Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:30 pm
You forgot "British". :pUri wrote:you can have all the gracious, dotting little aunts.
Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board
The internet's oldest Oscar discussion forum.
https://www.uaadb.com/
The Official Review Thread of 2009
Page 5 of 21
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:57 pm
More witless, arch, smug condescension from the Coens -- what a surprise!
Arch, smug, and condescending I can understand, but how is this witless?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:45 pm
Oy vey, take zwei – you can have all the gracious, dotting little aunts you want, let us keep the klaftes.Big Magilla wrote:I had no problem with the rabbi, it was the freakin' relatives I couldn't stand.Damien wrote:ROTFLMAO!Uri wrote:You can have all the immaculate, sweet nature nuns you want, let us keep the nagging, mean spirited rabbis, thank you.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:30 pm
I had no problem with the rabbi, it was the freakin' relatives I couldn't stand.Damien wrote:ROTFLMAO!Uri wrote:You can have all the immaculate, sweet nature nuns you want, let us keep the nagging, mean spirited rabbis, thank you.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:51 am
ROTFLMAO!Uri wrote:You can have all the immaculate, sweet nature nuns you want, let us keep the nagging, mean spirited rabbis, thank you.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:42 am
I saw It's Complicated. By Far the best Nancy Meyers film ever, or, in other words, harmless. Anyway, I came up with two observations. One – this movie should be seen as a part of a double feature with Lorna's Silence. Seeing these two back to back is the best and easiest way to illustrate what's fucked up in Western society. Second – of all the Americans films I saw recently, there are only two I can consider better than IC – Single/Serious Man. The others, though some are certainly more interesting or thought provoking or aiming higher, were worse: 500 Days of Summer (yes, yes, I'm going to hell for this one), Avatar, Brothers, The Rebound, Whatever Works, Inglorious Basterds, Cheri, Sherlock Holmes, Nine. There must be something malignantly wrong about American cinema if such a trivial, marginally competent fluff such as IC is in the top quarter of any given group of films. And it makes me sad, very sad.
Edited By Uri on 1263908643
Edited By Uri on 1263908643
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 6:36 am
Uri wrote:You can have all the immaculate, sweet nature nuns you want, let us keep the nagging, mean spirited rabbis, thank you.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 6:18 am
You can have all the immaculate, sweet nature nuns you want, let us keep the nagging, mean spirited rabbis, thank you.Big Magilla wrote:Not on Sabin's birthday!Damien wrote:A Serious Man
More witless, arch, smug condescension from the Coens -- what a surprise! As a friend of mine said about these assholes, why create characters if all you're going to do is show contempt for them. Partially salvaged by Roger Deakins's cinematography and knowing production and costume design.
3/10
I found it a mixed bag. Michael Stuhlberg is a definite find, but some of the other characters were written and played way too broad and I hated the ending.
I generally like the Coens, but I approach all their films with a bit of trepidation. Fargo was their highpoint for me and No Country for Old Men and Burn After Reading were welcome surprises after several failures in the 00s.
At the other end of the scale I hate Barton Fink, The Hudsucker Proxy, Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers and Paris j'taime and have yet to get what all the fuss is about The Big Liebowski.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 5:51 am
Not on Sabin's birthday!Damien wrote:A Serious Man
More witless, arch, smug condescension from the Coens -- what a surprise! As a friend of mine said about these assholes, why create characters if all you're going to do is show contempt for them. Partially salvaged by Roger Deakins's cinematography and knowing production and costume design.
3/10
I found it a mixed bag. Michael Stuhlberg is a definite find, but some of the other characters were written and played way too broad and I hated the ending.
I generally like the Coens, but I approach all their films with a bit of trepidation. Fargo was their highpoint for me and No Country for Old Men and Burn After Reading were welcome surprises after several failures in the 00s.
At the other end of the scale I hate Barton Fink, The Hudsucker Proxy, Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers and Paris j'taime and have yet to get what all the fuss is about The Big Liebowski.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:46 am
A Serious Man
More witless, arch, smug condescension from the Coens -- what a surprise! As a friend of mine said about these assholes, why create characters if all you're going to do is show contempt for them. Partially salvaged by Roger Deakins's cinematography and knowing production and costume design.
3/10
More witless, arch, smug condescension from the Coens -- what a surprise! As a friend of mine said about these assholes, why create characters if all you're going to do is show contempt for them. Partially salvaged by Roger Deakins's cinematography and knowing production and costume design.
3/10
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:13 am
From the alternative story which is not told.Sabin wrote:From the scenario or from the fatalist quality I'm describing?It's very careful to get as far as it can from THAT, actually.The Hurt Locker comes so achingly close to this.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:09 am
I wouldn't count on Tobey, despite the Globe nomination. Bridges, Clooney and Firth are definites. Freeman is highly likely, although if there is widespread indifference to Invictus he might be shunted aside (though more likely, folks will vote for him because they'll consider it voting for Nelson Mandela). That leaves 4 or 5 others fighting for the 5th spot. I'd say the most likely would be Jeremy Renner or Viggo Mortensen. (Go Viggo!)
Edited By Damien on 1263886050
Edited By Damien on 1263886050
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:17 am
A chance, yes, but a slim one behind Bridges, Clooney, Firth, Renner, Freeman, Mortensen, Foster, Damon and maybe even Copley.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:18 am
Any chance of a Tobey Maguire nomination?Damien wrote:Brothers (Jim Sheridan)
There are inconsistencies in narrative, characteriazations and logic but this character study of the traumatic aftermath of traumatic war experiences is quite affecting and nicely acted -- Tobey Maguire does haunted extremely well. A solid piece of craftsmmanship on Jim Sheridan's part and if it veers into melodrama now and then and has little intellectual depth (or point of view on the war in Afghanastan), this small film still works on an emotional level.
6/10
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:10 pm
Brothers (Jim Sheridan)
There are inconsistencies in narrative, characteriazations and logic but this character study of the traumatic aftermath of traumatic war experiences is quite affecting and nicely acted -- Tobey Maguire does haunted extremely well. A solid piece of craftsmmanship on Jim Sheridan's part and if it veers into melodrama now and then and has little intellectual depth (or point of view on the war in Afghanastan), this small film still works on an emotional level. And there's one absolutely shocking sequence in the film that completely astonished me -- me with my 51 years of going to the movies.
6/10
Edited By Damien on 1263893570
There are inconsistencies in narrative, characteriazations and logic but this character study of the traumatic aftermath of traumatic war experiences is quite affecting and nicely acted -- Tobey Maguire does haunted extremely well. A solid piece of craftsmmanship on Jim Sheridan's part and if it veers into melodrama now and then and has little intellectual depth (or point of view on the war in Afghanastan), this small film still works on an emotional level. And there's one absolutely shocking sequence in the film that completely astonished me -- me with my 51 years of going to the movies.
6/10
Edited By Damien on 1263893570