Having James Bond in a Austen movie would DEFINETLY make it more watchable. The only Austen film I'm a fan of is the Keira Knightley version...I think a parody with the two would be a interesting combination.

If I already posted about this in the previous thread, sorry XD I honestly can't remember!

Anyway, I saw the Time Traveler's Wife recently and was fairly under-whelmed. It was an OK movie but just didn't click with me. The characters were unrelatable and their struggles didn't interest me. The time travel aspect was the only cool part of it. The main theme seemed to be "two beautiful people in love, can't be together"...and not a lot of character development.

Winter's Bone--this is up for an Oscar for Jennifer Laurence's performance in the lead. I found this movie to be quite a bit different then the dvd case and trailer led me to believe--it promised it to be something of a thriler, with intense moments. The movie actually moved fairly slowly (not in a boring way though), and I wouldn't describe it as thriller at ALL. If anything it's a character/surroundings study of Ree's life in the hills of the Ozarks. I seriously doubt she'll win the Oscar simply because she's so new and she's up against big names like Natalie Portman, but she definetly deserved the nomination!

And I saw Casino Royale again, and have to say again how much I love it. As others have pointed out in the previous Past Movies thread, there's really a good amount of plot and character development to take it away from James Bond just being this hunky bloke who kills people Eva Green is breathtaking in her role and definetly is a lot more interesting and substantial then the Bond Girls in Quantum of Solace.

but I'll agree that Die another day (Although my favourite JB film) was a bit unrealistic, the explanation they give about how the car works is just rediculous!

According to IMDB's trivia about the movie, that idea actually is conceivable. Apparently, the military has worked on something that works like that although it doesn't work at close distants, just far away. I don't know if that's true, however, because IMDB isn't always accurate.

I do agree with everyone else that Daniel Craig is more down to earth as James Bond. However, I don't think he's supposed to be so down to earth. The suave and charm is a part of the James Bond character, in my opinion.

I definitely think Daniel Craig is the best Bond!
I Loved Casino Royal and Quantum of Solace!
Sean Connery was the first Bond I watched a long time ago, I always liked him as Bond and still do.
Pierce Brosnan is my other favorite, I thought he played Bond well.
But my favorite hands down is Daniel Craig.

Anyway, I saw the Time Traveler's Wife recently and was fairly under-whelmed. It was an OK movie but just didn't click with me.

My wife brought that home from the library several months ago and we were kind of ho-hum about it too. I mean the concept is interesting, but the whole thing just ended up not appealing to either of us in the long run. It's like they were trying to fuse romance/drama with sci-fi and that's hard to pull off. There was an old movie from back in the very early 80's called Time After Time (starring Malcolm McDowell and David Warner) where HG Wells holds a party to announce he's created a time machine, and Jack the Ripper (Warner), whose identity no one knows and who is present at the party, uses it to escape the authorities into the future, after which HG Wells goes in pursuit. It has been many years since I saw it, but I remember liking it a great deal. So it is possible to fuse the two genres, but quite difficult, as I said. Why do I get the feeling that GB is the only other one who might remember that movie?

Anyway, I saw the Time Traveler's Wife recently and was fairly under-whelmed. It was an OK movie but just didn't click with me.

My wife brought that home from the library several months ago and we were kind of ho-hum about it too. I mean the concept is interesting, but the whole thing just ended up not appealing to either of us in the long run.

My sister and I went to see that when it first released in theaters. We both enjoyed it well enough, but both left kind of ho-hum as well. Neither of us cares to see it again.

Why do I get the feeling that GB is the only other one who might remember that movie?

Actually, SL, I remember Time After Time. My college roommate at the time was really into that movie, and we watched it a number of times at the $1.00 cinema. (More recently, Ryadian's father, who is about the same age, has also watched and enjoyed this movie).

The premise was clever and David Warner makes a great villain. And Mary Steenburgen, who played Amy Robbins -

I've heard of Time After Time and possibly seen a little of it but the movie premise sounds very interesting. Anything H.G. Wells-related works for me and Jack the Ripper just adds a little more ooomph! to the proceedings.

okay so I saw "Avatar: The Last Airbender" (the live action version) and I was not impressed. why didn't anyone have accents? why were the scenes so confusing? the way I saw it, it was a bunch of stuff all jammed together.....it all happened way too fast. and to me, it didn't make any sense. and it also creeped me out. can someone help explain it to me?

just my two cents!

...it all happened way too fast. and to me, it didn't make any sense. and it also creeped me out. can someone help explain it to me?

Well...between you and I, I think it's about this bald kid with a arrow stenciled on his forehead. And he's got super powers. But he's been comatose for a 100 years or something, at least until some stock sidekick characters wake him up from his slumber. So the world's changed, the bullies are in charge, and the lead character (the bald kid) has to unlock new moves to fight the bad guys and win the day. Then there's this big battle at the end but no one really gets hurt and all the characters sort of stand around and look at one another with this "I'm obviously going to be in the sequel" look. This is as condensed of a version as I can provide.

Actually, SL, I remember Time After Time. My college roommate at the time was really into that movie, and we watched it a number of times at the $1.00 cinema. (More recently, Ryadian's father, who is about the same age, has also watched and enjoyed this movie).

It's been so long since I last saw it that I don't know if I'd still like Time After Time, but I'd like to see it again just to refresh my memory. I seem to recall it was Corey Feldman's debut in a feature film as some kid wandering around in the museum near the beginning of the movie who witnesses HG Wells arrival. And I had forgotten that Mary Steenburgen was in Back to the Future III...wow, she does have a penchant for showing up in time travel movies. One more and she wins a flux capacitor.

Yeah, you should really watch the TV show, Liberty. The movie is no good in any way, shape, or form (except, perhaps, the effects). The TV show is the one worth watching. I actually think you'd like it a lot. I've only heard good things from people who watch the show, whereas the movie gets a LOT of "meh" reactions.

So yeah, watch the show! You won't be disappointed.

That goes for you too SL.

P.S."Brooklyn!"

Well, last night I watched Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. I was hoping to like this but found myself not really caring very much for it in the end. Personally, I felt it was tad too brutal for an "action/adventure" film. A bit too realistic would probably be a better choice of words.

Also, I never found myself really liking any of the characters. A bad sign especially when you dislike your hero....

Production wise there's nothing to complain about. I did find it a bit funny that the French invasion uses what looks like medivial versions of WWII landing craft from D-Day.

All in all, a decent film but not one I would like to revisit. I much prefer the 2004 King Arthur "re-imagining" to this film.

2/5
--------------------------

Also, I recently re-watched Labyrinth (with David Bowie) and The Dark Knight with my cousins. Yeah, we have ecletic tastes in movies. Anyway, I still find the first film.... silly to the extreme, yet fun to watch. As for TDK, it's grown on me over repeated viewings. As long as I skip the torture scene with the Joker, it's a great (is dark) movie.

Labyrinth = 2/5
The Dark Knight = 5/5

Shadowlander: haha that about sums it up!

Rising_Star: my friend is an expert on the TV show version. I tried watching some of it, but I'm not a huge fan of cartoons, except PIXAR.....I might try again, but it's not my thing I guess.

It's been so long since I last saw it that I don't know if I'd still like Time After Time, but I'd like to see it again just to refresh my memory.

Ditto that. I suspect it might appear rather dated as an early-80s flick.

That's a rather amusing summary of The Last Airbender, Shadowlander. As others have noted, there's a lot more to the TV show than the live-action movie. Try it!

To be sure, condensing 20 half-hour episodes down to a movie means leaving a lot out, but the result disappointed the fans (those I know, anyway), of the original show. The pacing comes at warp speed and then there's the issue of changing pronunciations and the like. In my opinion, the series creators know how things should be pronounced, and that's that. A poor adaptation of good source material.

...and I was not impressed. why didn't anyone have accents? why were the scenes so confusing? the way I saw it, it was a bunch of stuff all jammed together.....it all happened way too fast. and to me, it didn't make any sense.

That pretty much sums up the responses I've seen from fans. On your first question, most of the characters in the original series didn't have accents (or only American ones) either.

This brief clip adapted from the 3rd-season episode "The Ember Island Players" became a popular 'review' of the movie among fans. "That wasn't a good play...but the effects were decent."

asdfdfyg... Pixar movies are not cartoons! Cartoons are hand-drawn or drawn on a computer but CGI is very different.

I haven't seen The Last Air-bender movie but I've seen the first series and I really enjoyed it. I've heard the only good thing about the movie are some of the special effects and the soundtrack. I think I'll pass on that one.