I saw the first half of a movie about an old man who's a janitor at the New York Diamond Exchange. who gets together with a woman and they steal all of the diamonds. I saw it on a plane and never got to finish it. It was set several decades ago, I believe. Does anyone know the name of this movie?
Bookwyrm, I wouldn't say The Prestige is depressing. It's very dark and sombre though. I haven't seen The Illusionist. I've heard it's good but I'm not really a fan of Edward Norton.
Currently watching:
Doctor Who - Season 11
I also liked Jimmy Stewart in Mr Smith Goes to Washington (Fabulous!) and of course It's a Wonderful Life.
Ah, yes! Same here, I enjoyed both quite a bit.
On The Illusionist: I saw that about a year or two ago, and I really enjoyed it. You're right, Booky, it was very "beautiful".
There are varying opinions in our family as to which is better: Illusionist or Prestige... One older brother says Illusionist, and the other says Prestige. I for one don't know--I haven't seen The Prestige--Though I would like to.
Avatar by Wunderkind_Lucy!
A few very brief comments:
Ryan, I fully agree with your thoughts on the ending of Neeson's Les Mis here. I really enjoyed the film, for the most part—recognizing that they couldn't (sadly) possibly include everything in the book—and thought Geoffrey Rush marvelous as Javert and Neeson as Valjean, but the ending did not sit right with me either.
narnian1, from your post here: why didn't you enjoy The Soloist? Have you read the book (it's a poignant and excellent read), of which the film was quite a faithful adaptation? I thought Jamie Foxx did a superb job of portraying Nathaniel Ayers! EDIT: Mind you, there were a few very minor scenes that were just silly and could easily have been left out to no loss. But the story, overall, I found gripping and poignant.
And I just have to say (once again) how I avoid any Keira Knightley movie, if at all possible. Her voice, those 5 expressions she chooses from - most things about her just bug me. (Although we have seen—and, in fact, own, all three Pirates movies. But they're much more for Jack Sparrow than anyone else. )
EDIT: And speaking of past movies ... we're seeing The Fellowship of the Ring on the big screen again this weekend, with the score performed live by a symphony orchestra and choir.
Signature by Narnian_Badger, thanks! (2013)
7,237 posts from Forum 1.0
I finally found out what movie it was that I was talking about. It's called Flawless and the reason it was so hard for me to find was because it takes place at the London Diamond Corporation not the New York Diamond Exchange. Also, it had a limited release in the US so that also made it hard to find. I finally found it by typing the right keywords into Bing.
I'm hoping to watch Ride with the Devil this weekend (my brother discovered it via Armchair General Magazine), but my older sibs get to preview it first. Anyone seen it?
Just over two weeks until our annual viewing of Arsenic and Old Lace (or Stinkin' Old Lace, as the kiddos have called it). I need to plan something for the party (but not elderberry wine, thank you!). *departs to browse the cooking thread*
SnowAngel
Christ is King.
And I just have to say (once again) how I avoid any Keira Knightley movie, if at all possible. Her voice, those 5 expressions she chooses from - most things about her just bug me.
Agreed! I know quite a few of her movies but as of tonight I've seen only four: Princess of Thieves and Oliver Twist [both of which I liked], Atonement *shudders*, and now Pride and Prejudice on the "Oxygen" network ... whatever. Ugh. What was wrong with the 1995 version?! It was PERFECT! Why remake perfection?! What was going on with the Bennets' house? It looked like a dump. I don't think they were that poorly off. And most of the casting in the 2005 version was just all wrong. Mr. Collins wasn't loathsome enough, Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley weren't likable enough, Mr. Bennet didn't seem bookwormish at all, and Judi Dench played Mrs. de Bourgh?! She plays historical roles all the time and yet she's never convincing in those roles. The only thing I liked her in was the Britcom "As Time Goes By." Every other time, Dench is the same. Anyway, Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet =
Incidentally, I wouldn't mind seeing Bend it like Beckham. Why? I have more faith in Ms. Nagra as an actress. And there's always Coming Home and Love Actually. Anyone's thoughts on those?
I'm going to go waaaay out on a limb here and mention a movie which I count among my utmost favorites. I say this with a bit of warning because the film has a great deal of profanity in it and will most definitely offend the more sensitive among you, however I still maintain it is truly one of the best Sci-Fi films ever made. And its name is Aliens.
I just watched the extended edition last night and was amazed at how perfectly the film is put together. The plot picks up very neatly from the end of Alien and pits Lt. Ellen Ripley, the heroine of that movie, against her former nemesis on the planet upon which the Nostromo originally set down "on company orders" to retrieve the specimen known as the "Xenomorph". Instead of civilian crewmembers this time Ripley is accompanied by the Colonial Marines, truly some of the most fearsome and machismo-laden group (and I include the female members of the unit in this) of soldiers you'll see on screen. The group is sent to investigate the terraforming station of Hadley's Hope on barren planet LV-426 after contact was lost several weeks prior, and the self-confident group finds themselves in way over their heads.
This movie garnered Sigourney Weaver (Ripley) an Academy Award nomination, something you don't normally see from films of the Sci-Fi genre and had a fantastic, brass and percussion heavy soundtrack by James Horner. I still love the sound of the martial cadence of the snare drums rat-tatting whenver the Marines are on screen. While I did not learn this until much later the film was essentially an allegory (of sorts) to the Vietnam War, where one side fielded a much superior level of sophisticated weaponry but had great trouble fighting against a foe that had more of a primitive guerilla war mindset. And I have to tell you, I love the sound of the M-41A Pulse Rifle firing, it's always a rush . The film also essentially jumpstarted the careers of Bill Paxton (Private Hudson) and Michael Biehn (Corporal Hicks) and they became staples of several of James Cameron's films afterwards.
Again, this is definitely not a film I would recommend to just anyone on here. There is heavy profanity as I stated before (this is a military unit up to their necks in trouble, after all) and this is going to ward off a good many folks. But I suspect a few on here have seen the film and maybe even love it as much as I do.
"Game over man! Game over!"
Kennel Keeper of Fenris Ulf
I actually prefer Alien to Aliens but both are great films (for different reasons). Alien is a brilliant horror/thriller movie and Aliens is a fantastic sci-fi/action (with some horror). Aliens: The Director's Cut is superior to it's cinema release but the original Alien is better than it's Director's Cut.
The less said about the other two, the better.
Currently watching:
Doctor Who - Season 11
Cool !!! W4J and Shadow and I are all on the same page (or at least in the same book) regarding the Alien franchise .
I agree with W4J's assessment that the first film is a Horror/Thriller and that Aliens is a Sci Fi/Action film. And I like both fairly equally. I'm going further out on a limb than Shadow or W4J though (hope it doesn't break ), because I actually liked the third and fourth installments too.
The third one is more Gothic Horror/Noir than anything, I enjoyed some of the Mystical themes. And the 4th is just pure popcorn Fun with a cast you rather hope doesn't get killed off. Alien: Resurrection is closer to it's Heavy Metal graphic novel roots than the other films, and as such is cartoonier, almost Anime-ish. But like I said a Fun Sci Fi/Action/Horror romp.
As Shadow says though, this franchise isn't for the kids .
GB
"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" -- Carl Sagan
I agree with W4J's assessment that the first film is a Horror/Thriller and that Aliens is a Sci Fi/Action film. And I like both fairly equally.
Yup, I agree, although Aliens does have horror elements to it as W4J said. The addition of the motion tracker and its unnerving "beep...beep...BEEP" really drove up the tension in that department as you could never see where the things were but you knew they were there nonetheless. It freaked me out, that's for sure!
The third one is more Gothic Horror/Noir than anything, I enjoyed some of the Mystical themes.
Good grief, GB. Everything with you is a "mystical theme". The 3rd one is watchable but it broke so many established rules that I simply could not take it seriously. I prefer to think it was Ripley having a bad dream during hypersleep.
And the 4th is just pure popcorn Fun with a cast you rather hope doesn't get killed off.
The 4th film is an abberation and an abomination. When I think of the ways that they could have done the plot, and how they ultimately settled on this one, I want to grab the entire development crew and slap them around relentlessley until having a xenomorph egg implanted in their chest cavity seemed like a better alternative. Phew...where do I begin?
You know what? I'm not going to go there. The scene which really brought it all home that probably my favorite film franchise was dead was:
I actually liked AvP better than Alien 3 and 4. Despite some flaws with the lore (a newborn xenomorph can take weeks in some cases to emerge, not just 30 minutes ) and I actually did care more about the characters in that case than I did for the movie's two "predecessors". And Lance Henriksen = Coolness.
I am very glad I can talk to folks here about these films though. It's good to know there's a few of us who have seen em'! Good stuff.
Kennel Keeper of Fenris Ulf
The Queen in Aliens was especially scary!
Alien 3 was watchable. It had an interesting premise and some cool ideas but the direction was all over the shop. I disliked Alien: Resurrection so much (nothing against your tastes GB). I wanted to like it, what with Jean-Pierre Jeunet directing and Joss Whedon as the writer. I had high hopes because Jeunet's other movies - Amelie, The City of Lost Children and Delicatessen are all so awesome. But sadly, it was not to be. The studio took Joss Whedon's original script and tore it apart. They left much of it on the cutting room floor, then spliced it together into a jumbled mess. Not cool.
I should know better than to listen to rumours. This is what really happened with Alien 4.
From the IMDB.com trivia page:
Joss Whedon has commented on his dissatisfaction with the movie. Fans had speculated that the finished article deviated from his original script in some fatal manner, however he put such rumors to rest. His dialogue, action and plot were essentially intact. However he had written with a playful, tongue-in-cheek tone, which didn't work when the director decided to "play it straight". Eventually the Betty and her crew became the prototypes for Whedon's _"Firefly" (2001)_, which captured the tone he had aimed for in this movie.
Currently watching:
Doctor Who - Season 11
I'm not saying the third and fourth Alien films were great movies , but I did enjoy them, and they both had redeeming qualities. It's been too long for me to recall the canon defying elements you saw in Three, Shadow. So I'll just have to take your word for it for now. Of the 4 films it was probably the bleakest, but it really did have an intriguing spiritual component. But again, it's been too long for me to be able to define precisely what I mean.
And I don't see the fourth film as completely horrible either. It was certainly the most light-hearted and humourous one of the franchise, but it had a couple of poignant moments, some decent action, and so help me, I actually liked the psychedelic parts. The only scene that was too over-the-top silly for me was when . That was completely ridiculous.
I too liked AvP, but I think it continued the vein of humour and Popcorn Adventure established in the last Alien film and the Predator franchise. I couldn't take it too seriously, but still very entertaining. Likewise with AvP2--entertaining but nothing particularly serious or deep about it.
I think I am safe to agree that the first 2 Alien films are the best in the franchises. But I still enjoyed the rest.
GB
EDIT: I have to say W4J, I don't know how they figured that they were playing it straight in Alien Resurrection . It seemed very tongue in cheek to me.
"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" -- Carl Sagan
Eh, I don't know GB. I have trouble pairing what's unquestioningly one of the most malevolent creations is cinema (xenomorphs) with humor. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind a little gallows humor from time to time, but an Alien film should be anything but "light hearted and humorous". A:R just...ugh. I can't do it.
I love the first film as a pure sci-fi/horror film. The fact that you really never get to see the Alien save for the briefest of shots (including the most memorable one to me, when a certain character is looking for it in the air shafts) really amps up the tension. Seeing something scary is one thing, but knowing that something scary is lurking in the shadows and makes itself invisible to you....well, that makes my skin crawl! The artistry in how they executed that in the movie is perfection. Is it just me or were Ripley and Parker the only two on that ship with working brains?
I have the special edition of Alien on DVD and have enjoyed many repeat viewings of it over several years. W4J, what did you think about the deleted scene where...
Kennel Keeper of Fenris Ulf
The first Alien, was the only one that was truly Terrifying. It's still one of the scariest films of all time. And yes, Ripley and Parker were the only ones aboard with functioning frontal lobes .
GB
"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" -- Carl Sagan