|
Post by John on Apr 8, 2006 20:01:41 GMT -4
don't mind me, dan. i'm bored of ben stiller to be honest. i understand that he's likely only famous because of his two famous parents, but he's become tiresome. outside of 'flirting with disaster', he's really never done anything that remarkable.
ok, fine, if you're having a bad day, pop in zoolander, and that'll brighten your spirits. but really, i can't get why he's so popular.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 10, 2006 22:44:09 GMT -4
Here's one review I wrote for my school paper: ‘Kong’ Fully Revives Legacy The fight between Kong and the T-Rex are one of many stunning visual scenes in King Kong We can thank the 1933 version of King Kong for first getting Peter Jackson (as a boy growing up in New Zealand) interested in filmmaking when he. Also, we can credit Jackson for bringing the tale of King Kong to life once again, following an absence of thirty years. Finally, we can thank Jackson and his entire crew for making the storyline compelling, the visual effects stunning and ground-breaking, and the emotional “monkey-woman” connection surprisingly more involved than one might think. It seems after the Lord of the Rings trilogy was complete, most thought there was no way Jackson could outdo himself. He now has. The story is told to near perfection [Jackson’s selections for casting are dead on]. Take for example Jack Black, whose character Carl Denham is portrayed as a sly, sneaky devil who through good fortune and lying tactics is able to set course to Skull Island, a myth-shrouded island consisting of larger-than-life animals. Denham, a New York filmmaker on his last dime, barely escapes the city’s authorities all the while assembling a team for his “breakthrough film”. One of the members of Denham’s team is Ann Darrow, played by Naomi Watts, a sweet, innocent city girl who is doing her best in making a living in acting. The cunning Denham convinces her to come on board for the ride, along with Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody), an accomplished author and one of Ann’s idols. Though the boat ride is a little too long, (one of the few flaws in the movie), once the team arrives at the island, the action hardly lets up. Along the way, the crew encounters some incredible creatures. Upon their arrival, zombie-like natives attack them, forcing quite a drawback in their plans. Ann is captured by these natives, and Jack pleads for the rest of the group to launch a rescue mission, which they reluctantly accept. The group encounters a heard of dinosaurs, man-eating worms, and a host of horrible and strange beings. Jackson also employs the versatile Andy Serkis again in two different roles. Serkis playing the poor and pitiful creature, Gollum, distinguished himself in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. In Kong, Serkis not only plays the ship’s cook, but also creates the movements of Kong in remarkable fashion. The way Serkis controls Kong keeps viewers attached to their seats, so unless you can hold your bladder for three hours, you might want to make a stop to the restroom before this movie begins. Kong’s love for Ann creates a rare and successful emotional connection between the beast and the beauty. Jackson’s incredible skill in tying the audience into the story creates an almost physical pain as one views the sadness Kong feels. This remake could not have been better. These are the best visual effects I have ever seen, connected with a brilliant storyline and pretty much anything one could ask for in a movie (love, drama, action, suspense). Despite one or two plot holes, in my opinion King Kong is one of the best movies I have seen in a very long time. My rating: **** out of ****
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 10, 2006 23:18:11 GMT -4
Not a bad review, but I disagree with you.
I didn't think King Kong came close to Lord of the Rings. It coulda done without about an hour of stuff. I'd give it maybe a 2.5 or 3 out of 4, though people were more impressed with it than I was. I guess it was that it just didn't captivate me.
|
|
|
Post by sirphawk on Apr 10, 2006 23:38:22 GMT -4
Dodgeball- Seen it before, but I watched it again today. It was moderately funny, definetly had its moments. Stiller held the whole thing together, Vaughn didn't really have any big laughs. Descent movie, pretty funny. **1/2 out of **** I thought Vince Vaughn was the best thing about the movie.
|
|
DRE
6th Man
SLOX - Raptors
2008 SLOX Champions
Posts: 1,337
|
Post by DRE on Apr 10, 2006 23:39:43 GMT -4
Evidently Spurs isn't one that appreciates the subtle humor that Vince Vaughn normally provides.
-Dre
|
|
|
Post by sirphawk on Apr 10, 2006 23:49:02 GMT -4
Evidently Spurs isn't one that appreciates the subtle humor that Vince Vaughn normally provides. -Dre Maybe hes a Brad fan?
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 11, 2006 17:03:49 GMT -4
I like Vince Vaughn, I liked some of his lines in Dodgeball I just think Stiller was better.
I also liked Vaughn in Starsky and Hutch.
I just said he didnt have any "big laughs", but he certainly did have laughs, just not hilarious ones like some of what Stiller did.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 11, 2006 17:12:16 GMT -4
wow, i thought king kong was near absolute trash. there was little redeeming about the movie outside of special effects. maybe that's what some people live off of in the movies. i'll take a movie like capote every day over something like king kong. i couldn't stand any of the lord of the rings, but i thought they were far better than king kong in virtually every way except for maybe special effects. and after reading your review dan, i'd say i felt the absolute polar opposite of you. but hey, different opinions are good. i can tell that i probably like completely different movies than you which isn't a bad thing. i'm sure you must have loved brokeback mountain though.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 11, 2006 17:14:17 GMT -4
wow, i thought king kong was near absolute trash. there was little redeeming about the movie outside of special effects. maybe that's what some people live off of in the movies. i'll take a movie like capote every day over something like king kong. i couldn't stand any of the lord of the rings, but i thought they were far better than king kong in virtually every way except for maybe special effects. and after reading your review dan, i'd say i felt the absolute polar opposite of you. but hey, different opinions are good. i can tell that i probably like completely different movies than you which isn't a bad thing. i'm sure you must have loved brokeback mountain though. LOL. I liked Lord of the Rings, but I didn't really like King Kong a ton. It's one of those movies that the more I think about it, the less I like it
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 11, 2006 17:14:36 GMT -4
I just said he didnt have any "big laughs", but he certainly did have laughs, just not hilarious ones like some of what Stiller did. i'm very sure i never felt stiller has been hilarious in any of zoolander, dodge ball or starsky and hutch. to me, stiller is very average. i'm not really sure what he's really ever excelled in outside of 'flirting with disaster'. now i'm convinced we have completely different tastes in movies, dan.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 11, 2006 17:15:51 GMT -4
I liked Lord of the Rings, but I didn't really like King Kong a ton. It's one of those movies that the more I think about it, the less I like it time delay? my initial post was meant for spurs dan, but i think the moment the movie ended, i couldn't have liked king kong less.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 11, 2006 17:18:07 GMT -4
I liked Lord of the Rings, but I didn't really like King Kong a ton. It's one of those movies that the more I think about it, the less I like it time delay? my initial post was meant for spurs dan, but i think the moment the movie ended, i couldn't have liked king kong less. I know it was meant towards him, I was just commenting on your post. Anyways, I saw Inside Man the other night. It's pretty solid. I like Spike Lee's movies. I really liked Denzel and Clive Owen's characters, though there were some very predictable parts and Jodie Foster was pretty meh. Some parts coulda not been in there too
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Slough on Apr 11, 2006 17:36:28 GMT -4
Saw Bench Warmers- fucking movie is hilarious, but i was stoned. Guy who played Napolean Dynamite is hilarious and probably the funniest guy in the movie. David Spade is always classic, wasn't super impressed with Rob schnieder, i have seen better out of him. all in all on i give this movie:
4 1/2 blunts out of 5 blunts.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 11, 2006 18:38:17 GMT -4
I just said he didnt have any "big laughs", but he certainly did have laughs, just not hilarious ones like some of what Stiller did. i'm very sure i never felt stiller has been hilarious in any of zoolander, dodge ball or starsky and hutch. to me, stiller is very average. i'm not really sure what he's really ever excelled in outside of 'flirting with disaster'. now i'm convinced we have completely different tastes in movies, dan. Yeh, and thats ok
|
|
|
Post by Boyd on Apr 11, 2006 18:41:51 GMT -4
I like Ben Stiller, and I think he's a pretty decent actor. But I think Vince Vaughn is one of the more underrated actors in the business.
If you actually watch him, he not only has the funny comments, but his facial expressions, and how he carries himself through out a movie is priceless.
|
|