Slashdot Mirror
Review: Insomnia
Far from home, subject to the endless sunlight of the Alaskan winter, Pacino (Detective Will Dormer) is drawn into a bleak, clever moral thriller. You have to pay careful attention to this movie, and even if you do, you'll end up doubting yourself, much as Pacino does. Against the backdrop of Spider-man and Clones and all the attendant hype, this is an almost refreshingly simple movie. It's all about acting and plot.
Pacino is up there because an old pal is running a tiny Alaskan police department, in over its collective head after a young girl is brutally and sadistically murdered. Pacino swaggers in, spotting all of the things the locals have missed, and is stunned and enraged to learn from his partner Martin Donovan (who plays LA Det. Hap Eckhart) that Hap is about to fess up to IA about various past wrongdoing, including Dormer's having planted fake evidence to catch a child-killer. This testimony will result in any number of killers going free, including the child-killer. It will also end Dormer's career.
Soon after, Hap is shot while the two are setting a trap for the local killer. This is really the heart of the movie -- a searing, twisting and turning moral agony for Dormer who, driven nearly mad by the insomnia he experiences in the long Alaskan day, tries, along with local police novice Ellie Burr (Hilary Swank) to understand what has happened, and what ought to be done about it. The fact that it isn't clear -- to him or to us -- what happened to Hap -- gives the movie a taut, gripping edge. Pacino has a tendency to overplay roles sometimes -- as in Heat -- but here, he is at perfect pitch. It's a knockout performance.
Christopher Nolan also does an amazing job of using Alaska as a backdrop from the opening scene, almost as a character. There is one stunning shot after another, putting the story into a particular context. Taking an embittered, wise-ass LA cop and putting him in this misty, eerie setting is a masterstroke, and Nolan makes the most of it. Day by day, Pacino becomes more disoriented fatigued and confused. He also is taunted by Walter Finch, the chief suspect in the local killing, and a creepy psycho who tries to blackmail Dormer into dropping the investigation, or steering it in another direction. Finch claims to have evidence against Dormer regarding Hap's shooting, and the two of them begin a cat-and-mouse game you know can't have a happy outcome.
Williams's doesn't seem to quite pull this off. He isn't creepy enough here -- think John Malkovich or Jeremy Irons. He doesn't get under your skin quite the way he ought to. But that's the only significant flaw in the summer's best thriller by far -- also a refreshing change of pace from the mega-movies and their marketing tie-ins. This is a psychological drama, a portrait beautifully rendered by a master actor. There isn't an explosion, thundering army, or special affect in it. Just a dark, powerful story about life, reality and hard choices, along with some amazing acting, and some of the best cinematography you'll see in a while.
That wasn't alaska! that was port alberni!!!
A movie Katz actually liked? That's unpossible!
I think that the fact that they filmed part of it in Canada might have something to do with the evils of globalization. So, we'll just call it Alaska.
What a surprise! :->
I watch the previews for this movie, and I thought either Robin Williams just wasn't going to cut it for this movie, or it was going to be the most disturbing character I have ever seen. Apparently, it was the former.
He's just too much a nice, wacky guy to come across as a killer I guess.
(All IMHO, considering IHNSTM (I have not seen the Movie))
~ kjrose
What is the name of this movie?
Hmmm, something is odd here. The writing style is relatively lucid and clear, and there is no refrence to the post-September 11th world that we live in. There's only one logical answer: Katz cloned himself and made a few improvements while he was at it.
Hey, even Jango had to hand over the family business to Boba eventually.
You zap the moderators with a wand of humor! The moderators resist!
If you like this film, please go see the original film which this is based on. http://us.imdb.com/Title?0119375 [Imdb]. A much better film.
And yeah i know you can filter out authors in prefs, but should i really have to in the first place ?
Insomnia is actually a remake of the Norwegian movie with the same name. It's set in the northern part of Norway, where the sun always shines. It was a good movie then, and I really hope they managed to capture the same feel in this edition. The Norwegian homepage for Insomnia can be found here (I didn't find an English version).
exhausted, tough, morally confused LA homicide cop
Sounds a lot like his character in Heat, hmm?
DamnKatz said:
This is really the heart of the movie -- a searing, twisting and turning moral agony for Dormer who, driven nearly mad by the insomnia he experiences in the long Alaskan day, tries, along with local police novice Ellie Burr (Hilary Swank) to understand what has happened, and what ought to be done about it. The fact that it isn't clear -- to him or to us -- what happened to Hap -- gives the movie a taut, gripping edge.
It is incredibly clear and a very important part of the movie that Dormer DID shoot Hap. Any doubt as to whether Dormer shot Hap makes the second half of the film make no sense at all. This is NOT what gives the movie a taut, gripping edge. The fact that it IS clear and it is used against Dormer is what gives it a taut, gripping edge.
Does Katz see these movies and then do a write-up on the drive home so he doesn't take away from his pr0n time at his desk? Glaring mistake Jon...
It was a good movie tho... 3 out of 4
I saw this movie on opening weekend and i was quite impressed. I was expecting something more uniquie like Momento. I still enjoyed this one anyway. i dont think it was good enough to deserve any oscars but certinaly worthy of an honorable mention.
In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
I saw this last night (and snuck into Unfaithful -- uh, wretched) and didn't think as highly. Loved love loved Memento.
Pacino has done much better work lately, particularly in The Insider.
The plot and twists are too formulaic -- it ends with the standard shoot-out at the end (come on, I'm not giving away anything). The big confrontation scenes are well written in a short-story kind of way, but don't carry the kind of gravitas they should.
Anything that wastes the talents of Hillary Swank is a problem -- why hire her for such a nominal role?
The scenery was absolutely gorgeous.
I don't think Hap was going to confess anything about the planted evidence, I think it was just about some small stuff that he did. Will was afraid that after that though, he would come under close scrutiny and they would find out that he planted evidence. (sorry... just a minor quibble)
Ben
somehow you have the 'A' mania. go and consult A psychater in A place next to your location. maybe he/she has A solution for your problem.
haha these kneegrows banned my ip... ban me once again and slashdot ends in a ddosdot.
Hey! Katz posted a review! Let us skip the entire thing and berate the guy for existing!
C'mon ya'll, the tremendous amount of trolling related to every single one of Jon Katz' post gets old after a while. Let's quiet down and discuss content rather than execution.
In a dank, soundproof basement in Holland, Michigan. Taco-snottings twice a day will make him a better person. You'll see.
Jesus Christ!
Based on your post you have no place to be in the human gene pool and now you even admit that you're pissing in it!!
What plot? This movie was completely lacking in plot and enough twists to even keep it moderately interesting. I think the movie was titled Insomnia if only to suggest it was a cure for insomnia. I was literally fighting off sleep watching it at 2 in the afternoon.
This was one of those movies where the entire thing is given away part way into it and you find yourself thinking "gee, it has to end up with (not saying) but I hope they don't do it in the truely obvious Hollywood ending" and then the ending is the same thing you were hoping it wouldn't be all along.
I was hoping for something on the same playing field as Seven, with twists and turns and things you just don't see coming - something that keeps you guessing. Insomnia only had one "neat" moment where there was a slight bit of "I didn't fully see that part coming" but the rest is just torn from so many other movies.
Then there are the plot holes, what author has his name in the phone book? How come someone so smart with criminals and murderers not know to check out the killer's other house?
Add in the total lack of character development and you have a total waste of an afternoon.
Wheeeee
to be honest, i don't know if there is much of anything to give away in a review. you pretty much know everything that is going to happen from the promos. the point of seeing the movie is to actually see it. i assume anyone reading this either saw it or doesn't care. not to give anything away, but there isn't much to give away. the movie is kind of slow, but i think that's part of the point. the laid back nature of a small logging town, the oddity that is Alaska and it's 6 months of daylight, and the effects on newcomers.... toss in a burned out old LA detective with something heavy on his mind.
after seeing Memento, i was hoping this movie would be as crazy and twisty. both movies were directed by Christopher Nolan, though Memento was written by Cristopher and his brother Jonathon, neither seems to have had a hand in writing Insomnia. that being said it's still pretty ok. i would not flock to the theater, but at some point it is worth seeing.
excuse the offtopic rant, but honestly 99% of the reason i went to see it was because i liked Memento and i had nothing better to do that night.
p.s. if you liked Memento, or wanted to see it they just released a limited edition 2x DVD that costs about $2 more than the regular version (at least at Best Buy). it's the one with the neat blue packaging.
Why don't you read Robert Ebert's review. He thought Robin Williams was rather good, and made much of the same points mentioned above. "3.5 stars"
I think he was trying to avoid giving away a critical plot point in his review.
Jeez. I got it. Why didn't you?
I'm old enough to remember mork and mindy first run.
He wasn't funny then, he isn't funny now, and adding him to a movie, well, you might as well set fire to it and blow it up, because the project is already a disaster.
If you think Robin Williams if funny, then I think you need to hold your head under a bucket of water for about 8 minutes. That'll help.
I thought it was excellent as well. And it really does show you that two hundred million dollars worth of CG isn't necessary to make a good movie. I highly recommend it.
A word of caution: If you go see this, it will make you want to go see Alaska because the place looks so beautiful =)
Far from home, subject to the endless sunlight of the Alaskan winter
I think its SUMMER when the globe tilts that way.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo! http://goo.gl/J9bkO
I thought it pretty much sucked. If it wasn't for Pacino and Williams, it would have really sucked. I fell asleep 3 times. Sum of all Fears was much better IMHO.
The Filthy Cirtic gave this movie a pretty good review as well and agreed for the most part with Katz.
In other news hell just froze over, Microsoft has released the source code to every thing and the MPAA and RIAA are no longer jerks trying to kill all technological advancements in the name of copyright protection.
Read Errant Story.
he has 4 kids, but who all are their right fathers ? can he tell us ?
You have the time to post a lame reply but not to actually read the story? If our citizens weren't so lame, the US might fare better when compared to the school systems of such advanced places as Cameroon and Senegal. Damn.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
I really liked it. I can see why a lot of people wouldn't though. For some reason with me, it really hit the same type of chord as Silence of the Lambs, even though it's a really different movie. I though the acting was great, and Robin Williams is very good as a bad guy, in an underplayed sort of way.
It seems like most movies of this type sort of try to one up previous movies by having a creepier villian. It's sort of a bad guy escalation. This movie is excellent because it gives us a very believable killer. He's not a total psycho, he's not a devil worshiper, etc.
I watch a lot of movies, and I'm a fan of this genre. It's gets old seeing seeing some super freak killer. In movies, anyways, it's lost it's shock value for me. It's much more interesting seeing a killer try to justify what he did, and convince the cop chasing him that they are really very similar. I saw the previews for this, and I was expecting something very hokey from these scenes between the cop and the killer. They were anything but, and made the movie much more interesting.
Anyways, just my opinion,
Dave
Someone's confused. The sun shines continually during the spring and summer months. Otherwise, our heroes would be trudging around in 6-foot high snow in heavy overcoats and there would be no such thing as the Midnight Sun Baseball Classic in June.
This was not Chris Nolan's best film. He'd tried to use Pacino's Insomnia as a gimic, but it was a weak gimic to fall back upon. Pacino's Insomnia was by no means as cool as the short-term memory problems that screwed with our heads in Momento. Moreover, Pacino's Insomnia did not even seem that -important- within this movie. Pacino seemed to function quite fine at work reguardless of the fact that he had been up for days.
All in all, this movie was veeeeery predictable, and that whole "good cop gone bad" story has been played out million times before. Watch Larceny or Momento... they are better.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
I thought this movie was ok. The thing that really got me, was after the first 30 minutes, you could tell what the whole movie was going to be about. And you still had another hour and a half left for the movie to play out. I think this would have been a much better movie if they added more suspense to it.
Since it's already been given away, the part that Dormer is confused about is whether or not he subconsciously *meant* to shoot Hap.
Williams's doesn't seem to quite pull this off. He isn't creepy enough here -- think John Malkovich or Jeremy Irons. He doesn't get under your skin quite the way he ought to.
I actually thought this was a nice touch. Ever since Silence of the Lambs, criminals seem to be completely over the top and without any sort of pity. Finch tries to get Dormer to believe his telling of the story, and that's impossible if we don't think he's human.
Towards the end of the movie (without giving too much away) Dormer might have to cooperate with Finch. The audience wouldn't stomach this if Robin Williams wasn't someone who seemed like a down-to-Earth guy who just got in a bad situation. I think the comparison with Dormer's situtation is the key here; Dormer is trying to convince himself that Finch isn't such a bad guy.
At the end of the film, however, Williams is pretty damn scary. He's mean, he's creepy, and he kicks some ass. I thought it was an excellent film, and dare I say, better than the original.
But then again, I was forced to see the original in film class next to two stupid people making out and in front of a big snoring football jock.
----------
I am an expert in electricity. My father held the chair of applied electricity at the state prision.
robin williams' character was a crime novelist. Why would he have gone and tried to kill Swank at the end? It's silly - he got away with murder and successfully blackmailed pacino. why'd he want to go and kill off the female cop? He could have taken her out later.
It was set up that way so pacino's character could redeem himself, which was pretty cheezy IMO. IRL, corrupt cops just deal with it and go on.
the original movie was much, much better - no hollywood-style ending, just...lack of sleep.
Also, the pacino character in the original was much more interesting - it was he that tried to seduce (or well, grope) the best friend, not the other way around. It illustrated that he was losing it due to insomnia, instead of showing that her best friend wasn't really.
. It was OK, but no great shakes. It's interesting to see the two movies side-by-side, because they're close enough to see how different they really are.
your wrong and katz is right - thats gotta hurt
"(and there isn't a single marching digital Army, special effect, or marketing tie-in involved!)"
Yes, but there was what I perceived to be a major product placement in the movie. No, not the cars, because every movie has cars and in this particular case their brands weren't made prominent.
I am speaking of the one scene where Dormer is in the lobby of the lodge he's staying in and is talking to the lodgekeeper. She's typing up something on her computer and what do we see? The back of an LCD screen with a *HUGE* Proview logo on the back. It brought back memories of the OJ trial and Judge Ito's Thinkpad with the larger-than-normal IBM logo.
It's amazing that it still costs so much to go to the movies when they have so many sneaky adverts popping up everywhere.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
What I want to know is, how does this film re-examine traditional cultural myths in the post-9/11 world?
It's not unclear wether or not he shot hap, it's unclear wether or not it was an accident.
Katz said it "isn't clear what happened to Hap". Perhaps he meant to write "isn't clear whether Dormer intentionally shot Hap", but that leaves us with the conclusion that Katz doesn't know how to write, which has the same result as before: the review is incorrect. In the end, I suppose it amounts to the same thing: Katz is lame.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Interesting sybolism---Dormer, sounds like , DORMIR. which in spanish means TO SLEEP. interesting
Well as usual our belated film critic (how often does he review movies weeks or even years behind) regurgitates some stuck up stuffy critic's article. This movie was uninteresting, unoriginal, and completely predictable. Surrounded by much hype, not even my favorite Robin Williams and Al Pacino were able to save this wannabe Oscar flop. The only part of the movie that I did not predict was when Robin Williams' character knocks out Hiliary Swank -- this by the way hurt Williams credibility as being a "manslaughterer" rather than a "murderer." The climatic ending was ridiculous. Pacino and Williams dying in the end was absurd, especially with Williams body coincidentally falling into the icy abyss. Then Swank tampering the evidence at the end. What would have been a better movie would have been if Pacino's partner was the one who shot at him, and through ballistics Pacino realized he had done the right thing, Williams character gets what he deserves and Pacino could die another way. This way there would be more interweaving in the story line and make it more of thinking movie, which I believe was what the director and writers originally intended on doing. Skip this So called Oscar contender and go watch UNDERCOVER BROTHER.
... boobs, no masturbation jokes, and apparently has a bit of appeal to individuals who think.
Katz actually *got* this movie, which to me is either a credit to the screenwriter (for using small words) or the director (for keeping the moviegoer's attention carefully focused by using conspicuously-placed shiny objects in each frame.)
Actually Katz is probably a thoughtful, intelligent fellow -- I shouldn't be so hard on him. It shocks me: just when I thought I completely understood his taste in films he comes along and likes a movie that somehow manages to avoid ten explosions per minute, one gratuitous segment focusing on jiggling female anatomy, and booger/fart/erection jokes.
Perhaps Satan *is* ice skating today.
Get off my virtual lawn, you damned virtual kids!
Dear God, I'll tell you what I'm afraid of: Katz's review of "Sum of All Fears." Can you even imagine the number of "post 9/11" references he'll be able to work into that?
It's not going to be a review, it's going to be an orgy of politically correct terminology.
The ending is very predictable - you know basically what it's going to be about half-way into the movie.
What you shouldn't know is that Hap got shot in the beginning - as much as I don't care for Katz-bashing (whether or not he's a tool) - he *did* spoil the movie because he broke the suspense.
You now know exactly what causes the ending, which takes 1/2 the fun out of it.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
I don't understand why everyone is complaining about how the plot was "predictable" - it was SUPPOSED TO BE! In many ways the fact that this is originally a foreign film is shown by this.
The movie was NOT about whether Williams killed the girl or not (BTW - I was impressed by his acting - I do normally HATE Williams), or whether Pacine shot his partner or not. This movie is about atmosphere and motives - not about "whodunit"!
It is about WHY they did what they did - and about how their personalities deal with the after effects of their actions. It is about what happens when basically good people make a mistake and try to cover it up - and how their moral character deals with it. It also touches upon idealism vs. pragmatism - is it right or wrong to taint evidence if you KNOW the person is TRULY horrible and guilty and won't be convicted otherwise, or is it wrong to cover up evidence of shooting somewhat accidentally (if it WAS an accident), because you KNOW people won't believe you...
A lot of Slashdotter's need to know that a movie doesn't ALWAYS have to be a mystery, or have rollercoaster-like twists and turns - this one simply tells a story and asks a few questions of the audience. I think that many of the comments here show too many people dazzled by Star Wars and the Matrix nd forget that other kinds of movies exist.
I thought that this was an excellently acted, dark, emotive movie - not a "thriller" or "mystery" but a piece of good OLD-FASHONED moviemaking that didn't rely on gimmicks or fancy wipes.
Sincerely,
Kevin Christie
Neuroscience Program
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
crispiewm@hotmail.com
I must say Nolan's insomnia is in many ways better than the norwegian original. In the original, John Holt (Walter's norwegian counterpart) is hardly developped at all, and there isn't much interaction between detective and criminal. Also, i think the american version gives a more plausible reason why the main character wants to conceal his mistake so bad.
Nevertheless, I was a wee bit disppointed by the gratuitous shootout at the end of the american version. It really isnt essential to story, and it seem to be thrown in just to please some gun happy hollywood exec. "Point of no return" (remake of la femme nikita) had once covninced me that there can be no good american remakes of european movies, but nolan's insomnia is a substantial improvement over the original.
I saw this movie this weekend and was completely disappointed. If you didn't figured out the ending by the trailers, it was apparent 30 minutes into the movie. For a movie that is supposed to be a thriller, I was forcing myself to stay awake through most of the movie. My heart skipped more beats watching "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes."
I get the feeling that either Chris Nolan as a director is a one trick pony like Quentin Tarantino, or he coasted this one in relaying on the abilities of the Academy Award winning actors and the fact that it was a successful movie in Europe. The entire key of the movie is filming the movie from the prospective of Al Pacino and him battling his insomnia. He tried doing this but completely failed. Every scene should have had Pacino in it, reveal what Swank was doing on her own at the end of the movie. Inner dialog also would have helped. Help the audience understand how delusional and paranoid he was getting.
The acting in the movie was great, but poor directing can ruin an entire film.
Thanks for the spoiler warning, fool.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
I think Katz has really grown, because instead of trying to make witty attack on an okay film, he decided to chose a good film, and give a good review. But... "Dormer who, driven nearly mad by the insomnia he experiences in the long Alaskan day" uhhh how does that work? The last time i experienced insomnia during the day, i called it waking up.
Yawn.
Excellent movie in its original form. We Hollywood sticks Sharon Stone in a remake with a (yes) watered-down-plot and expects a hit. I saw the original Insomnia and it was great so why see this one?
***SPOILERS***
Much as I love jumping on the Jon Katz - What A Pretentious Windbag bandwagon, he's right - it's not clear what happens to Hap: Did dormer shoot him accidentally, or was there a more (somewhat unconscious?) intentional veiling of the truth to make a problem go away?
Al Pacino sleepwalks through this movie. Which is the point, of course, but he appears pretty much the same as he has in his last half-dozen movies. Is he stalking a killer in the mist or his star receiver on the sidelines? You wouldn't know except for the scenery.
And the horribly over-dramatized conceit of the constant light causing such problems (I live in Interior Alaska and it is light all the time now-- it doesn't cause us, or the constant flow of tourists, any major problems) and the supposed Alaskans talking about it driving people crazy... well, there are a lot of things that drive people crazy here, but light is not one of them. Tourists? Sure. Mosquitos? You bet. Women? If there were any (we say "Alaska: where men are men and the women are too"). But the light?
Gorgeous scenery, though, even if most of it is actually Canada. Robin Williams finally underplays a part and it works. Hillary Swank was fine except that she looks more and more like Matt Damon every day. That has to be the most disconcerting element of this movie!
I saw this movie 5 years ago, it was set in Norway and starred Stellan Skarsgård (the math prof from "Good Will Hunting").
And also a refreshing change from hearing about the unseen moral ramifications of Spider-Man vs. Attack of the Clones, and the post-post-Columbine post-9/11 aftershock that you regularly seem to think plagues all movies.
Way to go Katz, you finally cut it down to nuts and bolts, and wrote a half-decent review without sounding like a pompous ass.
Now just keep it up.
"But the cars are all flashing me, bright lights are passing me, I feel life passing me by" - Stiff Little Fingers
Only thing that really bothered me about Insomina was Al Pacino's fingernails... GAH! They have medications for that now, man, might want to check into it. I'm sure you can afford whatever they charge, just get something done before those nails completely pop off and you have to pay a guy to pick up paper for you.
== Paul Rickard, Editor of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign ====
EVERY movie has special effects these days. They might not be special effects in the traditional "blow up a spaceship" sense, and in fact you might not even recognize the special effects, but they WILL be there. Take a look at the credits, and I'm sure you'll see the special effects people listed. The effect might be as mundane as removing the reflection of the camera-crew from a window, or adding a sparkle to a glass of wine, but it will be a special effect nonetheless.
...why am I reading about a non-tech, non-nerd film on /. ? Maybe it's time for me to write that review on "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron" after all.
/.
Folks, please let's keep this forum at least a little tech related. There are loads of sites where we can discuss films and stuff that would normally be rated as off-topic on
I feel so sig.
The movie has good acting performances from an excellent cast, but the plot was bland. I did not find it that engaging or original. From the start of the movie, I could not wait for it to be over. I felt as though I was sitting through another movie that I have seen before. It is a standard formula thriller that did not suprise me or offer any excitement. I found the action sequences to be poor as well with too much blurry camera motion. It is worth a reduced price or later rental, but I cannot recommend this movie to anyone.
Regards,
javajeff
I think that if the killer was actually a sexual predator, Williams would have pulled that off perfectly. He doesn't seem like a killer, but he could pass as a sexual predator. Just a thought.
you know I live in northen sweden and I'm starting to hate it. I like to sleep with open windows, but ever since I moved western to kiruna I get no more sleep, at least not with open windows, see there are a hurd of idiotic birds that starts to sing around 1 o'clock in the fricking middle of the night. It goes like this: tu-tu-tuuuuuuu, ni-ni-niiiiii, ad nauseum. I can't sleep with closed windows, I need the air. What should I do? Start shooting them? Put out poison? I dunno. Please help me.
- one bird hater to another.
I wonder if the Norweigan original does a similiar wordplay on the cop investigator's name.
- Sam
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
Insomnia, like so many other movies, is a remake. Many people enjoyed Traffic which was based on a Dutch version. Ocean's Eleven is a remake, and now I see Matt Damon is starring in a remake of the Bourne Identity (the original featured Richard Chamberlain...shudder).
With all the billions of dollars we pay to support Hollywood, why is there such a dearth of fresh ideas? Why do small independent (often European) filmmakers create more interesting films?
"The old forget, the young don't know" --Japanese Proverb
It is official; Kuro5hin confirms: Slashdot is dying (because of JonKatz)
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Slashdot community when JonKatz posted more tripe, causing the Slashdot readership to drop yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all geeks and nerds. Coming on the heels of a recent Slashdot survey which plainly states that JonKatz has lost more readers, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Slashdot's journalistic integrity is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the opinions stated following a recent JonKatz article.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict JonKatz's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Slashdot faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Slashdot because Slashdot is dying - all because of this cancer calling itself JonKatz. Things are looking very bad for Slashdot. As many of us are already aware, Slashdot continues to lose readership. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
Kuro5hin leader rusty states that there are 7000 readers of Kuro5hin. How many users of Freshmeat are there? Let's see. The number of Kuro5hin versus Freshmeat posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Freshmeat users. OSDN.com posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Freshmeat posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of OSDN.com. A recent article put Slashdot at about 80 percent of the troll market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Slashdot readers. This is consistent with the number of Slashdot comments.
Due to the troubles of VA Linux Systems, abysmal sales and so on, VA changed their name to VA Software, Slashdot went out of business and started taking bribes (called subscriptions) and was taken over by VA Software who sell more troubled software. Now VA Software is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that thanks to JonKatz, Slashdot has steadily declined in readership. Slashdot is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Slashdot is to survive at all it will be among JonKatz and his loyal troll-followers. Slashdot continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Slashdot is dead.
Fact: Slashdot is dying (thanks to JonKatz)
It is official; Kuro5hin confirms: Slashdot is dying (because of JonKatz)
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Slashdot community when JonKatz posted more tripe, causing the Slashdot readership to drop yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all geeks and nerds. Coming on the heels of a recent Slashdot survey which plainly states that JonKatz has lost more readers, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Slashdot's journalistic integrity is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the opinions stated following a recent JonKatz article.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict JonKatz's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Slashdot faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Slashdot because Slashdot is dying - all because of this cancer calling itself JonKatz. Things are looking very bad for Slashdot. As many of us are already aware, Slashdot continues to lose readership. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
Kuro5hin leader rusty states that there are 7000 readers of Kuro5hin. How many users of Freshmeat are there? Let's see. The number of Kuro5hin versus Freshmeat posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Freshmeat users. OSDN.com posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Freshmeat posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of OSDN.com. A recent article put Slashdot at about 80 percent of the troll market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Slashdot readers. This is consistent with the number of Slashdot comments.
Due to the troubles of VA Linux Systems, abysmal sales and so on, VA changed their name to VA Software, Slashdot went out of business and started taking bribes (called subscriptions) and was taken over by VA Software who sell more troubled software. Now VA Software is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that thanks to JonKatz, Slashdot has steadily declined in readership. Slashdot is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Slashdot is to survive at all it will be among JonKatz and his loyal troll-followers. Slashdot continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Slashdot is dead.
Fact: Slashdot is dying (thanks to JonKatz)
I'm not positive that this is what the review meant, but in the end it is not completely clear to Dormer or to us whether or not he MEANT to shoot Hap.
:)
This doesn't change the fact that it can be (and is) used against him, but I do think that things were set up to intentially make whether or not the shooting was an accident an ambiguous point.
I mean, I can't imagine you giving such good reviews for summer blockbusters just out of the goodness of your heart and for whatever Slashdot pays you.
He was darned convincing. Scary.
You're right he's underrated. I still have trouble taking him seriously, even though I've seen him turn in fine performances. He just hasn't been picky enough IMHO.
Pacino was good too. Perhaps not his best, but it was a rock-solid depiction. See for yourself.
robin williams' character was a crime novelist. Why would he have gone and tried to kill Swank at the end? It's silly - he got away with murder and successfully blackmailed pacino. why'd he want to go and kill off the female cop? He could have taken her out later.
It was set up that way so pacino's character could redeem himself, which was pretty cheezy IMO. IRL, corrupt cops just deal with it and go on.
the original movie was much, much better - no hollywood-style ending, just...lack of sleep.
Also, the pacino character in the original was much more interesting - it was he that tried to seduce (or well, grope) the best friend, not the other way around. It illustrated that he was losing it due to insomnia, instead of showing that her best friend wasn't really.
. It was OK, but no great shakes. It's interesting to see the two movies side-by-side, because they're close enough to see how different they really are.
I read Ebert's review before seeing the film. He warned about the spoiler before describing the shooting, but I read anyway. As a result, the scene in the fog was not nearly as suspenseful as I'm sure it was meant to be. My wife was sitting next to me. She hadn't read the review, and she was riveted.
True, the essence of the story is figuring out Dormer's motives. Did he mean to shoop Hap? Did he mean to do it subconcsiously? Or was he just making mistakes because he was exhausted? Nonetheless, it was a spoiler.
I wouldn't assume that Katz didn't understand the movie. There is a world of difference between knowing whether somebody was murdered or whether they died by accident.
I expected more from such a talented crew...
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
Dormer, in American English refers to a window in an attic. Ever wonder why it's called a dormer? Supposedly it comes from the French, and is named after the window in a "sleeping apartment." The etymological meaning is ironic, but the metaphor of the window in the attic is pretty apt. At first I thought it was a bit corny and agree that it draws attention to the writer, but upon reflection, I think Nolan has again picked some great thought-provoking names.
Here here. Insomnia was decent but that shootout was stupid. It would have been better had Dormer lived, and whether Finch lives or dies doesn't matter. Yeah I'm sure the pinhead department at Warner Bros. put it before a test audience and determined that Finch must die. Now I have to wait I don't know how many years for a director's cut. (I'm still waiting for the director's cut of Patch Adams ;~)
"... endless sunlight of the Alaskan winter ..."
I think you mean the endless sunlight of the Alaskan SUMMER.
There were several mistakes that I noticed. For one thing, detectives and cops are practically conditioned to never pick anything investigation-related up without those plastic evidence gloves. The worst one, though, was that at the end Robin Williams sinks when he's dead. But dead people don't sink, they float. Little inconstencies like that which could easily be fixed bugged the shit out of me.
Also, I was hoping Williams would actually be evil, not just a stupid guy trying to escape his guilt. I wanted pinky and the brain evil from him.
I liked Memento as much as the next guy and Nolan's style is fantastic. But there is NO point in seeing or even making this film. The 1997 version was spectacular. The inverted film noir concept is brilliant and well done and provides the mood that Roman Polanski's Frantic, another sleep deprivation classic, fell short of conveying.
We get the point. But Alaska does look badass so go visit there anyway.
Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.
Actually it did have teenage boobs - they just weren't alive.
that this may have had any influence on Mr. Katz.
...
This is all conjecture -- I have yet to see the movie. I wonder, do dead teenage boobs count? Were they prominently displayed? Maybe as part of a slide show that filled the entire screen? Did they LOOK dead?
Perhaps if we learn that Katz was confronted with a pair of pinkish, pert, lively-looking fifteen foot high teenage boobs it might explain his liking this movie. Maybe the dead teenage boobs were part of an evidence photo that was handed back and forth on camera every few minutes? That might hold Mr. Katz' attention the way the use of a lively bird in a television commercial would capture the attention of a house cat.
And after all, these wouldn't be REAL dead boobs
Get off my virtual lawn, you damned virtual kids!
Robin Williams is a comedian, Not an actor. why would he do a serious role when he's not an actor is beyond me.
~ I can smell the color Blue...