# Films which you can see were intended to be deep and meaningful but were just crap



## warszawa (May 29, 2008)

Dark City

Didn't they give a shit about consistency in this film: people falling down unconscious only to wake up later and not ask themselves what the fuck they were doing on the floor or how a twelve-story building erects itself overnight.

And what was with all that weird pointless speech pattern? All a bit overt in it's attempt to be original, and yet we had the totally banal Hell Raiser teeth-chattering rip-off.


----------



## Kanda (May 29, 2008)

Inconvenient Truth.


----------



## Firky (May 29, 2008)

How I Became a Racist, directed by warszawa.


----------



## cliche guevara (May 29, 2008)

Donnie Darko. Was really popular when I was in college and everyone loved it. IT WAS FUCKING SHITE!


----------



## idioteque (May 29, 2008)

Not it wasn't.


----------



## warszawa (May 29, 2008)

cliche guevara said:


> Donnie Darko. Was really popular when I was in college and everyone loved it. IT WAS FUCKING SHITE!



Bit for the teenage market, but I thought it was interesting, tbh.


----------



## cliche guevara (May 29, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Bit for the teenage market, but I thought it was interesting, tbh.



Well we were all teenagers at the time, but I don't think that justified thinking that this film waseither deep, or meaningful. It was rubbish (despite what Idioteque thinks).


----------



## Bingo (May 29, 2008)

I completely agree about Darko... was sucked into seeing it by all the "wow its so cool" hype and was just left thinking I'd missed the point at the end...


----------



## Bingo (May 29, 2008)

.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 29, 2008)

Eyes Wide Shut

Blue Highway

Forrest Gump

Brokeback Mountain

any Woody Allen film made since 1987.


----------



## geoff64 (May 29, 2008)

bit un-pc to say so, but The Colour Purple...

The only film i ever walked out of.  Fucking awful.


----------



## Santino (May 29, 2008)

American Beauty. Fuck.


----------



## kabbes (May 29, 2008)

I totally agree with Brokeback Mountain.  I think that film was underdone by its very premise (by which I mean the premise of trying to get across the sheer length of time involved in the affair).  This left it feeling like a collection of filmic soundbites with very little substance.  Frankly, I was bored and irritated.  It was also too... specific?  Something like that.  It seemed to lack a universal message somehow, being too involved with the minutae of the lives of these two specific individuals.

It was quite good, but I think it failed in its more epic scope.


----------



## Santino (May 29, 2008)

Requiem for a Dream.

Drugs are bad, m'kay?


----------



## Santino (May 29, 2008)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Eyes Wide Shut


Shit, that too. That is one of the very few films I found literally unwatchable. Every scene made me cringe in pain, I barely managed to make five minutes.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 29, 2008)

The one about the sledge.


----------



## Santino (May 29, 2008)

danny la rouge said:


> The one about the sledge.


Cool Runnings?


----------



## Fedayn (May 29, 2008)

danny la rouge said:


> The one about the sledge.




You mean Rosebud in Citizen Kane?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 29, 2008)

Yup.  The old one.


----------



## kained&able (May 29, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Requiem for a Dream.
> 
> Drugs are bad, m'kay?



yeah i thought that was shit. Didn't give a flying fuck about any of the charecters & turned it off about an hour in. Might of just not been in the right mood but fuck it was dire.

dave


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 29, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Cool Runnings?


----------



## mhendo (May 29, 2008)

_Crash_*

Really wanted to like it, but it was so obvious and didactic and maudlin that i ended up hating it.



* the 2004 one about racism in LA, not the 1996 Cronenberg one


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

Alex B said:


> American Beauty. Fuck.



Quite. There's no competition.

A whole cinema full of people gasping at the end as if they'd learned something.

But nobody was quite sure what.

Maybe it was actually a work of genius, fooling so many people that something so crass was profound.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 29, 2008)

Has anyone mentioned 'The Matrix'? Amazingly banal.


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

goldenecitrone said:


> Has anyone mentioned 'The Matrix'? Amazingly banal.



It's like a teenager's first trip.

"imagine right, if we were  just brains in vats, yeh"

It's like Max Freakout writing sci-fi


----------



## danny la rouge (May 29, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> "imagine right, if we were  just brains in vats, yeh"


Ah.  So I take it there's no point in me seeing it now?


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

Closer.  Thinks it's some great psychoanalytical look at relationships.  No, it's vacuous horrible crap. 

Shakespeare in Love.  Thinks it's a witty, novel approach to the day of the Bard.

Sorry guys, it's horrible crap!


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Closer.  Thinks it's some great psychoanalytical look at relationships.  No, it's vacuous horrible crap.
> 
> Shakespeare in Love.  Thinks it's a witty, novel approach to the day of hte Bard.
> 
> Sorry guys, it's horrible crap!



See, we do agree about some things. Those two, along with American Beauty, are my three most hated films ever. If only we agreed about what we LIKED


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> See, we do agree about some things. Those two, along with American Beauty, are my three most hated films ever. If only we agreed about what we LIKED



I liked the Three Burials...


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> I liked the Three Burials...



Great movie.

But Christopher Nolan? meh...


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

Well we're just never going to agree about Nolan...


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 29, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> It's like a teenager's first trip.
> 
> "imagine right, if we were  just brains in vats, yeh"
> 
> It's like Max Freakout writing sci-fi


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2008)

Fight Club, Brick & Gladiat0r


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

Yeh, Fight Club is something  I put with Bill Hicks. Just a bit..... obvious, somehow.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 29, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Fight Club, Brick & Gladiat0r



I don't really think Fight Club was intended to be that deep and meaningful. People just read too much into it. Plus, I just love the ending.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

I know Fight Club could easily come under this thread, but I liked it.  Ditto Donnie Darko.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

goldenecitrone said:


> I don't really think Fight Club was intended to be that deep and meaningful. People just read too much into it. Plus, I just love the ending.



Yes.  I think people are perhaps thinking that that (and DD) are trying to be deep when they aren't.  They're just good films.

On the other hand, El Jefe is 100% right about the Matrix.  It's like every teenager's idea of what 'deep' is after taking too many drugs.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Yeh, Fight Club is something  I put with Bill Hicks. Just a bit..... obvious, somehow.


I like Bill! 
I think Palahniuk is well overrated from what I've read of him
May I also add Apocalypse Now and El Topo (LTC is me on my phone - I forgot I was signed in as me, sorry). 
More recently, people seemed to perceive Garden State as somehow deep and meaningful. They're wrong.


----------



## El Jefe (May 29, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> I like Bill!
> I think Palahniuk is well overrated from what I've read of him
> May I also add Apocalypse Now and El Topo (LTC is me on my phone - I forgot I was signed in as me, sorry).
> More recently, people seemed to perceive Garden State as somehow deep and meaningful. They're wrong.



Garden State is the indie American Beauty. Twee empty platitudes.

Apocalypse Now is toss, but it's toss on a grand scale so it kind of works


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Yes.  I think people are perhaps thinking that that (and DD) are trying to be deep when they aren't.  They're just good films.
> 
> On the other hand, El Jefe is 100% right about the Matrix.  It's like every teenager's idea of what 'deep' is after taking too many drugs.


I saw it after doing way too many drugs - it was ace! I wasn't a teenager though. 
I have watched it since, mind.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 29, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> I saw it after doing way too many drugs - it was ace! I wasn't a teenager though.
> I have watched it since, mind.



I think it's a reasonable scifi film if you accept it as being trashy.  What's amusing though is how so many people really do think it's deep, or did at the time.


----------



## Bingo (May 30, 2008)

Got to agree again about Dark City and Cizizen Kane... downloaded em both thinking was in for a treat but couldn't be arsed and switched em off halfway thru...


----------



## Yossarian (May 30, 2008)

Sunshine


----------



## fishfinger (May 30, 2008)

Bad Lieutenant. Driller Killer was much better.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

But The Matrix has cool kung fu fights in it. The 'Whoa, imagine if nothing you knew was real' schtick is much less important to the film than is sometimes made out. It's just the narrative device that allows characters to do Jedi/wuxia stunts.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

Citizen Kane is a perfectly fine film. I can appreciate why people are disappointed when they see it though, it has no moment that blows you away, as you might expect from all the hype. It wasn't hailed at the Bestest Fillum Ever when it first came out, that happened quite gradually as professional critics re-watched it and re-assessed it.


----------



## Fez909 (May 30, 2008)

Hidden/Cache


----------



## Dirty Martini (May 30, 2008)

The Piano. Also the most boring film ever made.

American Beauty

Seven


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Fight Club, Brick & Gladiat0r



Gladiator was meant to be deep?

Wasn't Russell Crowe in that?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

Seven isn't actually supposed to be deep and meaningful though is it? Mind you it's not supposed to be a load of meretricious shite either, which it is.

I didn't manage more than about fifteen minutes of The Matrix.

I never liked The Conformist much.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Children of Men. It wasn't crap, but it wasn't deep, either.


----------



## Dirty Martini (May 30, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


> Seven isn't actually supposed to be deep and meaningful though is it? Mind you it's not supposed to be a load of meretricious shite either, which it is.



Perhaps not in the sense of some of the other mentioned here, but still self-consciously a superior and 'thought provoking' thriller.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

It certainly provoked some thoughts on my part.

Others mentioned... Donnie Darko is better watched with depression than without. Citizen Kane is a great and groundbreaking film: it's not deep but did anybody say it was?


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 30, 2008)

'no country for old men'  - empty art arse. 



Re: the Matrix. Was it sposed to be 'deep'? - I thought it was a stoners daft head fuck film - and works pretty well on that level.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Kaka Tim said:


> 'no country for old men'  - empty art arse. .



I agree that it wasn't deep, nor was it meant to be. But it was film art raised to the highest level.


----------



## electrogirl (May 30, 2008)

lost in translation
garden state

both had unlikeable characters and are totally and utterly forgettable


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> But it was film art raised to the highest level.


I disagree, although I acknowledge that it was technically very adept, and I like most Coen Bros films. The wrong-footing of the audience and the change of tone at the end are much less clever than some critics seem to think, and the character of Sugar I found fell between two stools. He was neither a realistic portrayal of actual evil or an entertaining Hollywood villain.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> He was neither a realistic portrayal of actual evil or an entertaining Hollywood villain.



He was something different, which is part of the superiority.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> He was something different, which is part of the superiority.


He just didn't do anything for me. *shrug*


----------



## toblerone3 (May 30, 2008)

I don't think American Beauty was crap. For me it worked on lots of different levels and was fun to watch.


----------



## trabuquera (May 30, 2008)

Repeat votes for American Beauty, Lost in Translation, and Crash (the LA one).

New Pretentious Bollocks nominations for:
Babel (people just DON'T COMMUNICATE! who knew?)
Adaptation (supposedly a masterpiece - I never even finished it)
Steve Zissou's The Life Aquatic (utterly pointless and mannered ...)
Trouble Every Day (well, I suppose seeing Beatrice Dalle as a live-flesh-eating vampire might attract some viewers, but the Deeper Meanings evaded me)
Uzak (nearly 2 hours of utter Turkish tedium - arthouse critics adored it)


----------



## DotCommunist (May 30, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Dark City
> 
> Didn't they give a shit about consistency in this film: people falling down unconscious only to wake up later and not ask themselves what the fuck they were doing on the floor or how a twelve-story building erects itself overnight.
> 
> And what was with all that weird pointless speech pattern? All a bit overt in it's attempt to be original, and yet we had the totally banal Hell Raiser teeth-chattering rip-off.




Did you miss the bit where everyone is controlled psychicaly by these powedul alien psykers and thier amplifying machines?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> He just didn't do anything for me. *shrug*



He was the embodiment of an elemental force, a concept. He wasn't meant to be a rounded character.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (May 30, 2008)

"Donnie Darko" - other people's "oh my god, it's fantastic" reactions to the film made me feel like I couldn't understand it and was thus missing out on some amazing revelation. Then I just realised I didn't like it and it didn't say anything - to me at least.


----------



## kabbes (May 30, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Brick


Oh God, yes.  Worst film I've ever seen, I reckon.

Well -- I say "seen".  I actually couldn't bear it for more than 30 minutes.  One of only two films I've ever actually stopped watching having hired it from a DVD shop.  Completely awful in every way.  Here's the thing: you CAN NOT DO "hard-boiled" with a bunch of wanky So-Cal teenagers.  It really doesn't work.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Requiem for a Dream.
> 
> Drugs are bad, m'kay?



All that guy's films are intolerably shit. Especially the fountain. But I probably hate 'requiem' the most because it's so horrifically depressing.


----------



## Brainaddict (May 30, 2008)

Pan's Labyrinth - evil murderous facists are evil and should be fought. Thanks.
No Country For Old Men - ................................... Thanks very much.


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Garden State is the indie American Beauty. Twee empty platitudes.
> 
> Apocalypse Now is toss, but it's toss on a grand scale so it kind of works


 
Another vote for American Beauty but I like Garden State.


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2008)

trabuquera said:


> Repeat votes for American Beauty, *Lost in Translation*, and Crash (the LA one).


 
Heathen! I fucking love that film.


----------



## electrogirl (May 30, 2008)

Marius said:


> Heathen! I fucking love that film.



meh. i didn't feel any sympathy for the characters and it's one of those films that about 2 days later i couldn't remember a single thing about.


----------



## stdPikachu (May 30, 2008)

Jacobs Ladder. Unwatchable bilge that thinks it's far cleverer than you.



Kaka Tim said:


> 'no country for old men'  - empty art arse.



Agreed. Had fuck all of a point to it, just a series of pretentious art student sketches. Same kettle of fish as children of men IMHO - gorgeous to look at, skin-deep beauty.Absolutely nothing of any substance.



El Jefe said:


> It's like a teenager's first trip.
> 
> "imagine right, if we were  just brains in vats, yeh"
> 
> It's like Max Freakout writing sci-fi



Max would be unable to believe that his thoughts could take physical form in the way of writing, and the knowledge of how to write doesn't exist because knowledge is impossible. Max would get as far as imagining the credits before his head asplode.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> He was the embodiment of an elemental force, a concept. He wasn't meant to be a rounded character.


Whether or not he was supposed to be the embodiment of anything, the portrayal of the character was just uninteresting. It takes more than a philosophical idea to make a decently entertaining and/or interesting character.


----------



## kained&able (May 30, 2008)

no country for old men. is that the tommy lee jones one where it all turns out to be a dream. If so yeah that was bollocks.

Not sure if its really deep but 3:15 to yuma or whatever its called. Im sure its meant to have a deep ending with the dangerous outlaw finding his humanity and sacrificng yadda yadda yadda, but they fucked it up royally.


dave


----------



## alsoknownas (May 30, 2008)

I actually like a lot of the films on this thread (Matrix, Donnie Darko, American Beauty), but found them entertaining rather than 'deep'.

Another film I rather enjoyed but could easily sneak on to this list - Last Year in Marienbad.

(I'm being a bit devil's advocate)


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2008)

Have we had Vanilla Sky yet?


----------



## Andy the Don (May 30, 2008)

Road to Predition..

Supposed to be the best film about the 1920/30 American criminal underworld. But it was shit, well that's obvious as it had Tom Hanks in it.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 30, 2008)

Another vote for american beauty here. That bag-in-the-wind scene was _such_ bit of wankery


----------



## London_Calling (May 30, 2008)

QueenOfGoths said:


> "Donnie Darko" - other people's "oh my god, it's fantastic" reactions to the film made me feel like I couldn't understand it and was thus missing out on some amazing revelation. Then I just realised I didn't like it and it didn't say anything - to me at least.


But marvellous nonsense for undergrads searching for 'meaning' aqnd 'truth':  pretentious, vacuous garbage, and very cynically done.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

Andy the Don said:


> Road to Predition..
> 
> Supposed to be the best film about the 1920/30 American criminal underworld. But it was shit, well that's obvious as it had Tom Hanks in it.


Oh, Christ. How on earth can you make a film about men in smart suits shooting each other so miserably tedious?


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2008)

Ooh Ooh I just remembered my most hated supposed deep film...

The Thin Red Line.


----------



## mrsfran (May 30, 2008)

I concur with Donnie Darko. It insists upon itself.


----------



## rubbershoes (May 30, 2008)

all of the Three Colours films

*yawn*

ok i know im a philistine but they all washed over me and left me cold


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2008)

rubbershoes said:


> all of the Three Colours films
> 
> *yawn*
> 
> ok i know im a philistine but they all washed over me and left me cold


 
Despite many attempts to record these I'm destined never to watch these films I'm sure.

It may have something to do with wanting to have all three available to watch in a row and never knowing in which order they are supposed to be watched.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Anything by Kieslowski is invariably beautiful to look at and enjoyable to watch, but ultimately means very little. I don't see any meaning in any of the Three Colours films. Why does blokely cry at the end of White, for example? What does A Short Film about Killing actually say about killing? The Double Life of Veronique is probably the worst offender - really lovely to watch, but wtf is it about, really? It's like you have to come up with your own motivations for the characters, because there are very few clues in the films.

Am I missing something here?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Marius said:


> Despite many attempts to record these I'm destined never to watch these films I'm sure.
> 
> It may have something to do with wanting to have all three available to watch in a row and never knowing in which order they are supposed to be watched.


They are self-contained - watch in any order.


----------



## London_Calling (May 30, 2008)

I'm unnaturally wary of films containing large, multicoloured,  oblong-shaped flags, almost always carried by men on horseback - it's surely the sign of an impoverished props and plot department.

I haven't seen the 3 Colours trilogy for fear of that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

London_Calling said:


> I'm unnaturally wary of films containing large, multicoloured,  oblong-shaped flags, almost always carried by men on horseback - it's surely the sign of an impoverished props and plot department.
> 
> I haven't seen the 3 Colours trilogy for fear of that.


Um...


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Anything by Kieslowski is invariably beautiful to look at and enjoyable to watch, but ultimately means very little. I don't see any meaning in any of the Three Colours films. Why does blokely cry at the end of White, for example? What does A Short Film about Killing actually say about killing? The Double Life of Veronique is probably the worst offender - really lovely to watch, but wtf is it about, really? It's like you have to come up with your own motivations for the characters, because there are very few clues in the films.
> 
> Am I missing something here?


You can say that about any film, indeed, any work of art. What does _Hamlet_ really actually say about anything at all? Get a fucking move on, you indecisive Danish twat?

What films do you think 'say' something?


----------



## tommers (May 30, 2008)

London_Calling said:


> I'm unnaturally wary of films containing large, multicoloured,  oblong-shaped flags, almost always carried by men on horseback - it's surely the sign of an impoverished props and plot department.
> 
> I haven't seen the 3 Colours trilogy for fear of that.





"Ran" is brilliant.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> You can say that about any film, indeed, any work of art. What does _Hamlet_ really actually say about anything at all? Get a fucking move on, you indecisive Danish twat?
> 
> What films do you think 'say' something?



Maybe 'say' is the wrong word. 'Provide a new way of looking at' would be better - all art should do that.


----------



## stdPikachu (May 30, 2008)

Marius said:


> Ooh Ooh I just remembered my most hated supposed deep film...
> 
> The Thin Red Line.



Fuck, yes. Don't understand WTF people see in it, it's like apocalypse now without any of the style or surreal substance.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

tommers said:


> "Ran" is brilliant.


What about that other Kurosawa film, in which the same story is shown slightly differently several times? Oh yes, I remember, it was 'Ran Lola Ran'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Every single American film about the Vietnam War. You were the baddies in that war, fuckheads. None of them can bring themselves to fully admit this.


----------



## tommers (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> What about that other Kurosawa film, in which the same story is shown slightly differently several times? Oh yes, I remember, it was 'Ran Lola Ran'.



that's terrible.  does your mother know what you get up to?


----------



## London_Calling (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe 'say' is the wrong word. 'Provide a new way of looking at' would be better - all art should do that.


I don't think it's a bad definition of 'art'. 

But we're talking about film, primarily non-subsidised US/UK produced film - which is entirely made to produce profit. 'Commercial art' - now is that a contradiction in terms . . .


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

tommers said:


> that's terrible.  does your mother know what you get up to?


You're just jealous.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> What about that other Kurosawa film, in which the same story is shown slightly differently several times? Oh yes, I remember, it was 'Ran Lola Ran'.



Rashomon is another in the 'enjoyable but meaningless' category.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Every single American film about the Vietnam War. You were the baddies in that war, fuckheads. None of them can bring themselves to fully admit this.




I thought Hamburger Hill portrayed them as fairly bad.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

London_Calling said:


> 'Commercial art' - now is that a contradiction in terms . . .


No. 

Singin' in the Rain - one of the most commercial kinds of films ever, but one of the greatest.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Rashomon is another in the 'enjoyable but meaningless' category.


That's not how I remember it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> That's not how I remember it.



Such realistic, understated acting...


----------



## Dirty Martini (May 30, 2008)

missfran said:


> It insists upon itself.



Nicely put.


----------



## no-no (May 30, 2008)

This thread was intended to be deep and meaningful, but it's just crap. What the hell does deep and meaningful mean anyway?


----------



## Barking_Mad (May 30, 2008)

Marius said:


> Have we had Vanilla Sky yet?



HAH! Yes.

Me and my mate watched this at our local multiplex at about 11pm. There was only me and him in the cinema, so we played hide and seek amongst the chairs and climbed up to the projector and did bunny ears on the big screen.



As you can tell, we didn't think much to it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

no-no said:


> This thread was intended to be deep and meaningful, but it's just crap. What the hell does deep and meaningful mean anyway?


You know it when you see it. The Unbearable Lightness of Being is intended to be deep an meaningful and I think largely succeeds as it is a faithful to the book and I think Kundera is a very insightful writer. Anatomy of Hell is another film intended to be deep and meaningful, but is a load of old toss.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (May 30, 2008)

cliche guevara said:


> Donnie Darko. Was really popular when I was in college and everyone loved it. IT WAS FUCKING SHITE!


This times 10 million. Utter twaddle.


----------



## Aravis (May 30, 2008)

Another vote for Lost in Translation. A dull, forgettable story about the vacuous.

I only liked Donny Darko because I treated it as a bit of an odd teen horror.


----------



## London_Calling (May 30, 2008)

Aravis - There's a difference between films you don't 'get' (and we all fail to get some films) and films that have no merits to get.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What does A Short Film about Killing actually say about killing? ..............Am I missing something here?


----------



## maximilian ping (May 30, 2008)

Amelie


----------



## Yossarian (May 30, 2008)

Aravis said:


> I only liked Donny Darko because I treated it as a bit of an odd teen horror.



I liked Donny Darko about a dozen times more after I saw the 'this actually makes sense as a story now' director's cut...


----------



## Biddlybee (May 30, 2008)

kained&able said:


> no country for old men. is that the tommy lee jones one where it all turns out to be a dream. If so yeah that was bollocks.


No. It has got him in it, but it's not a dream.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


>


A bloke kills someone, gets caught, and is in turn killed by the state.

Deep.


----------



## Aravis (May 30, 2008)

London_Calling said:


> Aravis - There's a difference between films you don't 'get' (and we all fail to get some films) and films that have no merits to get.



I don't think I'm the only one that failed to "get" the supposed charms of Lost in Translation though. It's a bit of a marmite film.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Aravis said:


> I don't think I'm the only one that failed to "get" the supposed charms of Lost in Translation though. It's a bit of a marmite film.


Any charm in it comes from Bill Murray, who I always find watchable, even when he's in execrable crap like this.


----------



## Santino (May 30, 2008)

maximilian ping said:


> Amelie


Surely Amelie was always intended to be a fluffy piece of tosh?


----------



## El Jefe (May 30, 2008)

Marius said:


> Ooh Ooh I just remembered my most hated supposed deep film...
> 
> The Thin Red Line.



One of the two or three greatest films ever made. Dumbass


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A bloke kills someone, gets caught, and is in turn killed by the state.
> 
> Deep.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


>


Write out a hundred times:

 is not an argument.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

It is a contraction of an argument, in the same sense as your posting provided a contraction of a plot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


> It is a contraction of an argument, in the same sense as your posting provided a contraction of a plot.



No it is not.

A contraction of the plot in the same sense as your  would be


----------



## Donna Ferentes (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it is not.
> 
> A contraction of the plot in the same sense as your  would be


No, that would involve using the same means. One may surely share a sense without copying technique?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Whether or not he was supposed to be the embodiment of anything, the portrayal of the character was just uninteresting. It takes more than a philosophical idea to make a decently entertaining and/or interesting character.



The movie is a pastiche of characters, scene etc. Focusing on him alone is like focusing only on the colour red in one of Turner's sunsets.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

tommers said:


> "Ran" is brilliant.



It's a good looking movie without much depth. Kagemusha actually delivers in that department.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Every single American film about the Vietnam War. You were the baddies in that war, fuckheads. None of them can bring themselves to fully admit this.



American cinema in 25 words or less.


----------



## debaser (May 31, 2008)

A.i


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (May 31, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> American cinema in 25 words or less.



I can't believe anyone could say that, say, Platoon was depicting the Americans as anything other than the baddies.


----------



## laptop (May 31, 2008)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah.  So I take it there's no point in me seeing it now?



I enjoyed the first 40 seconds. After that, yes, max_freakout is about the mark.


----------



## mk12 (May 31, 2008)

> no country for old men. is that the tommy lee jones one where it all turns out to be a dream. If so yeah that was bollocks.



You what?


----------



## poului (May 31, 2008)

*dtigblnu9p*

Get off this thread before you embarrass yourself any further, littlebabyjesus.


----------



## warszawa (May 31, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You know it when you see it. The Unbearable Lightness of Being is intended to be deep an meaningful and I think largely succeeds as it is a faithful to the book and I think Kundera is a very insightful writer. Anatomy of Hell is another film intended to be deep and meaningful, but is a load of old toss.



I'm reading Kundera's 'Immortality' at the moment. Can't imagine a film based on his writing.


----------



## Disaster (May 31, 2008)

Amelie was an absolute bag of wank.


----------



## ajk (May 31, 2008)

Perhaps, but it certainly wasn't trying to be deep and meaningful.  It seemed happy enough being manipulative, sentimental schmaltz.  And, may I add, utterly charming with it.

I thought it was great, but I wouldn't pretend to have gleaned any great wisdom from it, and would be surprised if that was the filmmaker's intent.

The Fountain, however, was unmitigated toss.  Fancied itself as dancing the line between pretentiousness and wisdom, in reality it was as if some of the more "lightweight" pizza-box threads from the Philosophy forum had been adapted for the big screen by a film student with a head injury.  And I quite like Aronofsky.


----------



## warszawa (May 31, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> Did you miss the bit where everyone is controlled psychicaly by these powedul alien psykers and thier amplifying machines?



I caught the bit where some mind altering liquid was independently injected into a couple to help them overlook that their living quarters had been spruced up. I have no idea how everyone else overlooked the fact that they had been lying in a puddle for five minutes. That's ignorring all the corny affected setting, script and expressions such as 'This one knows how to 'tune!''.

But I can see why you like it being that you so naively and ardently sit on only one side of the 'nature/nuture' debate: we're all poor victims of circumstance; we don't own our own minds, our own efforts and successes. Pity for you Dark City is pure fantasy, and a relief for the rest of us hard-working, ambitious, honest souls.


----------



## mk12 (Jun 1, 2008)

debaser said:


> A.i



It was not a very good film up until the bit where Haley Joel Osmont was frozen, and then it got 100 times worse when they showed you 10,000 years in the future. A dreadful film in my opinion.


----------



## imposs1904 (Jun 1, 2008)

American History X was unbelievably awful. I can't understand why anyone would like that film.

I thought at one point I was going to root for the Nazis.


----------



## Santino (Jun 1, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> The movie is a pastiche of characters, scene etc. Focusing on him alone is like focusing only on the colour red in one of Turner's sunsets.


I'm not focussing on him alone. He's just one element in a flawed film.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 1, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> I can't believe anyone could say that, say, Platoon was depicting the Americans as anything other than the baddies.


Platoon is a very good example. Lots about how the US conducted the war. Pretty much zero about why they were there, and the Vietnamese as little more than background filler.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 1, 2008)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Platoon is a very good example. Lots about how the US conducted the war. Pretty much zero about why they were there, and the Vietnamese as little more than background filler.



... And you don't think it was in any way critical of the USA?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> ... And you don't think it was in any way critical of the USA?



I don't think it was much


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 1, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> ... And you don't think it was in any way critical of the USA?


No, not really. If anything it was a celebration of the noble American soldier. Platoon was a film about the US army, not Vietnam.


----------



## Gromit (Jun 1, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't think it was much



Oliver Stone would be gutted to hear you say that as be was and is very anti the Vietnam war and it was with that mindset he made Platoon.


----------



## the button (Jun 1, 2008)

Lilya Forever.

Good sound track, but otherwise shite.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2008)

Marius said:


> Oliver Stone would be gutted to hear you say that as be was and is very anti the Vietnam war and it was with that mindset he made Platoon.


Platoon comes off as a typical macho war movie though, so he's not a very good film maker if he intended it to be anything other than that.


----------



## Fez909 (Jun 2, 2008)

Some very strange choices here.  Amelie deep and meaningful?  Adaptation?  The Life Aquatic?


----------



## Fictionist (Jun 2, 2008)

Apocalypse Now

A terrible film based on a particularly pointless text.


----------



## andyefc (Jun 2, 2008)

toblerone3 said:


> I don't think American Beauty was crap. For me it worked on lots of different levels and was fun to watch.



totally agree great film well acted maybe not deep and meaningful, i dont expect films to change my life buts it all a matter of opinion


----------



## kabbes (Jun 2, 2008)

Amelie is a brilliant film.  And it in no way pretends to be deep and meaningful.  Don't confuse "deep and meaningful" with "French".

"Lost in Translation", however, is sensationally brilliant.  It's a fantastic study in loneliness.  Subte and poignant.  If you don't get it then fair enough entirely.  But don't pretend that because you don't get it that there is nothing to get (as per L_C, above).


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 2, 2008)

You lot are weird.  What about the scene where they burn down the vietnamese village with that famous samuel barber music playing?  If there's a more powerful anti-war, anti-US foreign policy scene in a film, I've yet to see it.


----------



## Scarlette (Jun 2, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Requiem for a Dream.
> 
> Drugs are bad, m'kay?



Dear Lord, I hate that film. Was hungover depressed when I saw it and was then UTTERLY depressed. Horrible.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 2, 2008)

toblerone3 said:


> I don't think American Beauty was crap. For me it worked on lots of different levels and was fun to watch.



OK, then - I'll bite.

Talk me through these different levels.


----------



## May Kasahara (Jun 2, 2008)

I think the key part to concentrate on in that post is '*for me*', Jeff


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 2, 2008)

May Kasahara said:


> I think the key part to concentrate on in that post is '*for me*', Jeff



I know 

But I'd be interested to hear what, for *him*, those different levels were.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> I caught the bit where some mind altering liquid was independently injected into a couple to help them overlook that their living quarters had been spruced up. I have no idea how everyone else overlooked the fact that they had been lying in a puddle for five minutes. That's ignorring all the corny affected setting, script and expressions such as 'This one knows how to 'tune!''.
> 
> But I can see why you like it being that you so naively and ardently sit on only one side of the 'nature/nuture' debate: we're all poor victims of circumstance; we don't own our own minds, our own efforts and successes. Pity for you Dark City is pure fantasy, and a relief for the rest of us hard-working, ambitious, honest souls.



you what? You missed or failed to understand the internal logic of the film.

As for the rest of your bizarre rant, I expect such scorn from a racist prick such as yourself and value it as 0/10.


----------



## May Kasahara (Jun 2, 2008)

I bet you would! 

<takes cover from Jeff's throbbing anger vein>

<in his _forehead_, before anyone asks >


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> I caught the bit where some mind altering liquid was independently injected into a couple to help them overlook that their living quarters had been spruced up. I have no idea how everyone else overlooked the fact that they had been lying in a puddle for five minutes. That's ignorring all the corny affected setting, script and expressions such as 'This one knows how to 'tune!''.
> 
> But I can see why you like it being that you so naively and ardently sit on only one side of the 'nature/nuture' debate: we're all poor victims of circumstance; we don't own our own minds, our own efforts and successes. Pity for you Dark City is pure fantasy, and a relief for the rest of us hard-working, ambitious, honest souls.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 2, 2008)

Pi - this one really did take itself too seriously but was in fact total twaddle


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 2, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> You lot are weird.  What about the scene where they burn down the vietnamese village with that famous samuel barber music playing?  If there's a more powerful anti-war, anti-US foreign policy scene in a film, I've yet to see it.


That is a comment on methods, not motivation.


----------



## Robstarr (Jun 2, 2008)

kabbes said:


> Oh God, yes.  Worst film I've ever seen, I reckon.
> 
> Well -- I say "seen".  I actually couldn't bear it for more than 30 minutes.  One of only two films I've ever actually stopped watching having hired it from a DVD shop.  Completely awful in every way.  Here's the thing: you CAN NOT DO "hard-boiled" with a bunch of wanky So-Cal teenagers.  It really doesn't work.






I fully agree with you


----------



## warszawa (Jun 2, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> you what? You missed or failed to understand the internal logic of the film.
> 
> As for the rest of your bizarre rant, I expect such scorn from a racist prick such as yourself and value it as 0/10.



Funny you talk of 'value' because a single pube on my scrotum holds more value for me than anything you have to say. That said, in this case you've actually said pretty much fuck all. The ridiculous inconsistencies I pointed out, still stand.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Funny you talk of 'value' because a single pube on my scrotum holds more value for me than anything you have to say. That said, in this case you've actually said pretty much fuck all. The ridiculous inconsistencies I pointed out, still stand.



Thats because you appear to have only grown them recently. They still hold the novelty value.

Actually, the internal logic stands precisely because of the intense mental control these psyker aliens had. The whole point of the film was the protagonists ability to resist their will while everyone could not.


----------



## warszawa (Jun 2, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> Thats because you appear to have only grown them recently. They still hold the novelty value.
> 
> Actually, the internal logic stands precisely because of the intense mental control these psyker aliens had. The whole point of the film was the protagonists ability to resist their will while everyone could not.



Well, at least they're there.

So they had enough mental control to make their subjects forget they are walking around with dog shit on their face after spending ten minutes lying in a pile of poop. Maybe that's your thing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Well, at least they're there.
> 
> So they had enough mental control to make their subjects forget they are walking around with dog shit on their face after spending ten minutes lying in a pile of poop. Maybe that's your thing.



I keep mine trimmed short for the win.

Yes. ~If you've got enough mental control (and lets not forget the amplyfing machines) you'd be able to do that. 
It's not my thing. It's part of the plot that you were a bit to dim to get.


----------



## vogonity (Jun 2, 2008)

Death in Venice: add Thomas Mann's book, the beauty of Venice, Mahler's music and Dirk Bogarde and what do you get? Over-dressed, under-written, self-indulgent *shite*.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 2, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Shakespeare in Love.  Thinks it's a witty, novel approach to the day of the Bard.
> 
> Sorry guys, it's horrible crap!



Not sure that "Shakespeare in love" was supposed to be deep and meaningful.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 2, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> OK, then - I'll bite.
> 
> Talk me through these different levels.



Well with American Beauty the word levels is just going to lead me off into bullshit-land (if I try and describe a multi-*level* meaning where parts of the screenplay and characters symbolise deeper something beyond the obvious plot) 

....and you into disparaging guffaws. 

...but American Beauty was enjoyable is lots of different ways it had genuinely laugh out loud moments but it also seemed to be playing in a witty way with stereotypes present in American society (I'm thinking the self-help sub-Louise Hays tape the wife plays in the car, the household of the right-wing nutjob, the moody teenage daughter, the revenge of the downsized employee and so on).

I also liked the bag blowing in the wind scene. The soundtrack to that was good. 

Meaningful doesn't have to be like Russian dolls to be effective.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Jun 2, 2008)

imposs1904 said:


> I thought at one point I was going to root for the Nazis.


Surely everybody does that in _The Sound of Music_.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Jun 2, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> You lot are weird.  What about the scene where they burn down the vietnamese village with that famous samuel barber music playing?  If there's a more powerful anti-war, anti-US foreign policy scene in a film, I've yet to see it.


Not so famous that the poster knows the title....


----------



## warszawa (Jun 2, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> I keep mine trimmed short for the win.
> 
> Yes. ~If you've got enough mental control (and lets not forget the amplyfing machines) you'd be able to do that.
> It's not my thing. It's part of the plot that you were a bit to dim to get.



Oh, the 'ampl*i*fying machines' right! Silly me!  They're the ones that clean up the dog shit, but then they always go in themselves now and again to wipe the odd bit of cornflakes off someone's face. Nothing like the odd personal touch, ay?

Oh, and as for me being a little *'too' *dim, do you think these amplifying machines could do anything about your lack of spelling and writing skills? Maybe it's too much for them. There's fantasy, but that's really pushing it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Oh, the 'ampl*i*fying machines' right! Silly me! They're the ones that clean up the dog shit, but then they always go in themselves now and again to wipe the odd bit of cornflakes off someone's face. Nothing like the odd personal touch, ay?
> 
> Oh, and as for me being a little *'too' *dim, do you think these amplifying machines could do anythig about your lack of spelling and writing skills? Maybe it's too much for them -there's fantasy, but that's really pushing it.



The large scale telekenises was done by amplyfying machines. The  mind control and occaisonal  clean up squads needed were carried out by the aliens in person.  Now you can sit and pick holes in that idea all day, but then you are stupid. 

And fella, pedantry and spelling correction are the last resorts of a twat.


----------



## warszawa (Jun 2, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> The large scale telekenises was done by amplyfying machines. The  mind control and occaisonal  clean up squads needed were carried out by the aliens in person.  Now you can sit and pick holes in that idea all day, but then you are stupid.
> 
> And fella, pedantry and spelling correction are the last resorts of a twat.



Listen you fucking off-spring of the villiage idiot and his retarded eight year old sister. I don't need to pick holes in 'Dark City' anymore than I need to pick holes in most of your posts. There's pedantry and then there's being able to string simple sentence structure together, which, I'm sure, some monkeys could do better than you. Dark city was as about as sophisticated as your mum on a Saturday night out. No amplifying machine could ever sort her out, lying in her usual puddle of piss with her knickers around her head. 

So there you have it nob features. You can fuck off now and play with your father's balls, or whatever pastime you dopey inbred fuckers get up to in the evenings.


----------



## laptop (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Listen you fucking off-spring of the villiage idiot and his retarded eight year old sister. I don't need to pick holes in 'Dark City' anymore than I need to pick holes in most of your posts. There's pedantry and then there's being able to string simple sentence structure together, which, I'm sure, some monkeys could do better than you. Dark city was as about as sophisticated as your mum on a Saturday night out. No amplifying machine could ever sort her out, lying in her usual puddle of piss with her knickers around her head.
> 
> So there you have it nob features. You can fuck off now and play with your father's balls, or whatever pastime you dopey inbred fuckers get up to in the evenings.



Whatever the fuck the argument was, I take it DotCommunist has won it


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jun 2, 2008)

laptop said:


> Whatever the fuck the argument was, I take it DotCommunist has won it





Well, if he hadn't before, he has after that post by warszawa.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 2, 2008)

warszawa said:


> Listen you fucking off-spring of the villiage idiot and his retarded eight year old sister. I don't need to pick holes in 'Dark City' anymore than I need to pick holes in most of your posts. There's pedantry and then there's being able to string simple sentence structure together, which, I'm sure, some monkeys could do better than you. Dark city was as about as sophisticated as your mum on a Saturday night out. No amplifying machine could ever sort her out, lying in her usual puddle of piss with her knickers around her head.
> 
> So there you have it nob features. You can fuck off now and play with your father's balls, or whatever pastime you dopey inbred fuckers get up to in the evenings.




Who said it was sophisticated? It was a visual treat and a well crafted, underrated B movie bit of sci fi. Sorry you didn't get it.

Wipe the foam from your mouth and look back over your own posts. Cause I ent a massive pedant I haven't pointed out any flaws in your posts (other than your massive misunderstanding of the film LOL). But theres a few niggling bits of inelagance. Not as mistake ridden as my posts, true, but then I don't care so long as comprehension isn't impaired. You clearly do.

My fathers balls, ah many was the night where I would play elaborate scrotal games with my fathers balls. He left us, but my balls ripened and now I have my own balls to toy with. One day you to might feel a stirring  in your groin Warsazawa. Untill then my hairles and pointless chum!


----------



## Stigmata (Jun 3, 2008)

Fuck, I really want to see Dark City now.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 3, 2008)

Stigmata said:


> Fuck, I really want to see Dark City now.




Torrent for great justice.

I'm Downloading the thing, Kurts finest snd Carpenters finest hour. and a half.

Much better than the original


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 3, 2008)

Stigmata said:


> Fuck, I really want to see Dark City now.



It's a good film.  My only real quibble with it was over the baddies, who were a little too camp and silly.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 3, 2008)

Actually, now that it has been spoilered to death in this thread, I don't know if I'd bother with Dark City, great film that it undoubtedly is.


----------



## The Groke (Jun 3, 2008)

kabbes said:
			
		

> Oh God, yes.  Worst film I've ever seen, I reckon.
> 
> Well -- I say "seen". I actually couldn't bear it for more than 30 minutes. One of only two films I've ever actually stopped watching having hired it from a DVD shop.






Robstarr said:


> I fully agree with you



Rubbish.


Brick is great.




			
				kabbes said:
			
		

> Here's the thing: you CAN NOT DO "hard-boiled" with a bunch of wanky So-Cal teenagers. It really doesn't work.



Which was surely a large part of the fun/point of the movie...beautifully illustrated by the scene when you realise they are conducting "serious business" in the basement of the family home and Pin's Mom cooks them all breakfast...


That aside:

There seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread as to what constitutes a "deep" movie anyway.

I am pretty sure that many of the films mentioned and slated thus far are not really pretending to wrestle with weighty themes or attempting to offer searing insights in to the human condition but are "merely" cinematic entertainment and exist purely to tell a story.


----------



## Gromit (Jun 3, 2008)

kabbes said:


> Actually, now that it has been spoilered to death in this thread, I don't know if I'd bother with Dark City, great film that it undoubtedly is.


 
Watch it, You get to see Mellisa George from Neighbours nekid. She is da hawt 

Any enjoyment you get after that is a bonus.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 3, 2008)

Actually Brick sounds quite good.

*Trots off to check it out*


----------



## The Groke (Jun 3, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Actually Brick sounds quite good.
> 
> *Trots off to check it out*



It is ace.

Gordon Lofty-hemenyhomonywtf.../Him out of 3rd Rock from the Sun is brilliant in it.

It can be a little hard to follow in places due to the dense, fast, often quiet dialogue which incorporates some odd slang/dialect which I didn't all get, but it is worth the effort.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 3, 2008)

Oh yes, that's right -- the fact that you can barely even hear 50% of the dialogue in Brick doesn't help.  But then, the other 50% of the dialogue is laughable pap in any case.

By all means watch Brick.  Watch any and every film -- make your own judgements about them.  I am amazed that anyone can react to Brick in any way other than with utter irritation.  But then, I am amazed about lots of things.  Who knows?  Some people like it -- you might too.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Jun 4, 2008)

vogonity said:


> Death in Venice: add Thomas Mann's book, the beauty of Venice, Mahler's music and Dirk Bogarde and what do you get? Over-dressed, under-written, self-indulgent *shite*.


I watched twenty minutes' worth on Monday night and another fifty last night. So far nothing's actually happened but I have to say the ladies' hats are extraordinary. I keep having to rewind to have another look.


----------



## Spion (Jun 4, 2008)

Donnie Darko I liked. And American Beauty. I knew nothing about either of em before I went and don't remember checking on audience reaction while at the cinema. It helps not to build up an image of what you think some people might think of a film before/during watching it. Otherwise the snob part of your brain is constantly trying to decide, 'Oooh, should I like this, those people I think are idiots might like it too, then I'll think I'm an idiot.' Just watch the film.

I also liked Apoc Now, but then I saw that yonks ago, kind of grew up with it in my early 20s, with many a watching


----------



## Gromit (Jun 4, 2008)

Pee Wee's Big Adventure.

Its not the hard hitting political insight everyone makes out it is.


----------



## Santino (Jun 4, 2008)

Spion said:


> It helps not to build up an image of what you think some people might think of a film before/during watching it. Otherwise the snob part of your brain is constantly trying to decide, 'Oooh, should I like this, those people I think are idiots might like it too, then I'll think I'm an idiot.' Just watch the film.


If only we were all as wise as you.


----------



## Santino (Jun 4, 2008)

Marius said:


> Pee Wee's Big Adventure.
> 
> Its not the hard hitting political insight everyone makes out it is.


But it works on so many levels.

Levels 3 and 5 are particularly good. Level 8 is overrated though.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

Alex B said:


> But it works on so many levels.
> 
> Levels 3 and 5 are particularly good. Level 8 is overrated though.



Is Level 8 the one where you have to kill the Boss monster with a spade?


----------



## Santino (Jun 4, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Is Level 8 the one where you have to kill the Boss monster with a spade?


No, that's 9. Level 8 is the one that undermines the patriarchical view that there is such a thing as objective knowledge and argues that science should be viewed as a social construct.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

Alex B said:


> No, that's 9. Level 8 is the one that undermines the patriarchical view that there is such a thing as objective knowledge and argues that science should be viewed as a social construct.



Good ole Pee Wee


----------



## vogonity (Jun 4, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


> I watched twenty minutes' worth on Monday night and another fifty last night. So far nothing's actually happened but I have to say the ladies' hats are extraordinary. I keep having to rewind to have another look.


Granted, the clothes are very good-looking...


----------



## Santino (Jun 4, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Good ole Pee Wee


Can't say I agree with his views on post-capitalist anarcho-syndicalism though.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Can't say I agree with his views on post-capitalist anarcho-syndicalism though.



he missed that lecture - he was having a wank in a cinema instead.


----------



## dodgepot (Jun 4, 2008)

goldenecitrone said:


> Has anyone mentioned 'The Matrix'? Amazingly banal.



a terrible film. made worse by making people think that long leather coats are actually cool.



El Jefe said:


> It's like a teenager's first trip.
> 
> "imagine right, if we were  just brains in vats, yeh"
> 
> It's like Max Freakout writing sci-fi


----------



## London_Calling (Jun 4, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Level 8 is overrated though.


Agree, though Mark King's slap bass guitar style was inniv . . .inevit . . .ininit . . .new in its day.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

London_Calling said:


> Agree, though Mark King's slap bass guitar style was inniv . . .inevit . . .ininit . . .new in its day.



I liked the original version of this post better


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

Little Miss Sunshine. Even the great Alan Arkin couldn't save this cliche ridden, hey-we're-wacky, dysfunctional family freak fest. Too much box ticking, not enough script, zero subtlety.


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Little Miss Sunshine. Even the great Alan Arkin couldn't save this cliche ridden, hey-we're-wacky, dysfunctional family freak fest. Too much box ticking, not enough script, zero subtlety.



I liked it


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Little Miss Sunshine. Even the great Alan Arkin couldn't save this cliche ridden, hey-we're-wacky, dysfunctional family freak fest. Too much box ticking, not enough script, zero subtlety.



was it meant to be deep and meaningful then?

i just nearly fell off my couch at the end bit


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 4, 2008)

I wouldn't say LMS was trying to be deep though.  But I did find it overrated.  TBH the only bit I found all that funny was the cop/porno mag/dead body scene.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

Oh good lord.  Can something like "Little Miss Sunshine" not just be _funny_, without people reading too much into it and then slagging it off because of what they have attempted to read into it?  That dance at the end was fucking awesome and the grandfather was the nuts.  Great film.  But then, I also fucking love The Matrix (SLOW MOTION KUNG FU, FFS), so what do I know?


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 4, 2008)

Yeah I'm astonished LMS has even been mentioned in this thread


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 4, 2008)

kabbes said:


> Oh good lord.  Can something like "Little Miss Sunshine" not just be _funny_, without people reading too much into it and then slagging it off because of what they have attempted to read into it?  That dance at the end was fucking awesome and the grandfather was the nuts.  Great film.  But then, I also fucking love The Matrix (SLOW MOTION KUNG FU, FFS), so what do I know?



Yeh, it's a sweet funny movie, no pretensions to depth at all.


----------



## onemonkey (Jun 4, 2008)

The Abyss wasn't very deep.


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Yeh, it's a sweet funny movie, no pretensions to depth at all.



Then why all the set-piece characters? The dysfunctional family vs the 'normal' families, the non-traditional girl entering a beauty contest, the Nietzsche reading teen, the Proust scholar gay uncle, etc. Of course it was trying to say something and be meaningful.


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Then why all the set-piece characters? The dysfunctional family vs the 'normal' families, the non-traditional girl entering a beauty contest, the Nietzsche reading teen, the Proust scholar gay uncle, etc. Of course it was trying to say something and be meaningful.



go on then. what was it trying to say?  cos I just thought it was funny


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

kabbes said:


> Oh good lord.  Can something like "Little Miss Sunshine" not just be _funny_, without people reading too much into it and then slagging it off because of what they have attempted to read into it?  That dance at the end was fucking awesome and the grandfather was the nuts.  Great film.  But then, I also fucking love The Matrix (SLOW MOTION KUNG FU, FFS), so what do I know?



Tell me what I 'attempted' to read into it, oh wise one.


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

sojourner said:


> go on then. what was it trying to say?  cos I just thought it was funny



So the use of humour says nothing now, does it? Humour/tragedy two sides of the same coin.

As I said previously, my dislike of it was based on the box ticking generic outsider characters it placed as 'different' from 'everyone else'. The use of the highly sexualised pre-teens in beauty pagent was clearly saying _something_, and the little girl from the (forgotten the name) family was pitched as the outsider who didn't stand a chance, but should do it anyway for her own self-esteem. 

As for the rest of the characters, it was all about accepting that you are a failure (in the conventional sense) - the Father (failed salesman), academic (failure in love), teen boy (failure in joining the airforce), etc.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 4, 2008)

Oh bollocks.  We could interpret just about anything as 'trying to be deep' if we followed your line of reasoning...


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

There you go -- that's what you were reading into it.

And, incidentally, none of that is particularly the same thing as "depth".  Metaphor and characterisations and even pathos or poignancy do not mean that it is supposed to be "deep" any more than being French means that it is supposed to be deep.  Set your sights a little higher, dude.


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> So the use of humour says nothing now, does it? Humour/tragedy two sides of the same coin.
> 
> As I said previously, my dislike of it was based on the box ticking generic outsider characters it placed as 'different' from 'everyone else'. The use of the highly sexualised pre-teens in beauty pagent was clearly saying _something_, and the little girl from the (forgotten the name) family was pitched as the outsider who didn't stand a chance, but should do it anyway for her own self-esteem.
> 
> As for the rest of the characters, it was all about accepting that you are a failure (in the conventional sense) - the Father (failed salesman), academic (failure in love), teen boy (failure in joining the airforce), etc.



that's....not what I would call deep and meaningful.


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

kabbes said:


> There you go -- that's what you were reading into it.
> 
> And, incidentally, none of that is particularly the same thing as "depth".  Metaphor and characterisations and even pathos or poignancy do not mean that it is supposed to be "deep" any more than being French means that it is supposed to be deep.  Set your sights a little higher, dude.



'Reading into it' - it's there, in the script, on the film. What else am I supposed to do? Take someone else's interpretation and accept it? It appears people are getting irritated simply because they like the film and my take is different.

Yes, I know that being French does not mean depth. Thanks for setting me straight. You really are most helpful spreading wisdom from your ivory tower.

Where there's a point being made, a comment upon society, and a specific use of characterisation it suggests depth. A lot of people seemed to connect with the film, which suggests that it was more than merely the fluff others seem to be suggesting.


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Where there's a point being made, a comment upon society, and a specific use of characterisation it suggests depth. A lot of people seemed to connect with the film, which suggests that it was more than merely the fluff others seem to be suggesting.



It was hysterically funny at the end, is what I'm suggesting.  The dance, and the realisation that THIS was what grandad has been teaching her! That's not fluff - that's HUMOUR.


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Oh bollocks.  We could interpret just about anything as 'trying to be deep' if we followed your line of reasoning...



Not really, no. If you can't see the commentary that's being attempted in LMS that's your problem. Just because something is funny, or attempts to be funny, doesn't mean it isn't conveying some deeper emotion.

Are the rules here that a film must be 'serious'/non-funny in order to be considered?


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Not really, no. If you can't see the commentary that's being attempted in LMS that's your problem. Just because something is funny, or attempts to be funny, doesn't mean it isn't conveying some deeper emotion.
> 
> Are the rules here that a film must be 'serious'/non-funny in order to be considered?



don't get so narked about it, it ain't WORF it.  look, it's all subjective, right?  we're just talking about it.


----------



## jbob (Jun 4, 2008)

sojourner said:


> don't get so narked about it, it ain't WORF it.  look, it's all subjective, right?  we're just talking about it.



Heh, okay. You're right  Just snotty cunts like Kabbes piss me off.


----------



## Santino (Jun 4, 2008)

jbob said:


> Just snotty cunts like Kabbes piss me off.


The ironing is delicious.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

Funny, ain't it?  The snotty one is apparently the one saying that it's all just a larf.  Whereas the one insisting on "depth" in a lighthearted comedy is, apparently, just a kool dood or something.  Despite the fact that *he* is the only peron saying that there is depth there... and then he wants to slag it off for having no depth.  Oh, the larks!


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

(Incidentally, bobby-boy, I wasn't suggesting that it was *you* mistaking "French" for "depth".  Read the words on the page, not your wishful thinking about what they are supposed to mean.  Apparently you like reading stuff into stuff though, so what can I expect, really?)


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

a tad overly snotty there kabbes, don't you think?


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

Hey, once somebody is accusing you of being snotty anyway, you might as well give them what they are asking for.  He wants snotty, so I'll show him snotty.


----------



## sojourner (Jun 4, 2008)

now that's what I CALL grown up!


----------



## kabbes (Jun 4, 2008)

That's overrated


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 4, 2008)

Any film with Kinnear in it is automatically up itself.   Surely that's a given?

Jersey Girl.   That thinks it is deep and meaningful, but it's crap.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 4, 2008)

Here's a controversial one. I enjoyed Natural Born Killers a lot. Great visual, excellent soundtrack, and a little sideswipe at media prurience.

But no way near as deep as it thinks it is ( or, gives Stones commentary and others eulogising, no way near as deep as he and others think it is)


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 5, 2008)

Brainaddict said:


> Pan's Labyrinth - evil murderous facists are evil and should be fought. Thanks.
> .



If that's all you got out of Pan's Labyrinth, you weren't really paying attention. Unless you thought there was a serious injunction to fight the fash by the unconventional weaponry of fairytale, a method largely untried since the days of the Nibelungenlied.


----------



## andy2002 (Jun 5, 2008)

Donnie Darko
Closer (the Jude Law one)
Magnolia
Shawshank Redemption


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jun 5, 2008)

isvicthere? said:


> If that's all you got out of Pan's Labyrinth, you weren't really paying attention. Unless you thought there was a serious injunction to fight the fash by the unconventional weaponry of fairytale, a method largely untried since the days of the Nibelungenlied.



I found Pans Labyrinth unsatisfying too. Like a poundshop version of a Jeun Pierre Jeunet film. Good concept, bad execution.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Jun 6, 2008)

*Death In Venice*



Donna Ferentes said:


> I watched twenty minutes' worth on Monday night and another fifty last night. So far nothing's actually happened but I have to say the ladies' hats are extraordinary. I keep having to rewind to have another look.


Well, I watched the last hour last night and I have to say I won't be bothering again. I was only able to keep myself entertained by shouting "get your hand off your hip you little tart"  at Björn Andrésen and confusing Romolo Valli with Terry Jones.


----------



## albionism (Jun 6, 2008)

Zodiac...fucks sake


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jun 6, 2008)

A History of Violence - Utter toss


----------



## andy2002 (Jun 6, 2008)

Smoky said:


> A History of Violence - Utter toss



The graphic novel it's based on pisses all over that film.


----------



## Scaggs (Jun 6, 2008)

I think, going by the script, that 'Igby Goes Down' was trying to be 'deep & meaningful' but I fucking hated it! Rich American kid with crap mother and schizophrenic dad has a hard time. Unbelievably depressing and boring toss.

Agree about 'lost in translation' too. It didn't help that I can't stand Bill Murry mind.


----------



## Alicia (Jun 6, 2008)

Donna Ferentes said:


> Well, I watched the last hour last night and I have to say I won't be bothering again. I was only able to keep myself entertained by shouting "get your hand off your hip you little tart"  at Björn Andrésen and confusing Romolo Valli with Terry Jones.



I found Death in Venice deep and meaningful...and Tadzio's beauty  insuperable  (despite hand and hip).
Most pretentious film: Vanilla Sky, Lost in translation.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jun 6, 2008)

Citizen Kane

Can't believe how this film regularly makes it into the top 5 of the best ever lists. Pioneering in terms of cinematic effects - maybe... apart from that, SNORE


----------



## CRI (Jun 6, 2008)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> American cinema in 25 words or less.



I think Siskel and Ebert devoted one of their film review shows about 20 years ago to American movies about Vietnam - Rambo, Apocalypse Now, Coming Home, etc. called "This Time We Win."

Alot of people raved about "Born on the Fourth of July" as being a radical departure, but I couldn't get beyond the dodgy fake facial hair.


----------



## CRI (Jun 6, 2008)

Oh, and I loved Little Miss Sunshine - one of the few films where I laughed outloud in the cinema.  I liked the fact that it resisted the temptation for a predictable "happy ending" like most American films do.   The message in the end was, "it's okay to be a failure," which goes well against the grain of American "values."  That's cool in itself.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 6, 2008)

DapperDonDamaja said:


> I found Pans Labyrinth unsatisfying too. Like a poundshop version of a Jeun Pierre Jeunet film. Good concept, bad execution.



Fair enough. What I was taking issue with, however, was the to my mind absurd post suggesting the film was primarily a clumsy polemic against the fascists in the Spanish Civil War.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 6, 2008)

It was a great film

That said, I just watched the Devil's Backbone and that was arguably even greater.

I couldn't help but feel that Pan's Labyrinth, at times, wasn't quite sure what it wanted to be.  Did it want to be a pure fantasy film, or did it want to use fantasy as allegory?  It was a little muddled.

But the Devil's Backbone is a purely great, great horror film, and has gone straight into my list of 'classy, shit-scary, but not at all gory' horror films, along with The Others, Dark Water (Japanese one), The Shining and Paperhouse


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jun 6, 2008)

isvicthere? said:


> Fair enough. What I was taking issue with, however, was the to my mind absurd post suggesting the film was primarily a clumsy polemic against the fascists in the Spanish Civil War.



The dichotomy within the film was great, but I wished it would have gone further. The war scenes had the same fuzzy kind of fantasy imagery as the fantasy scenes. Beyond this, the character work grated on me. The baddies were far too dyed in the wool, and many of the tics supposed to flesh out the secondary characters were contrived (the stammering guy, for instance). I felt very clearly the hand of the director trying to hammer his points home rather than leaving me to feel what I wanted from it. In this sense it was a very linear film (in the exact way in that a David Lynch film is not), and this I didn't like.


----------



## the button (Jun 6, 2008)

andy2002 said:


> Donnie Darko



Fucking right. Even a _teenager_ who thought that film was "deep, man," would be a wanker.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 6, 2008)

Donnie Darko is one of the best films of the decade.  I can see why there's a backlash against it of course. But when I was watching it I was just entranced for the whole film, which very rarely happens to me these days...


----------



## 9jack9 (Jun 9, 2008)

Quills
Shadow of the Vampire


----------



## Socialist Cynic (Jun 9, 2008)

Any of the Tom Cruise films when he’s been trying to get an Oscar (Minority report, that one where he was a grey-haired hitman etc)


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 9, 2008)

Socialist Cynic said:


> Any of the Tom Cruise films when he’s been trying to get an Oscar (Minority report, that one where he was a grey-haired hitman etc)



Those two were just good films.  I didn't think they were trying to be deep.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2008)

Howard the Duck


----------



## smmudge (Jun 9, 2008)

ajk said:


> The Fountain, however, was unmitigated toss.  Fancied itself as dancing the line between pretentiousness and wisdom, in reality it was as if some of the more "lightweight" pizza-box threads from the Philosophy forum had been adapted for the big screen by a film student with a head injury.  And I quite like Aronofsky.



Absolutely, and Sky, or is it Virgin, or whoever writes the synopsis for the movie channels, described it as 'avant-garde'! Like hell is it.

Mine are The Crow and Blade Runner.


----------



## warszawa (Jun 9, 2008)

smmudge said:


> Mine are The Crow and Blade Runner.



How dare you say those two in he same sentence.


----------



## killer b (Jun 9, 2008)

9jack9 said:


> Shadow of the Vampire



shadow of the vampire wasn't trying to be deep! and it's ace...


----------



## El Jefe (Jun 9, 2008)

There are some very very weird nominations on this thread that IMO had no pretensions to depth.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 9, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> Donnie Darko is one of the best films of the decade.  I can see why there's a backlash against it of course. But when I was watching it I was just entranced for the whole film, which very rarely happens to me these days...



It was clever rather than deep I thought. The central theme of the film is time travel ffs, not something it's really possible to take overly seriously


----------



## foo (Jun 9, 2008)

Sex in the City.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 9, 2008)

smmudge said:


> Absolutely, and Sky, or is it Virgin, or whoever writes the synopsis for the movie channels, described it as 'avant-garde'! Like hell is it.
> 
> Mine are The Crow and Blade Runner.



How the fuck is the Crow trying to be deep?


----------



## jannerboyuk (Jun 10, 2008)

kabbes said:


> Oh God, yes.  Worst film I've ever seen, I reckon.
> 
> Well -- I say "seen".  I actually couldn't bear it for more than 30 minutes.  One of only two films I've ever actually stopped watching having hired it from a DVD shop.  Completely awful in every way.  Here's the thing: you CAN NOT DO "hard-boiled" with a bunch of wanky So-Cal teenagers.  It really doesn't work.



Actually it does. You just need to give it a chance. Brilliant film.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 10, 2008)

jannerboyuk said:


> Actually it does. You just need to give it a chance. Brilliant film.



^This. I loved it. Dunno about deep but the direction was superb.


----------



## smmudge (Jun 10, 2008)

RenegadeDog said:


> How the fuck is the Crow trying to be deep?



Yes, quite. Some people seem to think it has hidden depths but none that I've ever found.


----------



## The Groke (Jun 10, 2008)

jannerboyuk said:


> Actually it does. You just need to give it a chance. Brilliant film.





SpookyFrank said:


> ^This. I loved it. Dunno about deep but the direction was superb.



Good. Glad I am not alone on this one.

Renegadedog, did you get a chance to watch it yet?


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 11, 2008)

Arrived here after watching Magnolia,  certainly tries to be deep. But was just shit.

Can't understand the Donnie Darko rants either, top film I reckon. Might be it was just one of the big 'clever plot' films teenagers at the time would've seen and people might read a bit much into but I don't think it's deep or tries to be.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 11, 2008)

Magnolia is an awesome film - can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it


----------



## mentalchik (Jun 11, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> Magnolia is an awesome film - can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it



I liked it very much !


----------



## debaser (Jun 11, 2008)

Brick was excellent It wasn't trying to be deep. Just an exercise in mixing genre and style, very effective it was too..


----------



## winterinmoscow (Jun 11, 2008)

Fargo


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 12, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> Magnolia is an awesome film - can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it



The following day I think I should probably re-watch. I was really enjoying it but had to stop it a few times and kept thinking it should be ending. 

I really thought it was ending when everyone was singing then while everything was being tied up I wasn't taking enough notice.


----------



## dodgepot (Jun 12, 2008)

winterinmoscow said:


> Fargo



fargo, _crap?_ 

it's anything but.


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jun 12, 2008)

Swarfega said:


> Good. Glad I am not alone on this one.
> 
> Renegadedog, did you get a chance to watch it yet?



No, I found a version on torrents but it wouldn't download


----------



## ChrisFilter (Jun 12, 2008)

Orang Utan said:


> Magnolia is an awesome film - can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it



Quite, I fucking loved it. One of my favourites.

Agree with Brick being shite.

I used to think The Crow was really profound when I was a kid. I had 'It can't rain all the time' written on my bag. I used the video and my love of it to get some when accompanying girls babysitting.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 13, 2008)

Anyone seen the recent french film >  Heartbeat Detector  ?   seriously dodgy plot involving corporate culture and genocide, didn't convince.  Also crap viewing in UK with subtitles ruining what was supposed to be the climax of the film.

Good performance again from Mathieu Amalric but doesn't stop the film sinking.


----------



## Homeless Mal (Jun 13, 2008)

Into the Wild

self indulgent crap crap crap


----------



## ChrisC (Jun 13, 2008)

Solaris, WTF? He loved his wife so much! So...?


----------



## october_lost (Aug 25, 2008)

Alex B said:


> Cool Runnings?



Was on in the background today, meant to be a bit of feel good film but was really badly done.


----------



## laptop (Aug 26, 2008)

ChrisC said:


> Solaris, WTF? He loved his wife so much! So...?



I deduce that you watched the wrong _Solaris_...


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Aug 26, 2008)

DapperDonDamaja said:


> Citizen Kane
> 
> Can't believe how this film regularly makes it into the top 5 of the best ever lists. Pioneering in terms of cinematic effects - maybe... apart from that, SNORE


At last! Someone who feels the same about this turgid, pretentious crock of shite!

I know a film buff who said Welles nicked a lot of the effects from earlier films btw.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Aug 26, 2008)

Bitter Moon - first film I ever walked out of.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 26, 2008)

Casshern

unless the deep and meaninfull bit were intentionally tongue in cheek crap


----------



## Dr. Furface (Aug 26, 2008)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Anyone seen the recent french film >  Heartbeat Detector  ?   seriously dodgy plot involving corporate culture and genocide, didn't convince.  Also crap viewing in UK with subtitles ruining what was supposed to be the climax of the film.
> 
> Good performance again from Mathieu Amalric but doesn't stop the film sinking.


Oh god yes, that really sucked. It sounded interesting in reviews and it started off ok for the first 20/30 mins, but then it got incresingly pretentious and incoherent, and in the end it was just tedious. One of the most disappointing films I've seen for a long time.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 30, 2008)

I've found a new one: The Fountain. Truly abysmal. Unintentionally hilarious at times though.


----------



## jonnoboy (Jan 4, 2009)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe 'say' is the wrong word. 'Provide a new way of looking at' would be better - all art should do that.



debated whether or not to respond for a while, realised the possible futility in either and decided to krishnamurti it for my own entertainment.

first i'd like to apologise for what i'm about to say, it's long and probably pointless.

lately i've found myself seeing less and less i percieve as new.
i ask is this maturity, is it because i think a lot, am i becoming jaded, broadening my horizons, learning, depressed, enlightened, losing imagination?.. and many other questions.

i imagine it may be a common thing anyway, i am 22 and have not seen a new perspective (which i've not imagined or used) in any art bar andy kaufman for six months.

the rate at which i've felt like i've seen something before is multiplying, to a point at which i have started just to appreciate things that provide one of the ways of looking which i prefer.

END OF BULLSHIT

anyway donnie darko was entertaining but crap. 
not sure if the film makers set out to make it deep meaningful, but a lot of people who i know thought it was, and they were tossers.
it's hard to type irony but... and i was way more depressed than any of those farts who thought it was.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 4, 2009)

jonnoboy said:


> lately i've found myself seeing less and less i percieve as new.
> i ask is this maturity, is it because i think a lot, am i becoming jaded, broadening my horizons, learning, depressed, enlightened, losing imagination?.. and many other questions.
> 
> i imagine it may be a common thing anyway, i am 22 and have not seen a new perspective (which i've not imagined or used) in any art bar andy kaufman for six months.


I commend to you a semi-defunct artistic form: books. Due to the lack of budgetary constrainst they tend to represent a much wider range of perspectives than films.


----------



## jonnoboy (Jan 4, 2009)

Brainaddict said:


> I commend to you a semi-defunct artistic form: books. Due to the lack of budgetary constrainst they tend to represent a much wider range of perspectives than films.



i retract my previous statement, you sir/madam are right. i should have said apart from books.... i genuinely thank you.
i do read a bit, used to a lot til i  became incredibly lazy. anyway thanks again. good advice.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jan 4, 2009)

donnie darko was entertaining but not in any way "deep".  The weirdo spooky sci-fi/fantasy aspect of it was very weak.


----------



## october_lost (Jan 4, 2009)

This weekend I spent 5 and a half hours watching 1900 and concluded it was one of the worst films Ive seen in sometime. Considering the on screen talent (De Niro, Depardieu) they treated the subject matter with no sympathy, with a complete lack of insight and with little character development. Rubbish.


----------

