beginning, which made me want to just walk out (but unfortunately I didn't drive).

Robert Downey Jr (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XHsmRVYU-A). was incredible and his character was hilarious. His role was, by far, my favorite part of the movie.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Robert Downey Jr. was incredible and his character was hilarious. His role was, by far, my favorite part of the movie.

Are you sure that wasn't Obama playing that role, you know, pretending to be black?

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Are you sure that wasn't Obama playing that role, you know, pretending to be black?
Heh. Apparently RDJ knows how to be black more than Obama.

In an interview the real black guy said his mother came to the set and thought RDJ was Don Cheadle. :rotflmbo:

He said RDJ stayed in character so much he couldn't believe he was a white guy when he saw Iron man.

[TeenageRepublican]

American History X 4/4

Excellent film. That ending just made my heart burst.
it shows how easy a good philosophy can quickly become irrational poison.

That is the best movie, in my opinion, about racism ever made.

[ThomasMore]

Get Smart. Hilarious - two thumbs up. Steve Carell was perfect, and a lot of actors like the Rock had a lot of their own funny lines; it wasn't just about Steve Carell. Everyone got a piece of the comedy just like in 40-year-old Virgin.

Whad'ja think of 99?

http://thecia.com.au/reviews/g/images/get-smart-4.jpg

(Woof)

[norman]

The Patriot
Glory
30 Seconds over Tokyo

[PaulRevere]

Whad'ja think of 99?

http://thecia.com.au/reviews/g/images/get-smart-4.jpg

(Woof)
hubba hubba :D

[PrezLeefun]

That is the best movie, in my opinion, about racism ever made.

I dont know if it is the best, but it was definitely good. And on a perfectly shallow note, Edward Norton looked damn good in the movie even with that damned tatoo.

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c299/PrezLeefun/ednortonx.jpg

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

I dont know if it is the best, but it was definitely good. And on a perfectly shallow note, Edward Norton looked damn good in the movie even with that damned tatoo.
It's a very good movie. The only thing I didn't like was that it lumped certain conservative positions into "neo-nazism."

For example, opposition to illegal immigration was portrayed as a component of the neo-nazi ideology/movement by the film. When Norton's character says to Danny toward the end of the movie, in regard to his own former beliefs, that "it's all bullsh*t..." it includes his previous opposition to illegal immigration. It wasn't, in fact, "ALL" bullsh*t however.

The consequences of illegal immigration are real and it is the illegal immigrant that is the villain, not the opponent to his criminality. Illegal immigrants are not victims suffering at the hands of racist aryan opposition nor is such opposition nazism as the film seems to suggest.

Even the plot itself, while a great story, was simply unrealistic... even the complete opposite of reality rather (as are many films made looking through the leftist lens). There is probably no prominent aryan movement anywhere in America (or California of all places) much less a neo-nazi gang problem. Aryan ideology has been practically eradicated. Any adherents it still has have no social or political power of which to speak.

In reality, the very opposite is the case, as there is a rather large hispanic separatist movement in America, growing everyday, which is unabashedly seeking cultural and political dominance over non-hispanics, and it is racist hispanic gangs (many of which are predominantly illegal) that are literally targeting and murdering non-hispanics, which are a real problem in California and all across America.

[Trevelyan]

"Tropic Thunder" ***1/2 out of four.

My favorite comedy of the year so far. Tom Cruise and RDJ are amazing in this. There was one part where I was crying a little while laughing because of Cruise.

[DesertFox]

I just watched Pulp Fiction for about the 51st time. 485 out of 500 stars.

[TeenageRepublican]

I dont know if it is the best, but it was definitely good. And on a perfectly shallow note, Edward Norton looked damn good in the movie even with that damned tatoo.

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c299/PrezLeefun/ednortonx.jpg

I'm a heterosexual male and even I can't disagree with that.

It's a very good movie. The only thing I didn't like was that it lumped certain conservative positions into "neo-nazism."

For example, opposition to illegal immigration was portrayed as a component of the neo-nazi ideology/movement by the film. When Norton's character says to Danny toward the end of the movie, in regard to his own former beliefs, that "it's all bullsh*t..." it includes his previous opposition to illegal immigration. It wasn't, in fact, "ALL" bullsh*t however.

The consequences of illegal immigration are real and it is the illegal immigrant that is the villain, not the opponent to his criminality. Illegal immigrants are not victims suffering at the hands of racist aryan opposition nor is such opposition nazism as the film seems to suggest.

Even the plot itself, while a great story, was simply unrealistic... even the complete opposite of reality rather (as are many films made looking through the leftist lens). There is probably no prominent aryan movement anywhere in America (or California of all places) much less a neo-nazi gang problem. Aryan ideology has been practically eradicated. Any adherents it still has have no social or political power of which to speak.

In reality, the very opposite is the case, as there is a rather large hispanic separatist movement in America, growing everyday, which is unabashedly seeking cultural and political dominance over non-hispanics, and it is racist hispanic gangs (many of which are predominantly illegal) that are literally targeting and murdering non-hispanics, which are a real problem in California and all across America.

Whether or not you believe it, Nazis (the political ones) are for closing down the borders. But it isn't for the same reasons that conservatives want to close them.
The Nazis want to close them down because they're supposedly afraid of becoming a minority because most of the people crossing the border are Mexican.
The movie was actually pretty accurate in portraying their positions. They want to ban "gay" marriage because they hate homosexuals. They want to close down the border because they hate Mexicans. They base all of their politics on their blind hatred of others.
An average conservative might say that, on some issues, they're right for the wrong reasons. But history proves that they would be considered gods by the left for some of the things they did (nationalizing healthcare, strong gun control, big taxation, etc...).

[TeenageRepublican]

"Dog Soldiers" 4/5
If you're a guy, see this movie. There's nothing more manly than a couple of guys couped up in a house shooting bloodthirsty 8 foot tall werewolves (except maybe shooting Commies from Russia, that's just as manly).
Pretty well made for an independent film. Don't watch this expecting to watch the most realistic movie ever made though.
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t255/twistedmango/dog_soldiers_poster3.jpg
http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i78/cloudlandwcq/dog_soldiers.jpg

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Whether or not you believe it, Nazis (the political ones) are for closing down the borders. But it isn't for the same reasons that conservatives want to close them.
The Nazis want to close them down because they're supposedly afraid of becoming a minority because most of the people crossing the border are Mexican.
I'm aware of this.

The movie was actually pretty accurate in portraying their positions. They want to ban "gay" marriage because they hate homosexuals. They want to close down the border because they hate Mexicans. They base all of their politics on their blind hatred of others.
No, they base it upon the belief that whites are a superior race and that "lesser races," or "muds" as they sometimes call them, are inferior. Your low-level peon wannabe might be driven by blind dumb hatred, but your upper class adherent bases his opinions on what he believes rational, even scientific, proof of aryan superiority. (In the movie Derek wasn't always racist. He didn't hate simply for the sake of hating. His hatred stemmed from the murder of his father, who was himself implicitly racist if I remember correctly, in a black neighborhood, the blame for which, in his grief, he placed on all non-whites. The tragedy left Derek an easy target for the older aryan leader to recruit.)
An average conservative might say that, on some issues, they're right for the wrong reasons.
I understand all of this, but their being "right for the wrong reasons" is not communicated in the movie to my memory. He says it's "all bullsh*t." He doesn't say it's 'all bullsh*t, except for opposition to illegal immigration, which is legitimate for many reasons.' He makes no distinction whatsoever between a bad nazi opposition and a legitimate non-aryan opposition to it. It's "all bullsh*t," all of his previous positions and beliefs, which includes his opposition to illegal immigration. That's the message conveyed.

The clueless sheeple don't think past their nose. They watch the movie and perceive the message that opposition to II = nazism.

[PrezLeefun]

I understand all of this, but their being "right for the wrong reasons" is not communicated in the movie to my memory. He says it's "all bullsh*t." He doesn't say it's 'all bullsh*t, except for opposition to illegal immigration, which is legitimate for many reasons.' He makes no distinction whatsoever between a bad nazi opposition and a legitimate non-aryan opposition to it. It's "all bullsh*t," all of his previous positions and beliefs, which includes his opposition to illegal immigration. That's the message conveyed.

The clueless sheeple don't think past their nose. They watch the movie and perceive the message that opposition to II = nazism.

I disagree. I dont think he meant every single thing, just that the racism and the gang stuff was bullshit. Which it of course was. Derek never denounced his political beliefs, and with the way his teacher was, I doubt he would have. Sweeney never expressed any of his politics further than to say he realized that personal responsibility was important and acknowledging that he couldn't blame "the white man"- important conservative ideals. The audience is never lead to think that Derek under Sweeney's guidence was going to change all of his political beliefs. We are lead to think that he was done with all the Neo-Nazi gang crap which is what he was clearly denouncing.

[Wyatt_Junker]

No. No. You're all missing it. The moral of the story is to not eat curbs.

[PrezLeefun]

^^^ We're talking about the subplots Wyatt. lol

[Neil Peart]

No. No. You're all missing it. The moral of the story is to not eat curbs.http://twmmo.ytmnd.com/

[TeenageRepublican]

No, they base it upon the belief that whites are a superior race and that "lesser races," or "muds" as they sometimes call them, are inferior. Your low-level peon wannabe might be driven by blind dumb hatred, but your upper class adherent bases his opinions on what he believes rational, even scientific, proof of aryan superiority. (In the movie Derek wasn't always racist. He didn't hate simply for the sake of hating. His hatred stemmed from the murder of his father, who was himself implicitly racist if I remember correctly, in a black neighborhood, the blame for which, in his grief, he placed on all non-whites. The tragedy left Derek an easy target for the older aryan leader to recruit.)

I understand all of this, but their being "right for the wrong reasons" is not communicated in the movie to my memory. He says it's "all bullsh*t." He doesn't say it's 'all bullsh*t, except for opposition to illegal immigration, which is legitimate for many reasons.' He makes no distinction whatsoever between a bad nazi opposition and a legitimate non-aryan opposition to it. It's "all bullsh*t," all of his previous positions and beliefs, which includes his opposition to illegal immigration. That's the message conveyed.

I've only seen the movie once and that was a couple of weeks ago so I really can't remember all the things said and done in the movie. I'm going to go with Prez on this one and say that he was talking about his white supremacist beliefs and not his political beliefs.
If I remember correctly, it was the fact that the other races were getting away with so much that caused hatred (illegal immigration, getting special treatment, etc...). There's a scene in the movie where the father is talking to his sons. He says that the police force hired two inexpierenced black men over anyone else that got a better score because the force wanted to be seen as politically correct and fair. As a result, the father gets a strong hatred for other races.
It's been a while since I've seen the movie, I'll have to watch it again.

The clueless sheeple don't think past their nose. They watch the movie and perceive the message that opposition to II = nazism.

Then that's their fault.

[PrezLeefun]

I think the father was racist for a long while before anything concerning affirmative action, you dont after one situation far into your adulthood suddenly use the word "nigger" in casual conversation, which is what the dad did.

Derek got little bits and pieces of that as he grew up and then with his father's murder went apeshit in blaming all black people for all of his problems.

Remember TR with racism, you have to be carefully taught.

[TeenageRepublican]

Well still, he did have a point. You can't fight hate with hate and that's what I think the movie teaches.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

I disagree. I dont think he meant every single thing, just that the racism and the gang stuff was bullshit. Which it of course was. Derek never denounced his political beliefs, and with the way his teacher was, I doubt he would have. Sweeney never expressed any of his politics further than to say he realized that personal responsibility was important and acknowledging that he couldn't blame "the white man"- important conservative ideals. The audience is never lead to think that Derek under Sweeney's guidence was going to change all of his political beliefs. We are lead to think that he was done with all the Neo-Nazi gang crap which is what he was clearly denouncing.
It's fine that you disagree, but once again, I don't recall the movie ever making any distinction between a nazi and non-nazi opposition to illegal immigration. That's all your doing. You're basing your assertion on what you "think" he thinks, while I'm basing it on what's presented in the film.

This is how opposition to illegal immigration is presented in the movie.

<object height="344" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VgP4oxHUxh4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425">

The film portrays opposition to illegal immigration as a component of Nazism IMO (from what I remember of it). When he later says it's "all bullsh*t" it therefore includes his opposition to illegal immigration. The film does nothing to contrast the scene above against legitimate opposition, conveying the message that there are unacceptable (above) and acceptable forms of opposition, to my recollection. Nor does his character make any clear statements which would serve such a purpose.

You could probably hear similar things, in regard to greedy employers hiring illegals and being fed up with our country being invaded, at any average conservative get-together. Unlike the movie seems to suggest, however, such sentiments are not part and parcel of hard-core racism.

The message as conveyed to me is opposition to II = racism. (That also happens to be the sentiment of every leftist defender of illegals.) While we may realize there is more to it than that, the movie doesn't seem to express such at all, and I think we all know a disturbingly large portion of the human race accepts what they see in movies without much thought (how many millions around the globe believe Fahrenheit 911 and An Inconvenient Truth are fact?).

I haven't seen it in a while (I actually own it, but I don't have it ATM, it's like a thousand miles away... long story), so I might not be remembering some parts which suggest otherwise, but you'll have to point out those parts to me, specifically, in order to change my mind.
</object>

[maxparrish]

I just watched Pulp Fiction for about the 51st time. 485 out of 500 stars.

I've watched Kill Bill (both) several times, and love to replay the lead to to the crazy 88 fight scene, the fight with gogo, and the crazy 88 mele'...

Pure genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIROHAlmvGw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hHburo9EMU&feature=related

[maxparrish]

And the best movie this year (so far) is The Dark Knight - a really powerful film with Heath Ledger creating a Joker to rival that of Jack N., but in a much darker and sinister way.

[TeenageRepublican]

Same here Prez. I don't own it, but I have a neighbor that does.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Billy Jack" 1/5
For those of you who don't know who Billy Jack is, he's the opposite of Dirty Harry. He's a left-winger who defends a "progressive school" (it's more like a hippie club) against evil law enforcement officers. He's a Vietnam vet who hates the war and is half-Indian.
An anti-death penalty message is also in the film. "It's not going to change what happened," sobs the school counselor after she gets raped. The point of the death penalty is to not change what happened... it's to stop what WILL happen.
I need to watch the "Dirty Harry" flicks again (except for part five, that movie is dead to me) to cleanse myself of this filth.
http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/libertas/wp-content/uploads/2006/10/079074072901lzzzzzzzgif.jpg

[PrezLeefun]

It's fine that you disagree, but once again, I don't recall the movie ever making any distinction between a nazi and non-nazi opposition to illegal immigration. That's all your doing. You're basing your assertion on what you "think" he thinks, while I'm basing it on what's presented in the film.

This is how opposition to illegal immigration is presented in the movie.

<object height="344" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VgP4oxHUxh4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425">

The film portrays opposition to illegal immigration as a component of Nazism IMO (from what I remember of it). When he later says it's "all bullsh*t" it therefore includes his opposition to illegal immigration. The film does nothing to contrast the scene above against legitimate opposition, conveying the message that there are unacceptable (above) and acceptable forms of opposition, to my recollection. Nor does his character make any clear statements which would serve such a purpose.

You could probably hear similar things, in regard to greedy employers hiring illegals and being fed up with our country being invaded, at any average conservative get-together. Unlike the movie seems to suggest, however, such sentiments are not part and parcel of hard-core racism.

The message as conveyed to me is opposition to II = racism. (That also happens to be the sentiment of every leftist defender of illegals.) While we may realize there is more to it than that, the movie doesn't seem to express such at all, and I think we all know a disturbingly large portion of the human race accepts what they see in movies without much thought (how many millions around the globe believe Fahrenheit 911 and An Inconvenient Truth are fact?).

I haven't seen it in a while (I actually own it, but I don't have it ATM, it's like a thousand miles away... long story), so I might not be remembering some parts which suggest otherwise, but you'll have to point out those parts to me, specifically, in order to change my mind.
</object>

Oh please. Open your mind a little would you. The only thing he ever denounces is the extreme nature of the life style he was once living. You are watching the film under the assumption that the film makers thought the politics he once held were equal with his actions before he entered prison. That is highly unlikely.

Either enjoy the film and see it for what it is, a story about a man who changes his life for the better, or dont watch it or films remotely like it for fear of being offeneded and the desperate need to make everyone see what you see.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Oh please. Open your mind a little would you. The only thing he ever denounces is the extreme nature of the life style he was once living.
Show me.

You are watching the film under the assumption that the film makers thought the politics he once held were equal with his actions before he entered prison. That is highly unlikely.
No, I watched it and made my decision off of what I saw.
<object height="344" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8hEtN0-vF90&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>

And upon the realization that many, if not most, movies these days are, often very sly in their subtly, pushing a political agenda (and that agenda, being that the left owns "big hollywood," is generally leftist).

The above is another example to me of how his dialogue seems like conservative opinion with words like "monkey" added in to make those opinions seem overtly racist. I agree that the excuses for criminal behavior offered by the others are "liberal nonsense" (this phrase used to subtly send the message his position, the nazi's position, is a right-wing position) and often simply a means of 'alleviating responsibility for a criminals own actions.' People are criminals because they choose to commit crimes. Apparently that makes me Derek Vineyard according to this movie, and the looters after Katrina grabbing, not food, but plasma screen TVs, were justified because of the 'social inequalities which produce that behavior.' :rolleyes:

Either enjoy the film and see it for what it is, a story about a man who changes his life for the better, or dont watch it or films remotely like it for fear of being offeneded and the desperate need to make everyone see what you see.
You can stop fabricating rubbish about me being "afraid" (as already stated, I own this movie) and produce a legitimate response at any time.

[Neil Peart]

Prez, I have to side with CH on this one. Hollywood is notorious for doing the things that he describes. And I'm pretty sure he did say that he generally enjoyed the movie.

[PrezLeefun]

If you enjoy a film there is no need to nitpick at it.

[Neil Peart]

If you enjoy a film there is no need to nitpick at it.What if there's something that REALLY sticks out to you, as is the case here?

[TeenageRepublican]

I think it's really up to the viewer to decide what happens in the movie and form their own opinions about it. I happen to agree with Prez, but CH does put up credible debate points.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Dirty Harry" 5/5
I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
http://web.tiscalinet.it/silviodr/Dirty%20Harry.gif

[PrezLeefun]

What if there's something that REALLY sticks out to you, as is the case here?

You know what, each to his own. I love West Side Story but I always make fun of the many bloopers in the film but I dont feel the need to make long posts about it.

I am a little annoyed at CH with his long winded posts about his problem with the depiction of politics in the film. It IMO has not added much to the conversation. He wants to debate and go round in circles about it and I am not about to play that game with him.

[TeenageRepublican]

You know what, each to his own. I love West Side Story but I always make fun of the many bloopers in the film but I dont feel the need to make long posts about it.

I am a little annoyed at CH with his long winded posts about his problem with the depiction of politics in the film. It IMO has not added much to the conversation. He wants to debate and go round in circles about it and I am not about to play that game with him.

That's my job. :biggrin:

[Neil Peart]

You know what, each to his own. I love West Side Story but I always make fun of the many bloopers in the film but I dont feel the need to make long posts about it.This is more than just a blooper. It's the promotion of an agenda.

[PrezLeefun]

This is more than just a blooper. It's the promotion of an agenda.

OF COURSE THERE IS AN AGENDA. Its Hollywood. If you are gonna find something to dislike in every film, something liberal, you'll find it. Thats not a mystery. If Maggie T could pay to watch a children's movie with an overtone about the agenda of Global Warming and the evils of big business and still enjoy it because she thought there was a sweet love story that was worth sitting through the rest of it for, then by all means we can sit down and watch an excellent film and be able to say the core of film made it worth watching despite any agenda seen in it.

Either you are going to like a movie and appreciate it for what is, or you don't.

[TeenageRepublican]

OF COURSE THERE IS AN AGENDA. Its Hollywood. If you are gonna find something to dislike in every film, something liberal, you'll find it. Thats not a mystery. If Maggie T could pay to watch a children's movie with an overtone about the agenda of Global Warming and the evils of big business and still enjoy it because she thought there was a sweet love story that was worth sitting through the rest of it for, then by all means we can sit down and watch an excellent film and be able to say the core of film made it worth watching despite any agenda seen in it.

Either you are going to like a movie and appreciate it for what is, or you don't.

:claps:
I enjoyed "The Day After Tomorrow" even though it's about global warmth. I thought the father-son relationship was touching.

[PrezLeefun]

:claps:
I enjoyed "The Day After Tomorrow" even though it's about global warmth. I thought the father-son relationship was touching.

Thank You!

[TeenageRepublican]

But I hated "Billy Jack" with a burning passion because of it's hippie-dippy leftist plot. So, it really depends, for me, if it's well-written and well-made.

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

You know what, each to his own. I love West Side Story but I always make fun of the many bloopers in the film but I dont feel the need to make long posts about it.
So what. Then don't.

I am a little annoyed at CH with his long winded posts about his problem with the depiction of politics in the film.
So what. "Annoyed" is not a legitimate counterpoint.

It IMO has not added much to the conversation.
You seem as though you're looking for anything you can besides a legitimate response.



I don't feel the need to talk about the negatives of a movie, so neither should he.
He annoys me.
It hasn't added much (this is a joke coming from someone who thinks a post summed up in 'Edward Norton is hot' is a meaningful contribution to discourse).

It frankly doesn't matter if you think the negatives aren't worthy of mentioning, if I annoy you, or if you feel I am contributing or not.

Not once has my simple and polite request to cite any specific scene or statement from the movie, showing it does in fact contrast the opposition portrayed against legitimate opposition, and/or illustrates any distinguishment between the two, been granted.

(As for me I've openly stated I haven't seen it in a while, and am therefore open to the possibility I'm mistaken, and might change my mind upon seeing contrary evidence.)

He wants to debate and go round in circles about it and I am not about to play that game with him.
Actually, all I did was express my opinion on the film. That's it. I simply went more in depth than you and stated, that while I liked it, some things about it bothered me. You and TR are the ones who felt compelled to respond to and challenge my position (you replying to a post that wasn't even to you) making me feel I needed to elaborate on such.

Only problem is, when challenged on my perspective, I started buttressing my opinion with actual footage from the film, as opposed to leaving it a matter of unsubstantiated personal opinion (your side's schtick), and meaningless comments like "either you are going to like a movie and appreciate it for what is, or you don't."

I appreciate some parts of it and not others. I appreciate the story, which is good, but I don't appreciate the parts which seem agenda-driven, anti-conservative propaganda.

I see no reason to ignore the bad for the good. That's exactly why entertainment is in the state it is currently. People tolerate entertainment that is absolute garbage, and simply choose to ignore that in favor of picking whatever modicums of goodness they may from the dung hill of filth and propaganda.

Your sentiments remind me (figuratively) of the girl who's out on the dance floor shaking her ass like a complete heathen tramp to a rap song in spite of the profanity, misogyny, immorality, and ignorance of it all (all of which she's likely to say she condemns) because it "has a good beat." It reminds me of my friends who will watch a movie laden with utter excrement because it's "funny." :rolleyes:

If I want to enjoy a movie or not is frankly my prerogative. Just because you ignore all of the negatives, and choose to see only what pleases you, doesn't mean I must do the same, or that my posts must be limited in length and omit a films cons.

The film more than once subtly associated conservative positions with nazism from what I recall. If you disagree with that, so be it, but I've given examples of why I think that.

[PrezLeefun]

Mama Mia! 3 out of 4

It was fun and funny and great... a bit cheezy at times but all in good fun. I liked it a great deal.

The House Bunny 2 and half out of 4
It was also funny. There were great little things done by the actors that made it charming. You basically get what you see, lots of corn lots of cheese, lots of tight little outfits that the average woman could not fit in and a highly predictable ending with the exception of the main character saying a word you would never think could come out of her mouth let alone enter her brain without lots of help. But overall a good rental choice.

The Jane Austen Book Club 4 out of 4
This was heartfelt, funny, dramatic and incredibly sexy. I loved it. See it now. I am gonna go read some Austen.... Northhanger Abby perhaps.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Walk the Line" 5/5
A touching love story about Johnny Cash and June Carter (two people who were made for each other). It's overall one of my favorite romance movies.

[Kylester1987]

This is more than just a blooper. It's the promotion of an agenda.

what agenda is in west side story?

[Neil Peart]

what agenda is in west side story?Huh?

[PrezLeefun]

The agenda is that everyone should know the mambo.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Timeline" 4/5
Overall, a good adaption. Not great; pretty average acting. Great fight scene near the end.

"Transformers" 4/5
Appeals to the six year old in all of us.

[Trevelyan]

"The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" ***1/2 out of four.

[ThomasMore]

The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill.

A documentary. The true story of Mark Bittner, a street musician who falls in with a flock of South American parrots which had set up residence in San Francisco's elegant Telegraph Hill neighborhood.

Bittner is a bohemian free-spirit, but not drug-addled or insane. He studies the birds and cares for them; a modern-day St. Francis sans the Christianity. Remarkably, in the process, the birds bring him everything he needs.

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZBDqwkgjW6g&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZBDqwkgjW6g&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1OMiVruHMPA&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1OMiVruHMPA&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object>

It was a really good movie.

[TeenageRepublican]

"Blood and Chocolate" 4/5
They totally butchered the book, the only thing the book has in common with this is the characters. But, not compared to the book, it's a pretty enjoyable movie.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Blood and chocolate is what my wife does every month, then blames me for it. I didn't know they made a movie about it though.

[TeenageRepublican]

Wyatt, you're the only person I know that can take an award-winning teenage novel and turn it in to PMS.

[Trevelyan]

"Burn After Reading" *** out of four.

[Trevelyan]

An American Carol" *1/2 out of four.

Not funny.

[Trevelyan]

"Religulous" *** out of four.