Silent Bob Posted June 22, 2002 Share Posted June 22, 2002 M-m-minority Report, gooooooooooooooood. I'd write more, but I gotta go rest from getting a sensory overload from that movie and that oh-so-wonderful Daredevil trailer that came before it. So, yeah, I'll comment more, later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted June 23, 2002 Share Posted June 23, 2002 This movie was absolutely fucking amazing! I can't get over it. It's easily the best movie I've seen in theaters for a good while. I don't want to overhype it or anything, but fuck it. I loved minority report, you'll never forgive yourself if you don't see it now on the big screen. It was an insanely cool mix of scif-fi, action, and film noir elements. The preview is complete garbage compared to the actual movie. I was glued to my seat in awe for the whole thing. Set 50 years in the future, it has some really cool ideas that aren't so horribly far fetched. I think it's a lot more challenging to make a movie 50 years into the future, than to make one 1000 years into the future, because you have to base things on what could actually be done, and I thought this one was dead on with the futuristic advertisements and cars. The special effects were obviously great, but the best part about them is that they aided the plot, they weren't the whole point of the movie. The action scenes were effective not just because the special effects were great, they were effective because I genually cared about what happened to the characters! What a novel concept! Most of the thrills came from choices the character's made and the fact that I genuinely cared about them. Which brings me to the plot. I wasn't even expecting much of a plot, ha! This one shows us that plot and action are not bitter enemies, they can coexist just fine. The plot here was definately film noir inspired, with a flawed hero and these great twists and turns. The plot moved quick enough to excite me and kick my brain into gear, but it never lost me, it was so fucking well crafted, I don't think anyone in the theater was lost, and they never had to blatantly spell things out and insult the audience's intelligence. Even the soundtrack and style of the movie was very 1930's/40's film noirish. I thought that was cool as hell. All of the action still had this sort of adventurous speilberg touch, kind of hard to describe. A lot of the scenes had a definately distinctive sense of humor, you can very much tell that this is the same guy that directed indiana jones. As you can tell, I can't say enough about this movie, I'm still psyched about how fuckin great it was. It reminded me of why I love movies so much, it's one of the funnest I've seen so far, and it's great to see that one of the best directors alive hasn't lost a shred of talent after so many years of great movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted June 23, 2002 Author Share Posted June 23, 2002 'S exactly what I woulda said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigChiefSlapaho Posted June 24, 2002 Share Posted June 24, 2002 Saw it today. I agree. Very good stuff. Surprisingly good. A must have DVD when it comes out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted June 25, 2002 Share Posted June 25, 2002 Figured I'd pin this one since I finally have something worth pinning, and it'd be a shame if people missed it in theaters, this one's meant to be experienced on the big screen. And I was wondering, does anybody know anything about the actress that played Agatha, the female pre-cog? Name's "Samantha Morton." I thought she did an awesome job, incredible body language, it looked like she was an actress out of a silent movie. I wonder if she's well known at all or did any other noteworthy movies. I checked imdb and it seems she played a mute in a woody allen movie called "sweet and lowdown", with sean penn and uma therman in it too. I guess this one is also a testament to how good her body language is seeing as she plays a mute... anybody seen it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted June 25, 2002 Share Posted June 25, 2002 Wasn't easy to find, but here it is kids: A bad Minority Report review! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted June 25, 2002 Share Posted June 25, 2002 Eh, this is a mix of somebody going in with god knows what expectations, and I dunno, no hot dogs at the concession stand or something... Half of the review is just dumb comic book guy from the simpsons style nitpicking. I guess if you don't like the characters you don't like the characters, but the side characters he has to deal with are supposed to be totally fucked up. In film noir type stuff the main character always has to go sort of underground and deal with damn near surrealistic situacions with reeeally fucked up characters. Made for some great scenes, I thought. There will ALWAYS be at least a few bad reviews of movies. There is no such thing as a movie that has never gotten a bad review, period. Even the bad review says it's worth watching tho :p ***MAJOR SPOILERS*** Um.... anderton's murder was too premeditated. They said "this one's premeditated" and it technically was I guess because he'd been thinking about what he'd do to teh guy who killed his son for years and all that. Point is, it came out fo the mahcine as a premeditated murder.... if he thought it was important enough to warrant a paragraph in teh review... maybe he shoulda payed attention... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted June 26, 2002 Author Share Posted June 26, 2002 I always hated Harry Knowles. Now I know why. The guy has such a huge lack of taste that he calls Minority Report trash, and called Episode II brilliant. :dissappointed: Fan boy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted June 29, 2002 Share Posted June 29, 2002 Set 50 years in the future, it has some really cool ideas that aren't so horribly far fetched. I think it's a lot more challenging to make a movie 50 years into the future, than to make one 1000 years into the future, because you have to base things on what could actually be done, and I thought this one was dead on with the futuristic advertisements and cars. I saw it with my cousin here in DC, and we were talking about the futuristic elements. I said somethings looked like they were 5 to 10 years off and some looks like they were impossible. She said, living in DC most of her life, that she know road construstion goes WAY too slow in the Washington area to accomplish at that in only 50 years. I also notice how lots of the landscape shot from far away to show a wide view of DC, it still have the same basic look (low buildings, etc), but in the film in the city there were all these high rises. Hate to crap on such a good film, but these were issues of reality-conflict for anyone who knows the DC area. All of the action still had this sort of adventurous speilberg touch, kind of hard to describe. I saw a reviewer say something like "It's like nothing else Speilburg has done, and yet, no one else could have made it". That's pretty dead on. It's uniquely speilberg even though it's not like other speilburg stuff, kinda strange. Tom Cruise is doing well for himself. Vanilla Sky, then this (anyone who has liked MR this but not seen Vanilla Sky, go see it, you'll like it, it's got a very similar tone). He'll never get an Oscar though. Everyone is Hollywood is too jealous of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted June 30, 2002 Share Posted June 30, 2002 Cars have only existed for about 100 years, I mean, the first highways were built around the mid 40's. So if it only took 50 years to get the entire system we have now up (with far inferior construction tools) why wouldn't we see as big a change in another 50 years? I guess there are problems with stuff if you know the dc area, but I doubt the point was to realistically portray washington dc, I figure that few enough people know the DC area that they could take some liberties on how it's laid out, especially 50 years from now. As for an oscar, well, it's easily the best movie I've seen this year, but yeah, they dont want to give any more of those to him. Especially not for a sci-fi action movie. We all know that the oscars only tolerate action when it's within the confines of an epic/war movie. And sci-fi? Ha! A sci-fi movie has anout as good a chance of getting best picture as Hitler has a chance of being canonized a saint. Maybe speilberg could snag best director though, that'd be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted June 30, 2002 Share Posted June 30, 2002 they dont want to give any more of those to him. Any more? Cruise has never even been nominateed for any oscar. Not even a nomination for best supporting actor (not that he's had a supporting role in years). And he's had plenty of roles worthy of the award. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted June 30, 2002 Share Posted June 30, 2002 Oh, sorry, I thought you meant speilberg, I thought cruise did a good job, but there isn't much I think he deserved an oscar for. Best performance in the movie I thought came from Samantha Morton the pre-cog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 I thought he was oscar worthy in Vanilla Sky. I guess I could understand if he didn't get the oscar nomination this time again, but only if the other nominations are worthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 She said, living in DC most of her life, that she know road construstion goes WAY too slow in the Washington area to accomplish at that in only 50 years. I also notice how lots of the landscape shot from far away to show a wide view of DC, it still have the same basic look (low buildings, etc), but in the film in the city there were all these high rises.Hate to crap on such a good film, but these were issues of reality-conflict for anyone who knows the DC area. ...or anyone who goes to the a movie about clairvoyance and sci-fi expecting exact realism.... That's around the worst compaint ive seen in a while, man. "Worst...issue...ever!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 These types of movies are supposed to try to convince the viewer of a possible, sometimes plausible future, so as to make a connection to it and have it teach you something about the present. Complaints about lack of realism have merit as long as you don't dwell on them, and acknowledge them as details not of critical importance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted July 1, 2002 Author Share Posted July 1, 2002 Actually, JMT, Cruise was nominated for his supporting role in Magnolia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 Oops, right you are Bob, forgot about that. I've got to find a board with few pop-culture junkies so as not to be caught on all my slip-ups Haven't seen Magnolia yet, heard it was weird, was as I heard Vanilla Sky and Minority Report were weird. I must see that movie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted July 2, 2002 Author Share Posted July 2, 2002 Yeah, I never saw it either. I've heard mixed things. Just remembered because when Michael Caine won, he mentioned in his speech that it was a good thing Cruise didn't win, because supporting actors got much smaller trailers and much smaller checks and he didn't think Cruise would like that change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunkerSeed Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 I thought magnolia was fuckin great. It's definately love it or hate it though, I can easily see why someone wouldn't like it. It's three hours of heavy mellodrama, and has some odd bits, but it worked for me, I loved it, and cruise did do a fine job with a very cool character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 oy again with dey cousin? jack man just shtoop her already its prblably legal in DC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 Hey, triumph, you're obsessed with cousin-sex, go to Yahve's Cousin Sex thread in Curretn Events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 I never pass up the opurtunity to post a relavant Boondocks strip (or two), so: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier of fortune Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Heh heh. Thats a good strip Jack. Pretty decent film by Speilburg again, and Colin Farrell was pretty good in it to! Go on the :irish: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.