That's a nice way to describe puberty...

Yeah, several years ago. Seemed like just a typical Robin Williams fluffy drama. Did I miss some deeper connotation? I honestly don't remember much about it, other than that it was very pretty to look at, which puts it into the same basic category as Avatar.


Very cool. Tell him I said "thanks", and that the thing with the guy at the place worked out very well. He'll know what I mean.

(zack morris's phone)

No liked the film. I watched it again this weekend because netflix has shitty movies to rent

Why are 95-00 740s cheaper than 540s? not because race car obviously...

Because Space Cat.

Attachment 240889

Cute, but meh... I give it a 3.1 for effort.

I wonder what the record for being banned the most number of times in a single month is?

And is it more or less than the number of times I could say, "I want you to hit me as hard as you can" to Chuck Palahniuk before he complies?

I am buffon's sense of puzzlement and wonder.

I am Buffon's lack of lol... I think my personal best is 3 or 4 times. I cannot recall correctly.

Why?

Hint Buffon: I'm setting you up

See signature...

Fight Club. Great movie, I mean really.
"All right, if the applicant is young, tell him he's too young. Old, too old. Fat, too fat. If the applicant then waits for three days without food, shelter, or encouragement he may then enter and begin his training. "
Kinda reminds me of the initiation procedure for mt.n

That Robin Williams movie, I agree with Joe's assessment. Not an awesome story line. But the visual effect of the characters walking around in a world that looks like an impressionist painting was pretty cool.

Fight Club factoid from IMDB..

Fucking awesome.

I just realized something right now.

To me, movies like "Avatar" and "What Things may Come" strike about the same chord that "2001" does to people who aren't technical sci-fi buffs. Very pretty to look at, and utterly horrible to watch.

I totally get it now.

Was at the Camarillo Airport for lunch today. I looked up from my delicious tri-tip sandwich and Lou Ferirgno was about 3 tables away. He left in a black Eurocoptor with 2 other dudes and a blonde. The dude is still huge and jacked, although walking with a discernible stiffness.

So by that reasoning, are you suggesting that "What Things may Come" is an amazing film to the impressionist painting fans (?), and "Avatar" is an amazing film to the CGI/Computer geek fans?

Avatar is truly a landmark film in that sense, in that it raised the CGI bar much higher. 2001 needs no explanation for its value that has not been explained a million times already.

But "What Dreams may Come"? What did it accomplish? It was visually interesting and what not, but I do not find myself wanting to watch it again and again. Not being argumentative here, just spurring the discussion.

I need to set the DVR to record Fight Club. I have to watch it now.

And I don't find myself wanting to watch Avatar again and again. It bored the piss out of me.

I wasn't speaking to any grand purpose, quite the contrary. I was referring to the way that any one individual person perceives a certain movie as a movie.

From an entertainment standpoint, Avatar didn't impress me any more than any one of a hundred other CGI movies. Don't get me wrong; the behind-the-scenes stuff is very cool. The virtual viewfinder and the face-tracker are amazing inventions. When I first saw the film (not knowing how it was made) I was constantly trying to figure out where the matte lines were and how they'd composited the faces onto the characters. I was completely blown away when I found out that there were no matte lines and there had been no compositing, because the faces themselves were part of the CG models. It was the first time ever that I have seen a computer-generated human face and actually been fooled into thinking that it was real.

But that didn't make me enjoy the film any more.

From my own point of view as a guy sitting on his couch watching something on TV; Avatar, Dreams, The Aviator... they all fall into the same category. Very pretty to look at, but not particularly entertaining.


And yeah, I understand that 2001 was a technological tour-de-force, which broke new cinematic ground and more or less invented modern visual effects as it would exist for the next forty years. But there's more to it than that: I actually enjoyed the movie, whereas most people seem to hate it. The same goes for The Hudsucker Proxy, which features virtually no special-effects at all. Every single person I know found it dull and tedious, but I really enjoyed watching it.


That's all I meant. I understand the perspective of a person who thinks that film Y is cool as hell and yet film Z is boring and pointless, when I feel exactly the opposite way, for whatever the reason.

There's an air show in Rochester this weekend. Blue Angels are out flying around, and naturally, we were all out watching. There were half a dozen of us out there, and they made a couple of passes right over us at pretty low altitude. On the last pass, they spread out into single file, came in really low (like 200 feet maybe?) and each one waggled his wings as he went over. Very loud, and mega cool.

1