The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 47174 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
tommy wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
epilogue wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
tree_ wrote:
tommy wrote:
tree_ wrote:
tommy wrote:
tree_ wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:
I thought I'd seen the Illusionist before, but I guess I havent. Bunch of Scooby-Doo bullshit. Not good.
Yeah that movie sucks hard. Crazy how many people like or love it.
Is it better or worse than Now you see me?
Haven't seen it, but I hear it's really bad too
Is Ed Norton actually a good actor? He always seems to be making the exact same face. I liked him in Kingdom of Heaven (under a mask) but the last movie I saw him in was Red Dragon and he was awful.
Maybe he should stick to voice acting.
I think he's very inconsistent. He displayed some fun, novel charm in the 90s in movies like American History X and Rounders. I tried watching that Motherless Brooklyn movie he wrote, directed and starred in several years ago, and "oof" is all I can say about that one. But he was good in like, what else, ... Birdman. I just think he kind of worn out his welcome and showed all he has to offer. He's about on par with Leo with his acting ability but doesn't have his looks or charisma.
I think this is right on the money.
It's utter nonsense. Excepting the bit about Motherless Brooklyn which I haven't seen, but have no desire to see, and also the book sucks. But otherwise! Nonsense!
sorry, you're pro or anti Norton?
For my money, his best role is 25th Hour, but it's not like he stretched out in that role; I just think his resting state served the movie perfectly.
I thought I'd seen the Illusionist before, but I guess I havent. Bunch of Scooby-Doo bullshit. Not good.
Yeah that movie sucks hard. Crazy how many people like or love it.
Is it better or worse than Now you see me?
Haven't seen it, but I hear it's really bad too
Is Ed Norton actually a good actor? He always seems to be making the exact same face. I liked him in Kingdom of Heaven (under a mask) but the last movie I saw him in was Red Dragon and he was awful.
Maybe he should stick to voice acting.
I think he's very inconsistent. He displayed some fun, novel charm in the 90s in movies like American History X and Rounders. I tried watching that Motherless Brooklyn movie he wrote, directed and starred in several years ago, and "oof" is all I can say about that one. But he was good in like, what else, ... Birdman. I just think he kind of worn out his welcome and showed all he has to offer. He's about on par with Leo with his acting ability but doesn't have his looks or charisma.
I think this is right on the money.
It's utter nonsense. Excepting the bit about Motherless Brooklyn which I haven't seen, but have no desire to see, and also the book sucks. But otherwise! Nonsense!
sorry, you're pro or anti Norton?
For my money, his best role is 25th Hour, but it's not like he stretched out in that role; I just think his resting state served the movie perfectly.
What's Barry Pepper's best role?
True Grit maybe?
He was good, but I'd say Robert Duvall was better in the same role.
I thought I'd seen the Illusionist before, but I guess I havent. Bunch of Scooby-Doo bullshit. Not good.
Yeah that movie sucks hard. Crazy how many people like or love it.
Is it better or worse than Now you see me?
Haven't seen it, but I hear it's really bad too
Is Ed Norton actually a good actor? He always seems to be making the exact same face. I liked him in Kingdom of Heaven (under a mask) but the last movie I saw him in was Red Dragon and he was awful.
Maybe he should stick to voice acting.
I think he's very inconsistent. He displayed some fun, novel charm in the 90s in movies like American History X and Rounders. I tried watching that Motherless Brooklyn movie he wrote, directed and starred in several years ago, and "oof" is all I can say about that one. But he was good in like, what else, ... Birdman. I just think he kind of worn out his welcome and showed all he has to offer. He's about on par with Leo with his acting ability but doesn't have his looks or charisma.
I think this is right on the money.
It's utter nonsense. Excepting the bit about Motherless Brooklyn which I haven't seen, but have no desire to see, and also the book sucks. But otherwise! Nonsense!
sorry, you're pro or anti Norton?
For my money, his best role is 25th Hour, but it's not like he stretched out in that role; I just think his resting state served the movie perfectly.
What's Barry Pepper's best role?
True Grit maybe?
He was good, but I'd say Robert Duvall was better in the same role.
This was incredible. I absolutely loved it. Great performances, a very satisfying story, classic music - it really had everything. I really like the way black and white movies accentuates shadows and this was probably the best example I've seen.
This was incredible. I absolutely loved it. Great performances, a very satisfying story, classic music - it really had everything. I really like the way black and white movies accentuates shadows and this was probably the best example I've seen.
What would you say differentiates black and white film from color film?
_________________
Malloy wrote:
making this place inhospitable to posting is really the only move left.
This was incredible. I absolutely loved it. Great performances, a very satisfying story, classic music - it really had everything. I really like the way black and white movies accentuates shadows and this was probably the best example I've seen.
This was incredible. I absolutely loved it. Great performances, a very satisfying story, classic music - it really had everything. I really like the way black and white movies accentuates shadows and this was probably the best example I've seen.
Really a fantastic movie. 10/10
It's been on my mind all day. The scene where the bar patrons drown out the Nazis by singing La Marseillaise is one of the best things I've seen in a movie.
I'm tempted to watch it again tonight - maybe with Ebert's commentary.
This was incredible. I absolutely loved it. Great performances, a very satisfying story, classic music - it really had everything. I really like the way black and white movies accentuates shadows and this was probably the best example I've seen.
I thought I'd seen the Illusionist before, but I guess I havent. Bunch of Scooby-Doo bullshit. Not good.
Yeah that movie sucks hard. Crazy how many people like or love it.
Is it better or worse than Now you see me?
Haven't seen it, but I hear it's really bad too
Is Ed Norton actually a good actor? He always seems to be making the exact same face. I liked him in Kingdom of Heaven (under a mask) but the last movie I saw him in was Red Dragon and he was awful.
Maybe he should stick to voice acting.
I think he's very inconsistent. He displayed some fun, novel charm in the 90s in movies like American History X and Rounders. I tried watching that Motherless Brooklyn movie he wrote, directed and starred in several years ago, and "oof" is all I can say about that one. But he was good in like, what else, ... Birdman. I just think he kind of worn out his welcome and showed all he has to offer. He's about on par with Leo with his acting ability but doesn't have his looks or charisma.
I think this is right on the money.
It's utter nonsense. Excepting the bit about Motherless Brooklyn which I haven't seen, but have no desire to see, and also the book sucks. But otherwise! Nonsense!
sorry, you're pro or anti Norton?
For my money, his best role is 25th Hour, but it's not like he stretched out in that role; I just think his resting state served the movie perfectly.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 80 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
