The Best and Worst Movies of 2003?

rufey asks: "As 2003 comes to a close, I thought it would be interesting to ask Slashdot what they thought the best and worst movie of 2003 was, and why. At the beginning of the year there was excitement about parts 2 and 3 of The Matrix triology, X-Men 2, and of course, LOTR: Return of the King. In Slashdot's opinion, what did and didn't live up to the hype and expectations, and were there any surprises?"

Comments

Ug..

[drayzel]

Here comes all the votes for ROTK as worst picture and GiGli as best... or seomthing like that.

~Z

Re:Ug..

[Amiga Lover]

I'm certainly not going to vote for any of the LOTR pics as 'best movies'. Best "emulation of a coffee table picturebook" yes. Phenomenal scenes, pretty well done compositing, amazing themes but... everything just kept running ahead without giving me a feel of the true fellowship between our adventurers.

I've not read the LOTR books, and the movies have made me want to, but I don't feel they stand strongly on their own. Large format animated picture accessories to the books, but not on their own.

Re:Ug..

[GuyWithLag]

You have to understand that the movies, as shown in the theaters, are nothing more than extended trailers for the Special Edition DVDs - these have much better pacing.

Re:Ug..

[dave_n]

Having read the all three of the books the compromise TLOTR, I feel the need to note that:

a) the books are simply amazing, probably one of the best pieces of literature written in the 20th century.

b) the movies are are very entertaining, with some of the CG i've ever seen.

c) anyone who has seen the movies before reading the books has missed out on a truely great experience.

The movies I think are an excellent suppliment / add-on to the books. If you see the movie before you read the books, the books then become tainted, and you start seeing all the characters as they are portrayed in the movies. You also start to compare the movie to the book, instead of the more accurately book to movie view.

In closing, TLOTR:TROTK is one of the best movies created this year. I'm just depressed for all the poor people who haven't read the books first.

Re:Ug..

[mitherial]

/SNIP/ "Having read the all three of the books the compromise TLOTR..."


This is a hilarious typo, I thought that you were going to go on to deconstruct Tolkein/P. Jackson, or something like that...the word you're looking for is "comprise"

That being said, I liked the books and movies too; but having read the former several times over the years, I don't have the slightest idea of how well the movies "stand on their own", nor do I particularily care that much (other than as an incentive to read the books). While it's not the most philosophically profound book (inclusive: Tolkein regarded LOTR as one book with three parts) ever written, speaking from a literary perspective, any educated person should have read it, for its lyric beauty and influence.

Re:Ug..

[mitherial]

(and I also wanted to point out that...)

The movies serve as a beautiful and epic-scale rendition of Tolkein's story: they "stand-on-their-own" as works of art though fully appreciating them requires being familiar with a prior work of art.

Re:Ug..

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

If you see the movie before you read the books, the books then become tainted, and you start seeing all the characters as they are portrayed in the movies

I personally have always had a hard time with books with a ton of characters. It's difficult for me to 'imagine' the appearances of a lot of different people. I tried on two separate occassions to get through the LOTR books and couldn't do it. After having seen the first two movies I sat down and read through them all and it was much easier because now I knew what the various characters looked like and it was much easier to keep track of who is who.

Re:Ug..

[ahacop@wmuc.umd.edu]

The BBC radio adaptation of Lord of The Rings does a much better job with the characterization and story than the movies.

You'll fall in love with characters from the radio play that just fall flat in the movies.

Re:Ug..

[Alan Partridge]

Fuck LOTR, the best movie I saw this year was almost certainly Spielberg's "Catch Me If You Can". Mind you, it may have been a 2002 picture in the 'states. In that case, Pixar's "Finding Nemo" was really excellent - far better than LOTR again. I liked "Intolerable Cruelty", too.

Re:Ug..

[perlchild]

LOTR:ROTK and the rest of the series were in a rather tight bind, they had to respect the books enough(and the most-sold ever set of books of fiction in english literature kinda deserves a little). They also had to fit 5 books(in three volumes) into a three-movie set(and cut enough stuff to make it fit in the time constraints). They managed to alienate the true purists by cutting essential scenes from the movies, yet make it a wide-audience series that generated wide interest.

The cutting out of Tom Bombadil, for one example, was a perfect example of mass-marketing(it would helped to understand the world of Tolkien better, the mythology, and the role the Ring had with regards to the powers that be). It didn't include a fight scene, and the potential for special effects was minimal, so it was cut. The equivalent part with Galadriel, which served the same purpose, but to understand the relationship between the Elves' head honchos and the ring, didn't include a fight scene, but had more special effects/pizazz potential, was kept. I imagine that Saruman's invasion of The Shire(my term for it) was cut because it was hard getting that many male hobbits in uniform as to compose two opposing army units.

As for the books not standing out on their own, you're kinda missing the point... The books already are a hit, the idea is to translate the books into visual medium, for a different audience(how many people do you know would buy, then read a set of 3 800 page volumes? ), not make a related, but different product.

Re:Ug..

[sphealey]

In reading various volume's of Tolkien's personal letters, I found that he was very well aware that LOTR would not survive the translation to film intact. In fact during the first round of talks with Hollywood in the early 1960s, he instructed his agent "either full creative control or bags of money, but we won't give up both".

That said, I do wish Peter Jackson had spent some more time watching the character movies (and even the action movies) of the 1930s and 1940s to see that faster + louder does not always equal better.

sPh

Re:Ug..

[dubatuba]

Hear, Hear! TLOTR books was a truly epic part of my middle (earth) school days. The books provided an expanded horizon to a few dark shut-in weeks. I agree that the movies provide a visual extention to the books, and are much less without the added insight the lit gives.

Re:Ug..

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhhh.. your a fool then. catch me you can had that prat from titanic in it. that itself makes it a shitty movie. finding nemo was cool. you said you like intolerable cruelty, since you stated that catch me if you can was the best movie you've seen this year, that clearly puts your judgement in movies in doubt. our only choice is assume that it is as bad as the first and avoid it all costs.

Re:Ug..

[Omerna]

"the books are simply amazing, probably one of the best pieces of literature written in the 20th century."

One of the best piecies of FANTASY literature, yes. Literature as a whole? No. They're great books, but NOT near the top of best literature of the century.

Re:Ug..

[Rubel]

If only they had just let Cate Blanchett act! I bet she could have pulled off the "pizazz" of the scene without being made to look like a yelling ghost.

One of the few bits that really grated on me.

Re:Ug..

[Alan Partridge]

What the fuck is up with your grammar skillz?

Re:Ug..

[ChuyMatt]

Come now! You should know by now that that whole thing is for the mass audience that it is aiming for. The loud is still there in the Extended Eds, but there is much more lingering. Not to mention that he has gotten MUCH better from his first movies (check him out on imdb. QUITE a difference.) ANYway, that is what the editors/producers probably wanted. ho hum. off to do something.

Re:Ug..

[leprasmurf]

I personally have always had a hard time with books with a ton of characters. It's difficult for me to 'imagine' the appearances of a lot of different people.

When I'm reading a book, I personally create a person in my mind based on previous experiences. If the character strikes me as an middle aged male who is down on his luck type of thing I'll take a character from a movie or tv show I saw that matches that description. In a story containing a lot of characters, its very difficult for me to keep track of all the people and the templates that I've associated with them. To watch part of a series first, you will be introduce a template that is much more accurate (if cast right) and memorable.

Another point, take the Harry Potter Series, you watch the first two movies, introduce yourself to the character persona's. You enjoy the movies, get the experience, then you read the books, and you enjoy the books, you double the enjoyment of the experience. On top of that, you will be able to read ahead of the movie lines as opposed to waiting for the movies if you feel so inclided to.

Re:Ug..

[moving_comfort]

I felt exactly the same way. That scene was one of the few dissapointments in the film for me.

Re:Ug..

[Matthaeus]

Those who called Gigli a disaster truely appreciate the greek roots of the word.

Re:Ug..

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

They're great books, but NOT near the top of best literature of the century.

The UK disagrees. ;-)

(Cue extended debate about whether studies of "good" books are inevitably heavily biased towards those with recent high-profile cinematic versions...)

Re:Ug..

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine that Saruman's invasion of The Shire(my term for it) was cut because it was hard getting that many male hobbits in uniform as to compose two opposing army units.

Or maybe they didn't want to subject the casual viewer to something large like that after the ring was destroyed. Most viewers of the movie probably wouldn't have enjoyed to have a major scene such as that one after what they saw as the finale to the movie.

Re:Ug..

[syle]

The cutting out of Tom Bombadil, for one example, was a perfect example of mass-marketing(it would helped to understand the world of Tolkien better, the mythology, and the role the Ring had with regards to the powers that be).

Having Tom in there would have only been more confusing to the casual viewer, as it was in the books to most readers. Yeah, he's an interesting guy, but his background is an utter mystery and still debatable to even the most diehard Tolkien fans.

Bombadil's presence doesn't help explain the background mythology, rather it is explained only by extensive extra background mythology. Jackson had to ask himself, what is that point of this scene, how does it add to the movie, and what does it mean to the casual fan? The sad answer is, in this case, he doesn't add a whole lot.

Re:Ug..

[Cypherus]

I haven't read the books yet, but I plan to after seeing the movie. I'd like to make a couple points.

First, I have seen movies then read the books, and vice versa and I think that everytime I have seen the movie then read the books, the books end up being different most of the time and I thouroughly enjoy the little extra development of a character or an addition to the story. Example, I've seen A Clockwork Orange numerous times, then I saw the book in the library and picked it up. A lot of parts were different and it made me understand more parts.

Second, I think that any movie that comes out that actually makes you want to go get the books and read them is a good thing. There are a lot of people out there I'm sure that don't read very much, they just sit in front of the computer or TV and want everything displayed in pretty colors and an entertaining way. If people actually pick up a book and read, then I say that the director has accomplished something (whether he wanted to or not!)

And to what this original post is about, I think the best movie's were LOTR's and I enjoyed the Matrix movies as well. It helps too if you understand what they are supposed to be about. I feel empty though now that the main movies that I wanted to see are done with (Matrix and LOTR). Hopefully we will get some more witty Screenwriters and Directors to make some more excellent films.

Re:Ug..

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

They removed the scenes with Saruman in the Shire because it was a mistake by Tolkien to write them in the first place. The last third of Return of the King (the book) is truly awful. It reminded me of a movie like A.I. that might have been good had it ended earlier. There were many points when it could have ended but it jest kept going on and on and on...

I enjoyed the Tom Bombadil scenes in the book but Jackson was right to cut them from the movie. They don't really provide much for the main narrative. They were more interesting from the point of view of readers wanting to read hints of some of the background materual behind the main story.

Re:Ug..

[chris-johnson]

I saw Fellowship of the Ring, and The Two Towers movies before reading the books and then read all three books between seeing The Two Towers and the Return of the King (movie) was released. My opinion is that people should see the movies before reading the books. My justification for this is that when I saw the first two movies I was simply blown away, read the books and was even more blown away. But when I saw the Return of the King movie after reading the book, I was a little disappointed. There were parts of the book that the movie changes around (Lots of little things, like how both Merry and Pippin go to the final battle) and it just annoyed me. If someone sees the movies before reading the books, they're oblivious to these little annoyances, where as if someone reads the books first, then little things like that become annoying.

Re:Ug..

[darxyde]

the books are simply amazing, probably one of the best pieces of literature written in the 20th century.

If by amazing you mean, 'So boring the thought of extinguishing cigarettes on my eyeballs is preferential to ploughing to the end of another chapter', then yes... you're right. And if by 'best' you mean 'dull', 'drab', 'self-indulgent', 'pretentious' and 'sophomoric' then you're doubly right :). Of course, Tolkien was a brilliant writer and without doubt posessed mastery of the English language, though this didn't really translate to the quality of his story writing. Editors wouldn't have been too expensive in the early 1950's; Surely he could have payed a few hundred pounds to have somebody cut out all the crap for him before he put it to press. Essential reading, none-the-less, but for all the wrong reasons.

The movies on the otherhand are almost a completely different story; with artistic licenses allowing for the creation of rediculously fabricated premises (<rant>Since when did Aragorn fall of a cliff with a Worg ontop of him and get washed-up onshore? wtf? haven't we already seen this crap with Gandalf and the Balrog?</rant>), while simultaneously discarding the core concepts of the title by apparently placing them in the 'too hard and confusing for our poor arty-type brains' basket. By that logic I think we can be safe in knowing that Mr Jackson will skip the Silmarillion in favour of an even more 'dumbed-down' version of The Hobbit. But i guess that's what Jackson gets for having Hollywood own his hairy fat ass.

Re:Ug..

[BlackbyPubicDemand]

"Having read the all three of the books the compromise TLOTR..." I always thought TLOTR was ONE book in THREE parts. Cheers, Dhar

Re:Ug..

[Anonymous Coward]

The arrogance of some people. Tolkien creates a world of fantasy, populates with all sorts of interesting characters, and involves them in an endearing tale and you have the cheek to say "...it was a mistake by Tolkien to write them in the first place." When your literary talents have reached the same heights as Tolkien's and you garner a following like TLOTR has, we might then lend credence to such asinine remarks. Go back to your Spiderman comic books.

Re:Ug..

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

You idiot! The first idiotic thing you say is that I need to have the literary talents of a Tolkien to point out when he's made a mistake. I don't. The problem of generating quality literature is completely different from the problem of recognizing quality literature (the latter can sometimes help with the former though it's not clear at all to me that the former confers anything towards the latter skill). Secondly: you're an idiot for being so blinded by the excellent quality of much of Tolkien's work to realise that he has written bad stuff. The hordes of hobbits beating up humans towards the end of ROTK is truly awful writing, like something from a Saturday morning cartoon, and it's no surprise that Jackson and other, lovers of Tolkien's writing BTW, chose to remove these scenes. Thirdly: I've never read a Spiderman book in my life and have only read a handful of graphic novels. I prefer real literature and I think I've read enough of it to know when I've just read some writing that stinks.

Re:Ug..

[Ralp]

After having seen the first two movies I sat down and read through them all and it was much easier because now I knew what the various characters looked like and it was much easier to keep track of who is who.

You, kind sir, have just given me a wonderful flash of insight into what I now think was probably a major reason why I could never get into Tolkien. I had always figured that something about his particular style of, shall we say, painstaking attention to detail was just incompatible with my taste in literature. But after seeing the (wonderful) movies, and this minor epiphany, I will give FotR another shot. Thank you!

The Matrix

[c_waddington]

The Matrix proved itself to be the weak series it threatened to be in the first movie.

Re:The Matrix

[calebtucker]

Uh, I'm not following. The 1st was great and there was plenty of ways they could have expanded upon the 1st to make a good sequel (but obviously, they chose a different path).

Re:The Matrix

[calebtucker]

Wow, I suck as a person. Replace "was plenty.." with "were plenty.."

Re:The Matrix

[heir2chaos]

I thought that the Matrix series had potential, but I was extremely let down by the Reloaded, though Revolutions almost redeemed that. In my mind, they should have stopped with the original. It stood much better on its own than the story line created after the addition of this year's movies.

Re:The Matrix

[56ker]

The first was the best, but as with most sequels you start coming across the law of diminishing returns (except for box office takings). The third especially seemed like one over-long movie trailer relying too heavily on CGI to make up for a lacking script.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

He meant that some people expected that the first movie would suck, but it didn't. Therefore most people thought the next two would be as good (or almost as). They weren't even close. Marix Reloaded/Revolutions = worst movies ever.

Re:The Matrix

[slarshdot]

All 3 movies were written at the same time, but of course there were a few script rewrites along the way.

So if take take all 3 movies as a whole they are pretty amazing.

But I was let down that they did some cg just to show aff rather than for the sake of the story.

Re:The Matrix

[HardCase]

Marix Reloaded/Revolutions = worst movies ever.

How soon they forget Battlefield Earth.

Re:The Matrix

[Eric Smith]

How is the parent comment "The Matrix proved itself to be the weak series" in any way "insightful"? It didn't even give any rationale to justify this vague generalization.

I thought Reloaded was almost as good as the original, but was somewhat disappointed by Revolutions.

WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW

At the end of Reloaded, I was left with a lot of questions as to what was going on, and why Neo was able to stop the sentinels. I have various ideas about that, most of which involved Neo not actually returning to the same Matrix (or "real world") he had come from. It also seemed possible that even the original "real world" wasn't really the real world, but in fact another Matrix. And maybe in the *real* "real world", there would be a better reason for machines to be keeping humans around, instead of the absurd "battery" concept. (IIRC, Morpheus explained in the first movie that they used humans as an energy source, combined with a kind of fusion. That's like using pointed sticks to fight your enemy, combined with a kind of ballistic missile.)

But after thinking about these ideas for a while, I realized that they were probably too deep, and that what would be revealed in Revolutions would be simpler.

However, I was completely dumbfounded that the only explanation we got for how Neo could stop the sentinels was the Oracle saying that The One just has these abilities. What a complete crock! It fails to explain how Neo felt that "something's different" before he was able to stop the sentinels.

Oh well. I still enjoyed Revolutions, but not as much as the first two films.

On a different note, I think one of the most underrated films of the year was "Secondhand Lions". Not a science fiction film, so it probably isn't popular with the Slashdot crowd.

Re:The Matrix

[malkavian]

I think it was subjective with the 2nd and 3rd..
Personally, I think they were great. :)
There was a lot of philosophy going on in the background, and a lot to chew over, and debate what you through really was going on. :)
Not many movies these days play on consequence (to whit, setting off EMP pulse in the docking bay), or the fine line in some battles (the docking bay battle swung back and forth so many times, it made gripping viewing).
I can see there'd be quite a few people for who this Matrix 2 & 3 wasn't quite their cup of tea..
Same as Final Fantasy wasn't everyone's idea of a good movie..
Personally, I loved 'em. :)
But, as is the nature of art, it wasn't made to please everyone. Perhaps it didn't, but I've got the feeling it'll fit in that cult niche for a goodly many years to come.
But, like I said. Purely subjective. :) Perhaps if they'd followed a path you were happy with, I'd have felt they sold themselves short, or something. :)

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Potential letdown....and they took the carrot...

Re:The Matrix

[kv9]

the animatrix is imho better than reloaded and revolutions put together.

Re:The Matrix

[asklepius]

I think there is an explanation that cuts it. Neo had a link to the matrix, even when he was in the real world. They never explained it, but my guess is that the link was there. So even in the real world, he could manipulate elements of the matrix, like the sentinels, and destroy them in the real world. At least, that's how I tied it together.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, the worst movie ever is Manos: The Hands of Fate.

Re:The Matrix

[devmike]

(IIRC, Morpheus explained in the first movie that they used humans as an energy source, combined with a kind of fusion. That's like using pointed sticks to fight your enemy, combined with a kind of ballistic missile.)

But the truth of it is, if you're under attack by legions and legions of pointy sticks, might as well grab them and put them to good use.

Re:The Matrix

[nelsonal]

As far as single scenes go the fight in the Frenchman's stairway was probably my favorite of the three, although the lobby scene from the first is also a masterpiece. The stairwell fight is just gorgeous, and Juno Reactor fits it well. Three was an interesting end and ok movie, but not as fulfilling as some of the theories I read on the internet, so it was a bit of a letdown. The docking battle was cool, but the club entrance felt like a rehash, and I didn't care for the final Neo/Smith fight.

Re:The Matrix

[Codifex Maximus]

> At the end of Reloaded, I was left with a lot of
> questions as to what was going on, and why Neo
> was able to stop the sentinels. I have various
> ideas about that, most of which involved Neo not
> actually returning to the same Matrix (or "real
> world") he had come from. It also seemed possible
> that even the original "real world" wasn't really
> the real world, but in fact another Matrix.

My god Eric! I thought *EXACTLY* the same thing! I was still wondering if they were going to do the matrix within a matrix thing when NEO was able to see things in Red instead of Green. I just figured that the Red was him seeing the real matrix instead of the Green matrix within a matrix. When NEO stopped those sentinels in the fake real world, I could ONLY assume it was another layer of matrix. Remember when they said there was an original matrix? I figured that this original matrix was the one where NEO saw things in Red.

I *STILL* think they could reopen the storyline using this premise. Maybe go deeper into prequel with Creation of the Matrix or further into the storyline with NEO reawakening in the Real World and remembering he's a programmer or something. Maybe everyone in the matrix is a vegetable in the Real World - people who's only means of communication and life are only possible within the matrix. There is still much material that could be developed.

Re:The Matrix

[gustgr]

IMHO the 1st movie were really great. The 2nd and the 3rd were really bad. But somehow I can understand that. The idea behind the movies is fantastic and exciting and I think they could had explored this idea on a better way, but with less _profit_. For a movie with this size and for that much of money involved on its production, profit is all that matters. A movie with less fx's would have a better content and a better development, but I belive less people would watch it or by products based on it. The intention at the beginnig was develop that great idea into a good history, but suddenly became a special fx movie.

That's what I dislike in the Hollywodian industry: the good ideas are usually destroyed/distorced by the money. Well, what can we do ? Stop going to movies ? I don't know ...

Re:The Matrix

[powerg3]

How come so many people are down on Reloaded? It kept me thinking and second guessing myself long after I saw it.

Revolutions, on the other hand, answered none of the questions that Reloaded brought up. I'd vote Revolutions most disappointing movie of 2003.

Maybe I was just reading too much into Revolutions, who knows.

Re:The Matrix

[t0qer]

I didn't think battlefield earth was that bad. If you consider it had the bad acting of lost in space, with the religious overtoned science fiction like battlestar galactica, and the special effects a bit sup par with Babelon 5, it's not all that bad, really.

I've seen a whole lot worse in sci-fi. Remember disney's black hole?

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

yep lots of philosophy but they abandoned consistancy and reason to cram all of the "what is real?" philosophy in. The philosophy was interesting but was less than subtle and fell far short of the great movie(s) it should have been. The W. Bros could have explored all the same philosophy in a much subtler way and it would have made for both a good movie and a thought provoking piece. As it was it was too simple in its oddness and not sly enough to be of any real philosophical value.

That coupled with abandoning the concept of a good basic movie that following on the original themes and visions of the original made it the biggest disappointment(s) of the year.

Re:The Matrix

[bmad]

Ya' know, I wouldn't really say "for a lacking script" as much as "for lacking a script"...

Re:The Matrix

[JFMulder]

Yeah, but this law seems like it's going to be broken, cause TTT made more money that FOTR, and now ROTK just opened yesterday as the biggest opening ever for a movie on a wednesday at 34 million dollars, slapping silly TTT's first day at 26 millions and FOTR at 18 millions.

Re:The Matrix

[YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT]

I think there is an explanation that cuts it. Neo had a link to the matrix, even when he was in the real world.

But this doesn't explain it, and that's grandparents point :-( What is different in Neos "meat" that gives him this amazing wireless link to an artificial construct? That's a question I really would have loved to see answered.

YLFI

Re:The Matrix

[Dalroth]

No way, he's right. The Matrix did look like crap. The previews told us nothing about the movie, it only showed us another crappy Keanu action flick. Then we actually saw the movie. That's what he was referring to, the "just another crappy Keanu action flick" stigma the movie had until you saw it.

Admit it, even WHEN you saw the movie, the first 20 minutes or so you thought it was crap too. Nothing made sense, it was all weird and for God's sake it's KEANU!

But then the dumb bastard took the red pill...

Bryan

Re:The Matrix

[pboulang]

That would be 802.11g

Re:The Matrix

[Shazow]

Heh indeed. The matrices were excellent!

I loved the third one. It was one very elaborate [object oriented] programming joke.

The Smiths got garbage collected! Teehee.

- shazow

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

I enjoyed Battlefield Earth. It was stupid but entertaining. (Praise be to LRon.) I fell asleep during the last two Matrix movies. There was far too much of the characters just standing around yacking at each other.

Re:The Matrix

[t0qer]

I enjoyed Battlefield Earth. It was stupid but entertaining. (Praise be to LRon.) I fell asleep during the last two Matrix movies. There was far too much of the characters just standing around yacking at each other.


See I knew someone out there would agree with me, but it's funny how you say you enjoyed it, yet commented Anonymous Coward. Were you ashamed you enjoyed it? I must have no shame! Should I be?

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

>There was a lot of philosophy going on in the background

If you want philosophy read the 2nd tome of Leibnitzs "Introduction to metaphysics"> A movie should be fun and has to fail when it tries to pretend to carry a deep message.

Re:The Matrix

[roman_mir]

Or the Avengers?

Re:The Matrix

[jeffkjo1]

The master would not approve.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

let us not forget south park.
there is only so much of little whinning fat bastards you can take. and singing no less

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

donkey raping shit eater

Re:The Matrix

[DrMrLordX]

Not everyone liked the first movie. I found it to be rather average. I didn't like the majority of the action sequences. Woo's style annoys me, and The Matrix's emulation of his style annoyed me even more. The martial arts sequences were over-choreographed. The use of bullet-time for more than a few seconds at a time annoyed me. It starred Keanu Reeves.

In light of the overall mediocrity of the first film, it's no surprise to me that the sequels were lacking in lustre. It just took 3 doses of The Matrix before people could see it for what it was in the beginning.

Re:The Matrix

[mo^]

Thankyou for telling us what form a particular media must take.

But my Grandma was born before you so I guess we are gonna be stuck with Old Time Musicals and Soap Operas.

Alternativley we could all enjoy a form of cinematic expression that we like the most.. or perish the thought.. we could enjoy a wide range of movies of different types depending on our mood.. (how else could i love "Clueless" & "Cube" both )

Re:The Matrix

[Walt Dismal]

Gee, obviously you haven't seen Dance, Monkeyboy which stars some guy named Balmer.

Re:The Matrix

[black mariah]

They shoved a WiFi card up his ass before flushing him in the first movie. It was a deleted scene, but you can see it on the upcoming Matrix Trilogy DVD.

Re:The Matrix

[haggar]

The Matrix Revolutions, just like Reloaded, is a masterpiece in disguise and a new kind of cinema all in one: nobody can say to have completely grasped it, during a single viewing. But when many people who saw it and thought about it, talk to each other, the many veils and layers of meaning of these movies, start to unleash and things click into place. And new ideas emerge, new possibilities, and then you start to appreciate all the though that went into the creation of Reloaded and Revolutions.

These movies can not be fully appreciated by the individual, without a community or circle of friends, because they're so complex, layered and widely spanning.

That's why, isolated and (wrongly) self-confident, the movie critics have mostly slammed Revolutions, and those that liked it, they did so because of the battle scenes and special effects. None of them has even tried to understand it.

Re:The Matrix

[Wolfrider]

--The worst movie of 2003 that I can *remember* ATM was "Dreamcatcher".
http://hollywoodbitchslap.com/rev iew.php?movie=733 6

--I basically went to see it for the advertised AniMatrix trailer beforehand. The movie itself was so horrible that I walked out after an hour and demanded my money back. (Got it, too.)

Re:The Matrix

[Al Al Cool J]

Five days after I saw Revolutions, I realised what it was that I saw. The third Matrix movie is, in many many ways, the first Matrix movie. It's the same story, told again, different enough so as not too be obvious, but still with enough commonalities so as to leave me quite impressed with the whole franchise. The storytelling was at it's best in the first movie to be sure, but I can certainly appreciate the vision and ambition of the trilogy as a whole. Can't wait for Revolutions to come out on DVD.

Re:The Matrix

[Wolfrider]

--Ph34r the Pointed Stick!

Python clicky

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree, while I liked the first movie, I think it was apparent that no sequel was necessary, and no good one was possible.

Re:The Matrix

[woohoodonuts]

If you didn't fully understand the matrix trilogy it's probably because you didn't realize it was an allegory to the second coming of the messiah. No, I'm not some religious quack who tries to find God in everything... step back and think about it: The lead character was NEO... machines/consumerism/earthly possessions wielded power over fields of humans/the masses... these same machines were attacking ZION. This isn't an art site, so I'm not gonna go into the details of every character, but it's safe to say that this trilogy was well planned out from the beginning, and that the symbolism is so thick it barely even makes sense if you don't recognize the allegory. Finally, the protagonist sacrafices himself to save his race... come on! (smacking head) more people should be able to see this than english majors... okay... one more character just for the hell of it... the merovingian was charged in the movie with governing all knowledge of the matrix and the movements of underground programs, so to speak. Back in the real world, the merovingian's are an ancient frankish bloodline that supposedly gaurds the true history of the holy grail... the brothers didn't even bother to change the name of the character in this instance... and just another off the top of my head, the sermon on the mound was nice in M2, after you realize what it was... they fly these huge ships around and you're telling me that they don't have a freaking megaphone for morpheus to speak into? or lights, perhaps, instead of torches? this was done in this archaic fashion so that the symbolism was easier to notice... only, it seems, few people did...

Re:The Matrix

[alanmusician]

I think the main problem is that people want them to be the same thing the original was. People should realize they can't be. The great thing about the original was it was something we'd never seen any part of before. To be a sequel eliminates any possibility of this.

Although I didn't enjoy the second film, the third film would undoubtedly stand with high ranking on it's own merit, and is only frowned upon as a sequel. It's got excellent drama, eye-catching but not pointless effects, and good action. The story is even reasonably twisty without the pretention of the second film.

People have critisized the ending, but, in general, it seems to me those are the people who had a particular ending theory based on the second film that was proven wrong. Again, if the third film hadn't been a sequel it wouldn't suffer from the same kind of criticism.

Didn't hold a candle to X2, though, IMO, because that managed to be an extremely cohesive and surpassing sequel. However, it is a great film, with all the elements that most people enjoy in a movie.

Re: The Matrix

[Black Parrot]

> I *STILL* think they could reopen the storyline using this premise.

Yeah, adding another sequel always fixes things...

Re:The Matrix

[camrdale]

It seems to me that the original was the most liked because it had the most scenes inside the matrix where cool things can happen. Reloaded has fewer, and Revolutions even less, leading to their dislike by people who want to see more of said cool things.

Personally, I liked the series as a whole, but the original was, and still is, the best.

Re:The Matrix

[The Grassy Knoll]

I agree. I saw the second Matrix film on DVD and had to "rewind" (or whatever it is you do with DVDs) several times so I could make out what was being said. So I got a lot out of the film because I could follow what was going on.

In a cinema, I think it would all wash over you - you'd be so phazed by the fight scenes that the dialog/philosophy would pass you by.

Just my 2p

.

Re:The Matrix

[nosfucious]

Yeah, and "The Core". I can't get the smell out of my nose still.

Re:The Matrix

[Shugart]

The ending of the first movie ruined the whole movie. There are lots easier ways of creating a battery than using humans. It just didn't make any sense. I never bothered to watch the sequels.

Re:The Matrix

[patrik_reali]

The Matrix Reloaded and Matrix Revolutions are obviously a completely different movie from the Matrix. They just share the same characters and environment in the hope of locking the spectators into a movie theater.

In the first one, Neo and Morpheus are the most important persons in the movie; in the sequel they turn out to be just small pawns in a much bigger play.

Reminds me a lot of Rambo. First blood was an excellent movie with a great story and a psychological side, Rambo II and III featured the same actor playing the same character in a war movie and a completly different situation setting.

Re:The Matrix

[Bedouin X]

The Oracle said that the power of the one comes from the machine core (mainframe). It might not be a satisfying explanation, but the thing didnt go unaddressed.

Re:The Matrix

[atheken]

not worst movies ever, probably just the most anticipated, most disappointing sequels ever... But, they did explain everything.. er.. uh, nevermind.

Re:The Matrix

[Mysticalfruit]

I agree. I argued that if the machines were really that smart, they would have created a matrix that consisted of an endless fields of grass and instead of humans they would have had a matrix full of cows.
<p>
Firstly, cows even if they wake up from the matrix dream will just go "MOO!!!"
<p>
Secondly, their not going to stage some sort of revolt, they'll just graze and poop. This poop you can then compost into methane that you'll then use to power giant generators.
<p>
Thirdly, if you've even been near a cow, they produce way more BTU's then a human will ever make!

Re:The Matrix

[Isca]

In the words of John Stewart, from the Daily Show...

It BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWSSSSSSS!

Re:The Matrix

[Opie812]

Neo doesn't say more than 10 lines in Reloaded.

You say this as if it were a bad thing?

Re:The Matrix

[moebius206]

No way. I disagree.

Take the original Star Wars trilogy. The first movie was something no one had ever seen before, with effects and an 'epic' feel that had rarely been done (at least in the sci-fi world). Was that the best? Not in my opinion. It just got better and better (tho Empire is truly my favorite). The plot came together at the end beautifully and seamlessly, and I honestly felt content with where it ended.

I love all of the Matrix movies just for what they are. But other than the first, those movies are no better than any other sci-fi flick coming out these days.

I love Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within the same way I love the later 2 matrix movies: They're simply beautiful if you accept it for the way it comes packaged. But if you really look at it from an objective point of view, the movies are horrible. Face it: any movie that feels pointless at the end is not exactly the stuff legends are made of.

After watching something like the LotR trilogy (yes, its based on amazing books -- but there was more than enough room to screw it up), there's no way you can put the Matrix trilogy on the same level.

Re:The Matrix

[icedcool]

Man, that is the truth.
Every bit of those movies I loved.
Get over the debate its just a movie, so just enjoy it for the entertainment value.

Re: The Matrix

[Opie812]

Yeah, adding another sequel always fixes things...

Just wait until Rocky 7, mister...that'll fix it all up nicely.

Re:The Matrix

[icedcool]

This one kid next to me was like, "What if he wakes up in front of his monitor." I felt the urge to show how violent video games have made me. ;)

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

the bad acting of lost in space

I just recently saw this movie (on TV.)

I thought Joey was reasonably talented - when he does "Dr. Drake Ramoray", his parody of "soap opera acting" is hilarious..

Then I saw "Lost in Space", and I realized - it's not a parody!

Re:The Matrix

[j_kenpo]

Well, the problem with the Matrix 2 & 3 were stated in the Matrix itself. As the oracle said "You cannot see past the choices you don't understand". So obviously, they couldn't see past the decision of why they should make sequals, so they couldn't fortell just how bad they would suck.

Re:The Matrix

[Hoarke42]

"The Core" was perhaps the most incredible movie I've ever seen... if you take incredible as "not even remotely believable". It was awarded the all-time winner for worst movie physics, so my buddy and I rented it for laughs. It did not disappoint. I HIGHLY recommend it as a late night rented with a group of people with a clue.

Re:The Matrix

[JackCroww]

ROTJ was just plain Cheez Whiz. Ewoks? The storybook ending right out of Disney Studios? Please. It only was acceptable as an ending to a movie if there were movies to come after, which was what Lucas intended when he made it (Parts VII, VIII and IX, yes?), but now he says that's it, that's the Star Wars saga closer.

Re:The Matrix

[Chump1422]

Honestly, it's not that deep. Just because you didn't get it the first time doesn't mean that others can't. If you've taken any intro philosophy courses or even had a conversation with a friend while stoned, you've probably covered 99% of what they blabbed on about in the movies.

It's nice that they opened you up to these things, but they're nothing but B-movies with expensive effects.

Re:The Matrix

[Abreu]

Aw, c'mon! Disneys Black Hole was a great movie!
I had the home video and I saw it about 45 times! ...although I havent seen it since 1983 ...And I was 7 at the time ...mhmmmmm, perhaps I should see it again...

Hey Honey!! Wheres the Betamax vcr?!!

Re:The Matrix

[garymm]

The problem w/ the second movie (I liked it, but I mean the reason it wasn't as good as the first) is that it took all the awesome philosophical and epistemilogical questions that were subtley (sp?) presented in the first one, and put them into dialog that was very hard for some people to follow. Whle the first movie was cool because you could watch it over and notice new things, the second you had to watch over to make sure you caught all the unnecessarily wordy dialog. I don't know how they could have represented the battle between determinism/causality and free will in a better way, but I feel it was quite lazy to do it by just having Morpheus and the Merovingian talk to each other about it.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Numbers don't lie:

"The Matrix Revolutions" was a bad movie and the public quickly figured that out.

On day 43 the OVER HYPED "Revolutions" dropped off the box office radar at 137 million.

That's half of "Reloaded's" box office draw and eventually even the UNDER HYPED "The Matrix" made 170 million.

If it wasn't for the simultaneous release world wide "Revolutions" would never have made its money back. Look at the numbers and its obvious lots of people went to see it early on then reality hit and moviegoers stopped going.

Truth be told the sequels were over hyped and cashed in on a marketing concept instead of taking the chance (LOTR) and making a great film. This seems eerily familiar to another sci-fi franchise, but me cannot remember name.

Re:The Matrix

[moebius206]

Well, ROTJ was at least pretty good up until Endor came into the picture. I'll submit to that..

But you got my point ;)

Oh, and let's not get started on Lucas and Star Wars. Let's just all agree that every decision past Empire has been getting worse and worse...

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

No you didn't, lying coward. You sat and watched the movie and was disappointed like everyone else. You never demanded your money back...as if they ever would give you your money back. Next time try another blatant lie...like Linux being a decent OS.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Or anything on Mystery Science 3000. Admittedly some of those movies were so bad they were good, humorous movies (which would have been good if they were comedies, but not so great for dramas) but they were still bad.

I'd like to see them come out with an MST3K: the Movie 2, in which the characters are forced to watch ... MST3K: the Movie 1. Now that would be a good movie.

Re:The Matrix

[srussell]

There were two tactical things about Matrix: Revolutions that bothered me.

1. The EMP burst doesn't affect equipment that is turned off when it is detonated (proof: they're able to fly the Nebekanezer after setting of an EMP). So why didn't the humans just put a bunch of EMP generators in the cave, and coordinate a series of bursts?
2. Why didn't the machines just roll a nuke down the hole, or have one embedded in the tunneler?

Re:The Matrix

[bitrott]

The last 2 remind me of some HS acquaintances of mine who, one time while stoned, held discourse about the ifallible nature of Twinkies. If it looks like shit, smells, sounds, and tastes like shit... guess what... simply pathetic... oh! or maybe I don't 'get it'. BWAHAHAHAHAHAA

Re:The Matrix

[The Grassy Knoll]

Indeed. Watch it with subtitles is my advice!

.

Re:The Matrix

[ObiWanKenblowme]

I don't know that I'd quite call them masterpieces, but I have to agree with haggar's other points. I did really enjoy Revolutions and Reloaded, and I think they're getting an unfair reputation as "the worst movies of 2003."

There IS philosophy and layered meaning to them, and so what if it doesn't cover these topics as deeply as a college textbook? It's not a textbook! It's entertainment!

Like so many other (over-?)hyped movies lately, you get what you want to get from them. If you go in with lots of preconceptions thinking it's going to revolutionize storytelling and cinema, you'll probably be disappointed. If you just go hoping to be entertained, you'll probably enjoy it - and maybe even find a little more meaning beyond the CG effects and Keannu.

Re:The Matrix

[stonecypher]

Ahem.

Maximillian > John Travolta in stilts.

Re:The Matrix

[ObiWanKenblowme]

1) It was Locke's insistence that his was was the best way to save Zion that put all their ships (and EMPs) out on the line in the first place. He wanted to stop the machines before they got to the dock, and insisted they'd need all their EMPs to do it. They never would've even had the Neb's at the end if the council hadn't overruled him and sent the 2 ships out to look for Neo and Morpheus.

2) Not really sure about that one...how about "because all the humans dying would've been one hell of a down ending"? ;)

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the complexity and layered symbolism of the Matrix movies has been vastly overstated. Yeah, they had some pretty cool ideas and more layers than the average hollywood movie, but we're not talking Homer here. This was not great literature.

The first movie was great because it was a tight, well-told, engaging story. The latter two I think suffered from a bit of trying to hard. It was like reading a book by Tom Clancy trying to sound like James Joyce. (Or like the movie AI, with Spielberg trying to be Kubrick).

And I think a lot of the mysterious prophecy/symbolism/technology in all three of the movies boiled down to reconfiguration the main deflector dish. There's nothing wrong with that, but don't try to read into it too much.

Re:The Matrix

[PoopJuggler]

It is that very fact, that he can alter "the matrix" from the "real world" and the fact that he can "see" things in code in the "real world" that proves the real world was just another matrix. There are two matrix-es. One for people who accept the main matrix, and then another for people who don't accept the main matrix. It's all a system of control to keep both sets of people content. The accepters are content in matrix #1 because they just are, and the non-accepters are content in matrix #2 because they THINK they have escaped the matrix and are fighting the power.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember getting an e-mail sent to me explaining exactly what happened in matrix revolutions and why it did. I had seen it already so it wasn't like I was getting a spoiler. So I read it and it actually made sense. You just had to really pay attention to the movie which most people just didn't get.

Re:The Matrix

[danila]

As far as I understand, it did have some questionable physics, but most of it was based on hard science, although often it was stretched too far. There was an interview (here on /.?) with the science advisor behind The Core and he sounded quite believable, although he clearly was not up to the task of making a scientifically sound disaster movie. May be noone is...

Re:The Matrix

[infiniphonic]

what are you talking about black hole rules !!! a black hole that looks like a 2nd grader drew it and robots that look like they are made of wood is all i need !

Re:The Matrix

[Grishnakh]

Um, no. They clearly said in The Matrix that the sun was obscured by pollution or something in the sky. Sure, the cows-and-grass method is great for generating energy using solar power if you have plenty of sun; otherwise you need another method.

What doesn't make sense is how they use humans to generate energy. Humans still require fuel in the form of food, and presently, we get most (if not all) of our food from solar energy. As omnivores, we either eat plants (which grow using solar energy directly), or animals (which eat plants). Maybe the machines figured out how to feed the humans using fungus, by growing lots of mushrooms.

Re:The Matrix

[Moekandu]

I agree. I personally thought the Matrix Trilogy was brilliant.

If the total extent of your education in math is algebra, then calculus looks like garbage. But it's not.

25% of the people who watched The Matrix didn't get it.
50% of the people who watched Reloaded didn't get it.
75% of the people who watched Revolutions didn't get it.

This doesn't suprise me. Most people don't get the subtleties of Shakespeare, but his work is considered brilliant because they've been told so.
It's taken for granted.

I can actually picture some minor lord in 1602 telling his friends, "You know, I liked Hamlet and all, and the blood and swordfights were great, but it just wasn't that deep."

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

The original Major Don West from the TV show was a stereotypical dumb jock with too much power and not enough judgement used as a foil for Dr. Smith.

Portrayal of said musclehead moron is well within Matt LeBlanc's acting ability, so he was perfectly typecast as Major Don West.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU ARE AN IDIOT

I can't believe that you're comparing The Matrix to Shakespeare

Re:The Matrix

[33degrees]

I think the answer lies in the fact that Neo is not actually completely human. In a nutshell, my take on it is that 'the one' is bred by the machines for the purpose of 'balancing the equation' or whatever the architect called it (he may even be some kind of android), and his supernatural powers are given to him as a way of ensuring that he fulfills his role; they force him to play out the role of messiah whether he wants to or not.

Regardless of whether this was the intention of the brothers, his having these powers fits into the religous symbolism of the movies, and I think it was wise for them not to spell it out; for me, the discussion that this provokes are a big part of the pleasure of science fiction.

Re:The Matrix

[alanmusician]

Even as a big fan of Revolutions, I still have to disagree. I hear people spout this big-headed rhetoric about how deep these movies are, waving around the word "philosophy" like it was a sceptre of supreme intellect. In general, I see the arguments of those who do this as pedantic, with an attitude of "if you don't think this is "philosophical gold" then you're simply less intelligent than I!"

People who think that these films are so deep rarely come up with any profundities when put under the lights about what exactly they mean. How did it impact your life? How does it impact all of life? What great revelations are brought to light by these films? Can you show me something that'll knock me off my cerebral feet? I didn't think so.

The thing that Revolutions and Shakespeare have in common is levels of human drama. Painting a picture that makes the audience indentify on some level is good drama, not philosophy. Painting this picture can be achieved by both forcing questions and pulling the audience into the action.

Re:The Matrix

[StingRay02]

Dammit, you need to warn us before you go spouting spoilers like that!!!

(joke)

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I think it's more than just cool things, it was original cool things. The Matrix had a new spin on man-against-machine, and the cool tricks, and Neo's discovery and progressive mastery of them, were part of that story. The first scene was one of the best beginnings to any film ever. The plot is coherent throughout, but it takes half of the film for you to work out what's really happening.

In contrast, the sequels were fairly routine man-against-machine sfx-fests. Any action inside the matrix, or outside it for that matter, was more an excuse for big special effects set pieces than an integral part of the story. Sure, they were more spectacular effects than many before them, but not particularly original, if only because The Matrix already did them, and more importantly, not particularly relevant.

In their own right, the sequels wouldn't have been bad action/sfx sci-fi movies, but they were nothing special. I guess it was just too tough an act to follow.

Re:The Matrix

[DeadScreenSky]

The Matrix Revolutions, just like Reloaded, is a masterpiece in disguise and a new kind of cinema all in one: nobody can say to have completely grasped it, during a single viewing.

I think you need to watch some more cinema. Easy example of a popular film that had a similar impact: Kubrick's 2001, which came out quite a bit earlier then the Matrix series! Huge groups of people would see it multiple times, discuss it, look at the different layers, etc. Plenty of other film examples out there, too - I am rather partial to David Lynch's work, which features the exact same 'new kind of cinema' quality that you speak of. How about the film version of Ghost in the Shell, which obviously inspired much of the ideas and visuals in the Matrix series? Speaking of anime, how about other stuff like Akira, Memories, or Evangelion? How about plays, like Hamlet?! Or hey, what about the Judeo-Christian Bible!?

This 'new kind of cinema' you speak of is not even remotely new.

Re:The Matrix

[VoraciousGorak]

The Matrix had depth.
Revolutions had depth, as well as an insane number of little fighting deathbots!
Reloaded... that served as a bridge between the two for me. I could never truly picture that movie as anything more than a good action flick (nice car chase!), whereas TM and TM:Rev gave more of that [Neo]"Whoa..."[/Neo] feel.

Re:The Matrix

[Valthonis]

The stairwell fight is just gorgeous, and Juno Reactor fits it well.

Umm... the Chateau fight-scene music was done by Rob Dougan. And on short notice, too.

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that was one of the most entertaining movies I saw this year.

Re:The Matrix

[kamog]

The comment above is as "insightful" as a crate of rusty hammers. Simple. If the king does not appear to wear any clothes, there is a chance that he is really naked. The second and third installments of the Matrix theory have plot holes you can throw a rhinoceros through, and the "philosophy" spouted in the second movie does not add up to much. A much more profound look at the same problem (layers gradually peeled off perceived reality) was delivered decades ago by Stanislaw Lem in one of his Ijon Tichy stories. There exist many arguably better and subtler cinematographic adaptations of the same theme - Dark City, Existenz, 13th Floor... And it doesn't help matters that by the beginning of the second movie of their trilogy Wachowski brothers apparently lost all the sense of self-irony (if they ever had it), along with common sense. The final insult of the third movie was in the form of fighting machines with the operator all but crucified on the front armor plate.

N% of the people who watched the movie didn't get it - because there is nothing there to get. You can only pour out of a vessel what was poured into it. As for the % of the people who "got" the second and third movies - I would expect it to be higher: in Andersen's tale, almost all the people did claim to see the king's new clothes. Advocates of the last two Wachowski trilogy installments sadden me - trying so desperately to represent themselves as thinking people yet so afraid to think for themselves...

Re:The Matrix

[nobody69]

Reloaded was a great action flick, that me setup for a deep philosophical film with kickass action sequences. Unfortunately, Revolutions wasa hurried mess with a crappy ending.

Re:The Matrix

[nobody69]

Revolutions was such a huge letdown after the buildup from Reloaded though. There was nothing as wild as the stairway/chase sequence, and the ending left me ... flat I guess. Also, the big fight with Smith, after the rain-soaked walk through the city filled with Smiths, was just a letdown. Neo and Smith slamming into one another at Mach 5 over and over again is pretty boring after all that came before. And the scenes with the Merovingian seemed like they had been cut down from something much longer. And from the Animatrix and Reloaded, the Kid seemed like he would have some bigger impact. After all, he saved himself, something even Neo didn't pull off. I did like the subway station and the ending for Neo and Trinity and the Big Giant Head of sentinels, and lots of other bits, but the whole thing was overall a disappointment. Mileage varies.

Re:The Matrix

[nobody69]

Wow, I disagree with almost everything is your post except for the last para. X2 was the best movie of the summer (that I saw of course). I loved that they set up the end so well, and that the end sets up the next onbe so well...

Re:The Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a bad comment but needs more fucking smileys.

Re:The Matrix

[Xrikcus]

What was there to "get" in the movies. I mean, I came out of the cinema feeling I'd understood all but why some niggly little person did something small somewhere, usual thing. I didn't understand what there was that other people were claiming to not understand. Having said that I felt the films were as deep as a puddle on a dry day.

First film was good, the other two I didn't see the point in at all.

Re:The Matrix

[Xrikcus]

But does understanding that actually lead to a greater understanding of what happens in the films? I don't see it. It provides a link, and explains what they were thinking when they created the films, but it doesn't really improve the understanding of the story itself.

Re:The Matrix

[Xrikcus]

Nono, you'd feed the cows the same way you feed humans. It'd just be easier to keep the cows happy in a matrix that was just a field of grass, than to keep humans happy with all their complexities. I think that was the point being made.

Re:The Matrix

[woohoodonuts]

you're missing the point of an allegory... it's not supposed to be a link to a new story--it IS the story. the matrix is an allegory, and hence--an interpretation... if you miss the allegory, the matrix trilogy hardly makes any sense at all and has no artistic cohesiveness... basically, there is no secondary parallel storyline in this circumstance. the characters are personifications that don't exist outside of the allegory...

Re:The Matrix

[Xrikcus]

I can see that it's an allegory. If that was FULLY intentional, though I'm still not 100% sure it was, concepts taken, certainly, a fully intentional allegory? hmm, have to think about that.

I'm not so sure that sheds light on the plot itself though. You can use the plot and link it to the second coming, fine, that all works. It characterises abstract ideas behind the second coming - that makes it an allegory.

In fact, thinking about it being an allegory, that's all the more reason for it to make sense on its own. Allegories are usually used to explain a concept, make it make more sense. The matrix certainly doesn't do that, what it does do is attempt to apply concepts to a sci-fi storyline with the result that you have to accept far fetched possibilities, based on it being an allegory, that have no real place in the story.

The Hulk

[qewl]

The Hulk. Need I say more? I wanted to throw something heavy at the screen during most of the showing.

Re:The Hulk

[twoslice]

Are you kidding??? That movie should be nominated for the best comedy of the year award! I never laughed so hard in all my life...

Re:The Hulk

[merphant]

Seriously. This movie was horrible, and long. Near the end of the film, one of the characters said "I'm sorry" and someone in the theater shouted back, "Not as sorry as this movie!"

Re:The Hulk

[cujo_1111]

I don't think it was meant to be funny...

Re:The Hulk

[twoslice]

You kidding right? How can someone take it seriously when a big green guy bounces like a rubber ball all over the place?

Re:The Hulk

[Brandybuck]

Ditto. I rented it a couple of weeks ago. I was expecting "dumb and fun". What I got was "stupid and excruciating."

Re:The Hulk

[HolyCoitus]

Yes, the Hulk was like watching paint dry... I couldn't even make fun of it since it was so bad. I just felt like a jackass for seeing it. Exactly the same as I would feel if I sat there watching paint dry.

Re:The Hulk

[KReilly]

Don't equate your short attention span with a movie actually being bad. I thought purley on the basis of the way it was shot and edited was worth the money at the theaters.. Not to mention the hulk hands were the coolest damn toy I ever played with..

Re:The Hulk

[laxcat]

The Hulk was made by an accomplished film maker that made one of my (and probably one of your) favorite films of all time . Visually and artistically, Hulk (while not the BEST movie ever) was not nearly as bad as everyone pretends. I think the problem was everyone was expecting "fun but dumb" and when they received something that was a little more experimental in style and truer to the tortured character from the comic books (especially the later ones), everyone felt cheated that they didn't get a "real" comic book movie. Maybe it wasn't Lee's best decision to try passing off something so different to a summer movie audience, but in a purely academic sense it really wasn't that bad. I would even say it was good.

(Revoutions, of the other hand... I've seen better writing on a cereal box. I think they really phoned that one in.)

Re:The Hulk

[forgotmypassword]

Are you kidding, that movie was pure Shakespeare. The entire father son conflict was like right out of an unwritten play. The sceen near the end where bruce and his father were having dialog under the spotlight - it was such an homage to the theatre.

This was one of the best movies of its kind that I have seen since Akira Kurasawa's "Ran".

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

THANK YOU!!! It's so great to hear someone agree with me on this. The Hulk was the best movie of the year as far as i'm concerned. It was dark and deliberate, and had some of the best editing i've seen (comic-style frames etc). Sure it wasn't a popcorn beat'em-up, but it wasn't supposed to be! I found it both visually and emotionally stimulating. Perhaps a lot of the people watching haven't experienced the kind of scarred childhood Bruce did, so they couldn't identify with it? Screw 'em. It was a great movie.

Re:The Hulk

[BizDiz]

Well, yeah, but that's because you're a pretentious, effete fop.

Re:The Hulk

[Zork the Almighty]

I wanted to throw something heavy at the screen during most of the showing.

Prehaps you are the Hulk ?

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

I watched Crouching Tiger again recently after seeing the Hulk. It doesn't strike me as being as masterly as I thought it was the first time I saw it. I couldn't help thinking, on the second viewing, that Ang Lee had fluked it.

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely disagree. The Hulk was terrible. Even just in a "purely academic sense," it was terrible. Yes, it used experimental visuals. They were even kind of cute. But for the movie to count as a success, it has to have a story we care about, and characters we care about. (I didn't say "like", I said "care about." It's okay if we hate them; it's not okay if we don't care what happens to them.)

Oh, and nothing happens in the first hour. Nothing!

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

emotionally stimulating

Shut up, faggot.

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

You are such a fucking faggot.

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

Oooh, he made Sense and Sensibility?

Crouching Tiger was nice, but I mean, Iron Monkey came out first (outside the U.S.), and in my opinion it's better. Hulk just proves that Ang Lee is an art fag that doesn't know action, Crouching Tiger was the work of a truly accomplished crew that Ang Lee just happened to be heading. He can suck my big fat balls, he ruined the easiest movie to make in the world. What was that, three or four origins? Why? Maybe that's not his fault, but all the weird cuts were, and the length of it I imagine was too, and he should have at least had the decency to turn the script away for being the piece of shit it was.

Re:The Hulk

[noisehole]

i second that, i was blown away by crouching tiger hidden dragon and hulk wasnt as good as it could be, but it surely wasnt as bad as ppl are yelling.

same goes for the matices, ppl are expecting something different, but the 3 movies as a whole were damn good

Re:The Hulk

[TaxSlave]

I enjoyed The Hulk. It wasn't the greatest movie of the year, by any means, but it was a decent trip to the movies.

I thought the comic-book framing for the scene transitions was very innovative, and at times brilliant. The CGI wasn't nearly as bad as some have made it out to be in this discussion. The Bruce Banner character was very well done.

Like any good geek, I'm a big fan of Jennifer Connolly. The helicopter shot of her from late in the film was one of the best shots of the entire movie, with her seeming to descend from Heaven as the angel she is (to the Hulk, that is. Yeah, we'll say that).

The one really bad thing about The Hulk was the entire father subplot. It gave nothing to the movie except clutter, and after the movie should have ended, we had to sit through more of the same clutter. Want to release a special edition of this movie? Cut 30 minutes out, and forget Bruce ever had a dad.

Re:The Hulk

[cgenman]

It wasn't the first time that a legendary asian filmmaker has made a dud. In fact, it's not ang lee's first dud either.

Everyone is entitled to half of their films being well-intentioned failures... that shouldn't tarnish a reputation too much. Ang Lee is floating on the upper half of that equation, and is successful overall. The Wachowskis are two and two. Personally I feel Revolutions received a lot of the venom that should have been directed towards Reloaded. Forcing Keanu to act without his eyes was a stroke of brilliance, and really helped his performance.

Re:The Hulk

[MrCam]

I have to agree that the CGI was really bad, and the acting, and the plot but the whole movie wasn't bad. I think the direction was pretty cool. I liked how they had the panals like in a comic book. So if you ignore the dialog and CGI the actual frame work of the movie is good.

Of course you can't make a good tasting cake with flour made of shit, but it can look pretty.

Re:The Hulk

[MrCam]

I was watching the League of Ex. Gentalmen the other day and thought that Mr. Hyde was done really well and if he had a green tint would have made a an excelent Hulk.

Re:The Hulk

[schon]

some of the best editing i've seen (comic-style frames etc

Oh come on - those "comic-style frames" were annoyingly stupid.. the only reason they were there I can think of is that the director wanted to dupe people into seeing the movie multiple times, so they could actually follow what was being said.

Properly done, split screen can be an effective device (watch "When Harry Met Sally", the four-way split screen was done exceedingly well) - but in the Hulk, it was just annoying - multiple characters talking about different things at the same time just makes the viewer miss what's being said in at least one of the dialogues, if not in all of them (as they try to switch from one to another.)

If the "comic-style frames" were done properly (ie, round-robin dialog, that clearly gives the viewer focus) it would have been OK, but the director apparenly just wanted to get people to spend extra money coming back to the theater to get the "full experience" - not realizing that the whole movie was such a stinking pile that after seeing it once, nobody would want to listen to the full dialog.

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

RAN?!??!? ahahahaa.

sure. king lear at its best.

IF you can get beyond the subtitles and ridiculous use of symbolism.

Re:The Hulk

[hawkfish]

Maybe it's just because I went to boarding school (coincidentally with the the author Rick Moody) and knew people like this, but I found The Ice Storm harrowing.

Re:The Hulk

[kandrewnet]

Ride with the Devil was an engrossing film that almost no on saw. I really enjoyed it on DVD.

Re:The Hulk

[stonecypher]

This was one of the best movies of its kind that I have seen since Akira Kurasawa's "Ran".

You should burn out your tongue and commit seppuku for even joking like that. ;)

Re:The Hulk

[sTalking_Goat]

I completely agree. Hulk wasn't bad, it was just to artsy. If Banner didn't turn green and huge, and the budget was ten times as less and it premeired at sundance you would be heraring different things all together... I don't know who's bright idea it was to hire Ang Lee anyway. Probably some idiot producer who thought Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon was ABOUT kung-fu fighting.

Re:The Hulk

[Matimus]

If I remember correctly Broken Arrow was fairly successful as well.

Re:The Hulk

[xTown]

I will always remember Broken Arrow with fondness, because I saw it immediately after I saw the absolutely horrendous "Barb Wire". And I mean immediately--we left the theater and said "We need to see another movie right away to get that out of our heads" and we turned around and walked right back in and got tickets to Broken Arrow.

Compared to "Barb Wire", it's a friggin' masterpiece.

Re:The Hulk

[Mike Markley]

I had a similar experience with "Pitch Black" -- a mildly entertaining action/scifi flick, but nothing substantial. However, I saw it back-to-back with "Mission to Mars." Vin Diesel came out looking like an oscar contender in that matchup...

Re:The Hulk

[mr100percent]

"Why should I care what an actor says about anything other than acting?"

Well, Jack Black pointed out that since Washington has lots to say about how movies and music should be regulated, then conversely the actors and musicians should have a say on how Washington should be regulated.

Re:The Hulk

[JamieF]

>"Why should I care what an actor says about anything other than acting? "

Why should anyone care what a computer geek has to say about movies? Obviously you're not an Officially Certified Movie Critic with a PhD in literary criticism so you can't possibly have a valid opinion or have anything interesting to say.

Re:The Hulk

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll bet you prefer Charlie Chaplin over Laurel and Hardy too.

Definite "style over substance" type.

(Nods to Preacher authors)

Re:The Hulk

[bender179]

I didn't see The Hulk, but personally i found Crouching Tiger a huge disappointment after all of the hype. I'm a big fan of Ang Lee because of the amazing movie The Ice Storm, which is one of my favorites ever, but I feel like nothing else I've seen of Lee's is anywhere near as good. In any event, for comic book movies (at least, those involving superheroes) to work, you need more of an action director than an artsy one. Spider-Man and X-Men 2 were in no way "high art," but they were enjoyable as movies, and that should be the test of any movie, not what it is or isn't true to.

Re:The Hulk

[robertjw]

Look, John Woo SUCKS. I am so highly irritated that the next Phillip K. Dick story is going to be directed by "Mr. Slow Motion" himself.

The Hulk was unusual, but failed more because it wasn't dumb enough than because it was poorly made.

Surprises

[shawkin]

Lost in Translation
American Splendor

Re:Surprises

[The Only Druid]

Frankly, American Splendor was utterly uniteresting to me. Lost in Translation, however, was brilliant. I dont think I ever respected Murray as an actor before - though I've thought him to be a fantastic comedian - but this movie showed that he actually had the ability to evoke complex emotion. Scarlett similarly was impressive. The two of them are the movie, and I'd be shocked if they're utterly excluded from the Oscars.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

I second that emotion . Three cheers for Lost in Translation

Re:Surprises

[starphish]

Wow! You picked my two favorite movies this year. The acting in both were amazing. I actually saw them both on the same day. I saw Lost in Translation at 6:30 and American Splendor at 9:00. It was a good day.

Re:Surprises

[danmitchell]

I dont think I ever respected Murray as an actor before - though I've thought him to be a fantastic comedian - but this movie showed that he actually had the ability to evoke complex emotion.

What, you've never seen Rushmore? Murray won several awards for his performance in that wonderful film.

Re:Surprises

[gladbach]

One movie I walked into thinking it was going to suck, was last samurai. I walked out having thoroughly enjoyed it.

Go figure.

Re:Surprises

[PIBM]

I've just seen it today and I've been really impressed. Remind me of braveheart but still a very good story!

Re:Surprises

[flacco]

Lost in Translation

dang, i thought i was going to be the first on Planet Geek to suggest this movie.

American Splendor

i've read some of the comics (or, if you insist, "graphic novels"), and thought they were OK, but nothing to write home about.

Re:Surprises

[DNS-and-BIND]

Tom Cruise as John Walker Lindh? No thanks.

Re:Surprises

[Shant3030]

Rushmore is the best movie made in recent times.

First time I saw it, I had never laughed so hard. Now, when I watch it, it brings a tear to my eye.

And that soundtrack.... my gosh...

Re:Surprises

[kirkjobsluder]

Lost in Translation is my pick with Bill Murray as the best male actor performance of the year. One of the best defining scenes has Murray as the aging unknown actor with the brief 70s moment of glory doing a photo shoot to hawk whiskey. The photographer fires off a series of thickly accented names, "Frank Sinatra, Sean Connery, Roger Moore" and with each name Murray with just a subtle shift in position, a slight change in the angle of his eyes and his body becomes a characature of Sinatra, Connery and Moore. The scene is both funny and pathetic at the same time. Murray's character riffs on all of these icons, softly cracking one-liners at the expense of his audience of very professional Japanese advertising photographers, while the eyes reveal that this is a washed-up over-the-hill actor who is being paid a million dollars to sit in a chair with a glass of ice tea and pretend to be Sinatra hawking whiskey.

And while Murray is pulling off the acting job of his career, Sophia Coppola earns a name for herself as a director by keeping the entire thing hanging together, and delivering an astonishing romance without sentiment. Johannsen does an excellent job paired with Murray. Of the movies I've seen this year, this one sticks with me the most.

Re:Surprises

[Codifex Maximus]

> Rushmore is the best movie made in recent times.
> First time I saw it, I had never laughed so hard.
> Now, when I watch it, it brings a tear to my eye.

Groundhog Day did this for me. "Don't drive angry!" heh Though, it's not so recent. :/

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

I loved Lost in Translation. I listened to the soundtrack about 4 times a day for a long time. One of the best movies I've ever seen.

Re:Surprises

[pedro]

Another really interesting sentiment-free romantic film is Linklater's Before Sunrise
I truly wish more people had seen that most worthy effort.
Thankfully, there's a sequel in the works.
I was just DYING to see how that relationship turned out (or not).
Linklater ROOLZ!

Re:Surprises

[xTown]

The script for "Lost In Translation" was pure genius. If there was ever a movie that deserved a screenwriting award, it's this one--just for what he tells her at the end. (Yes, I'm trying desperately to avoid a spoiler.) That was certainly one of the greatest moments in movies this year.

Sofia Coppola deserves an Oscar for the script, and a nomination for Best Director. I'm not so sure she deserves to win, though; there were some problems with the flow and pacing, and definitely some scenes that didn't need to be there. (For example, after the nth long sequence of Scarlett Johansson wandering around, I was thinking "We get the message, already.") On the other hand, the performance that she got from Bill Murray was just incredible, so it could go either way.

It will be a shame when Bill Murray doesn't win the Oscar, because his was literally the performance of a lifetime. I was overwhelmed. There were so many moments when he could have spilled over into being "that Bill Murray character", and didn't. He showed remarkable restraint that I didn't think he was capable of. He deserves the award. I doubt he'll get it.

Re:Surprises

[putamare]

What movie that won an Oscar gives you the impression that movies that deserve Oscars actually win them?

Re:Surprises

[Wateshay]

• American Beauty
• Braveheart
• Schindler's List
• Unforgiven
• Rain Man
• Platoon
• Amadeus
• Ghandi
• The Deer Hunter
• The Godfather
• The French Connection
• Lawrence of Arabia
• Ben Hur
• On The Waterfront
• Casablanca
• and
• All Quiet on the Western Front

...just to name a few.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

What does he tell her at the end?

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont think I ever respected Murray as an actor before - though I've thought him to be a fantastic comedian - but this movie showed that he actually had the ability to evoke complex emotion.

I guess you missed him in "The Razor's Edge".

Re:Surprises

[CanadaDave]

I also thought he was good in Wild Things. It was the first non-comedic role I saw him in, and he was really good. He was kind of funny, but he didn't ruin the movie at all, in fact he made it much better even though he had just a small lawyer. As soon as I saw him in the neck brace when he first appeared, I thought oh no.... but it turned out he was great.

Re:Surprises

[saskboy]

I consider comediens actors too, as long as they aren't standing in front of a mic.

If you've seen Scrooged, Groundhog Day, or The Man Who Knew Too Little you'd see both a great actor, and funny man in action.

Re:Surprises

[Sir0x0]

Coppola deserves the nod for Screenplay, but not for Direction. The direction was a near disaster, and if not for the excellent script and Bill Murray's outstanding acting, the movie would have fallen flat. Murray deserves not only the nod, but the Oscar for best Actor. Coppola admittedly added many (too many?) personal touches to the movie, and that may be what made the direction seem so washed out.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone else has mentioned great Bill Murray movies, but the most important and best has to be Ghostbusters....and then followed by Ghostbusters 2

Re:Surprises

[Wolfrider]

--Lost In Translation was horribly (horribly!) overrated. I paid matinee price for it, and wish I hadn't bothered.

Re:Surprises

[Wolfrider]

--I'll agree with you there. The trailer *really* does not do the movie justice. It gives you the impression that they're trying to make Tom Cruise as the "last samurai" along with a STD-HOLLYWOOD-PLOT love-story for background. I saw the film somewhat under protest (it was the only thing playing that I hadn't seen yet) and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention Razor's Edge.

Actually his acting (or the editing) sucked for half of that movie, but evidently he had an epiphany in the middle and wound up with a great performance

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy whose comics and life the movie was based off of talked at my college. SOunded interesting but without seeing hte movie it was boring.

Re:Surprises

[16K Ram Pack]

The worst thing is that comedy is rarely taken seriously ;)

Last comedy to win Best Film? Probably Annie Hall in 1977.

The academy it seems would rather pick something grand or worthy than an excellent, well crafted comedy. Groundhog Day is a gem, but got how many Oscar nominations? None (saying that, against Schindler's List, The Piano and Remains of the Day it's a tough call, but it's better than The Fugitive).

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Enjoyed the ay the scenes were put together and filmed. Each given its own space, and contained enough emotion and character to fill an entire movie. Others would have spoiled them with narration, believing the audience too stupid or too uncreative to figure out "what's happening". Instead, Lost in Translation perfectly captures the awkwardnesses of life's moments and paths.

Re:Surprises

[Moofie]

The French Connection?

You're kidding, right? I was surprised...by HOW BIG A TURD THAT MOVIE WAS.

Would you please explain to me, in small words, why people think that was a good movie? I keep thinking I missed something...and then I think "Oh yeah! I missed the part when the movie DIDN'T SUCK!".

And there was NO car chase in that damn flick.

Re:Surprises

[kiwimate]

Okay, I'm late, but just had to mention:

Winged Migration
You want stunning cinematography, this is it. You want a film that will leave you months later looking at a flock of birds in the air and wanting to join them, this is it. Minimal dialog and sound track, it rests on the sheer power of the visual impact -- which, to get in the geek factor, prompted a lot of people to wonder "how did they do that". (I'm looking forward to the DVD special features on this.)

Whale Rider
Yes, I'm from New Zealand, so probably biased, but I really enjoyed this. Good proof you don't need a huge budget and blowaway CGI if you actually have a good story and a couple of actors who can, you know, act.

But, for me, Winged Migration should be on every inevitable "end of the year wrapup best films" self-indulgence from the critics.

Re:Surprises

[GeckoX]

Wow, I'll give you cudos for posting that on your account rather than anonymously.
If you had, it'd be insta-troll!

Now, I most certainly do NOT agree in any way shape or form!

Re:Surprises

[fodder69]

You are retarded right? The movies you picked are all great, bu do you really think Jesus spoke english?

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Notice the quotes around his sig.
I'm fairly certain he just thinks it's funny.
Don't take anything you read on slashdot to heart, ok?

Re:Surprises

[WinDoze]

Watch out for subway gropers!

Re:Surprises

[WinDoze]

Winged Migration is INCREDIBLE. I just rented the DVD two nights ago, and to be honest the "Making Of" featurette was my favorite part of the disc. I was stunned with what they had done to make this movie. I won't give it away, but buy/rent the DVD and watch it.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

he also was good in royal tennebaums which was made by the same guy - rob anderson. rushmore is a fantastic movie.

Re:Surprises

[fognugen]

What would the spoiler be? You can't hear one word of what he says.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought he said gophers.

Re:Surprises

[volponi]

American Splendor was one of the bests of 2003. So do The Barbarian Invasions. Matrix? Hummm... The first movie is better.

Re:Surprises

[filmsmith]

All great flicks.

And to add mine

Dr. Strangelove

Casablanca (oops, you said that!)

Throne of Blood

Maltese Falcon

The Killing

Annie Hall

Hunt for Red October

Goodfella's

Apocalypse Now!

Lost in Translation

In the Bedroom

The Trois Couleurs Trilogy

and Chinatown

My list for this year is here.

fs

Re:Surprises

[Moofie]

Fair enough. I watched this movie with some friends, and with my dad, and with my friend's dad. Both of the gentlemen from a previous generation seemed to remember this movie being good, but on watching it again, there was just no there there.

I really don't get it. What was appealing about the film? Two generic cops, chasing a generic McGuffin, having generic car chases...

I mean, maybe I'm jaded, (and, more to the point, maybe I've seen all the cop movies for which French Connection was the prototype) but that movie has nothing on (say) Ronin, which gives you TWO of the greatest car chases in cinema history for your movie dollar.

And that hot Irish chick.

Re:Surprises

[Moofie]

Gosh. When the movie poster says:

Tom Cruise

the
Last Samurai

I wonder why people think that. When is Hollywood going to stop treating people like they're stupid? I know it's popular to think that everybody except yourself is a mouth breathing idiot, but we really need to get past that.

People are smart. Treat them that way. They'll like it, and buy stuff from you.

Re:Surprises

[drudd]

I think that's often critical to enjoying some of the crap that hollywood puts out...

If you expect nothing, you really can't be disappointed, and if there's anything at all to enjoy, you'll be happy. That's why I didn't hate Matrix Reloaded, I went into the theater expecting not to like it, so anything good stood out.

Doug

Re:Surprises

[asparagus]

Ahh, but it was the first generic Hollywood car chase.

Re:Surprises

[xTown]

Well, that's the spoiler. The greatest writer on earth couldn't have come up with something that didn't sound trite or banal or cliched, and the fact that she chose to handle it that way was really great.

I just didn't want to up and reveal that; it's better if you discover it for yourself.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Biggest surprise? Secretary. It's a very odd erotic love story that is probably the strangest "feel good" movie I've ever seen. James Spader and Maggie Gyllenhaal are incredible.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0274812/

Re:Surprises

[stonecypher]

You seem to be neglecting the "of 2003" part in order to karma whore. Hell, the bulk of these movies are greatly overshadowed in the run os filmmaking history (exceptions to Schindler's List, Rain Man, Amadeus and The Godfather.)

It is my opinion, to keep in your thread rather than that of the story, that film students are too quick to heap praises onto the same damn things everyone else does than to generate their own opinions. Moreover, they tend to conflate plot with fine filmmaking, and to be apologetic for the past not having some of the understanding that modern day filmmaking. Whereas I agree that it's unfair to compare things like special effects, things like direction, acting and camera work are what *makes* a film; you cannot compare the past without the present and still have an objective list of the greats.

This is why I feel most of Hitchcock's films can be largely expunged from these lists. I respect that he invented and broached much of the genre, but only a few of his films really hold up these days - rear window, 39th guest, but good god, how long has it been since you saw The Birds? It looks like a *student* film.

As such, I also feel that you can strike Casablanca and AQotWF. Yes, they're both fine films. They're not nearly what Rain Man or Amadeus is.

Why all American films?

Where's Basquiat? Ran? Kundun? Titus? Waking life? I meen, shit, man, you named Braveheart. Don't get me wrong, that's a good and fun movie, but it's no Being There, no Gummo, no Harold and Maude, Kids, or Dead Man. Why don't I see Pi, Requiem for a Dream, Silence of the Lambs, Howard's End, From Hell, Fear of a Black Hat?

Why no Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead? Where are Ronin and Ghost Dog? Cannibal: the Musical? The Bride with White Hair? Waiting for Guffman? Blade Runner? Army of Darkness?

How come there are no Mononoke Himes, no Spirited Aways, no Rail of the North Stars? Where are Tokyo Fist and Dark City? Why no Ferris Bueller's Day Off? Where's Fong Sai Yuk, a legend adapted to modern filmmaking so well that the average white guy doesn't realize it's not a kung-fu flick at all? why no Hameer Films, Ed Wood flicks? Where are Amistad and Freeway? Where's Tetsuo 2: Boddy hammer?

Where's The Lord of The Rings? Let's be honest, that movie is a fucking masterpiece. And from the man that made Meet the Feebles. :D

Where is the Dark Crystal? Where's Shallow Grave? How about The Full Monty, or SLC Punk? Where's the Violinist of Hameln? Empty Mirror? X (either the malcom movie or the anime?) Where's I'm Gonna Git You Sucka, or The Wall? How about some Brazil, or The Last Supper action?

Why no Kubrick films? Fuck, you could get +5: insightful just listing those, if you ignore plot wide shut.

Where's Blazing Saddles?

Right. So, anyway, let's stick to 2003, shall we?

Re:Surprises

[Moofie]

In that case, I malign it for its evil hellspawn children.

Scratch that. Evil hellspawn would make a good movie. Boring car chases are just...boring.

Re:Surprises

[CFTM]

If you'd actually taken the time to see The Last Samurai you'd know that it is actually quite a good movie. I am not a Tom Cruise fan, I think he's overrated but I was able to watch the movie and not believe that it was "just Top Gun set in the 1870's". The costumes and the cinematography were both amazing. The story was engaging and interesting, and it even gives you a bit of a glimpse into a culture that is foreign from modern american culture.

Re:Surprises

[elemental23]

It's called humor. Look it up sometime.

The fact that it's in quotation marks (you know, these things -> "") suggests that it's a quote from somewhere, not an original statement by the poster.

Re:Surprises

[Anonymous Coward]

Half those are just multiculturalist, egalitarian pieces of crap.

Schindlers List? Lawrence of Arabia?

Please.

Re:Surprises

[satanami69]

You should also catch his performance in Cradle will Rock.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0150216/

Re:Surprises

[hambone_p]

When I saw Murray in The Razor's Edge is when I realized he could act. Even better than Robin Williams, who's acting always seems to still contain just a little bit or Mork.

Re:Surprises

[The Only Druid]

I feel I should respond to one film in particular: Gummo. I watched this while I was in Oz last fall, and frankly was certainly interested but unimpressed. I felt I was just watching an ethnography of a bunch of Southerners, more than watching a 'movie'. Thats not a direct insult: its still good, but its not a film.

Re:Surprises

[Moofie]

Why would I go to see it? Why would I bother? What, I'm supposed to shell out $8 just to have an educated opinion?

Their marketing was designed to cause me to form an opinion. It did. That opinion is negative. Hoist by their own petard...

Re:Surprises

[sapped]

Lost in Translation, however, was brilliant.

I must have watched a different movie with the same title, because everybody keeps raving about this movie and I thought it was the most inane drivel I had seen in years.

Re:Surprises

[stonecypher]

of a bunch of Southerners

Worse: it's Xenia, Ohio.

pfftt

[Frequanaut]

LoTR...meh..Go check out Bubba HoTep

Re:pfftt

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to give my opinion on Bubba Ho-Tep, but unfortunately hasn't come out in my area, but after tomorrow... :)

X-men 2 was better than the first. Pirates was better than expected. The Matrix sequels did not live up to their hype. Elf was fairly funny.

ROTK the best

[the_2nd_coming]

and I have not had a chance to see it yet!!!

I just know :-)

worst...Gilie or how ever you spell that crappy Ben and Jen movie.

Re:ROTK the best

[l0tu53at3r]

I'm willing to bet you actually do know the spelling of the movie. Or at the very least know how to find the spelling, considering the vast amounts of information you have access to. :-)

Re:ROTK the best

[Anonymous Coward]

I just got back from it. It is the ONLY big title movie this year to live up its hype. It had some weak points, and the end was overly drawn out, but overall, awesome.

Re:ROTK the best

[the_2nd_coming]

your right...I am just lazy.

Re:ROTK the best

[scrabblenut]

and I have not had a chance to see it yet!!!

I just know :-)

I got back from seeing it last night... It was incredibly beautiful. The 3+ hours you spend in the theater won't be noticed... the movie is very engrossing and things like time will seem mundane.

I was very fortunate to see a Matinee of it - less than 40 people in the entire theater. When I got out, there was a very long lineup of ticketholders for the evening showing.

I know I'll likely see it as many times as possible while it's in the theaters. In the meantime, I have the EEs of FOTR and TTT.

Re:ROTK the best

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen it twice now and I have to say that over all it was the most fantastic of the three for story interpretation. I think some CG was not done as well as the other two - but I still think it was good. The scene with the Riders of Rohan charging into the Hosts of Mordor was incredible - the best scene in all three movies in my opinion. I wanted to get up and yell and cheer!

I can not say enough good things about the movie. Most of my disappointments were technical in nature - unlike the previous two movies I did not feel robbed because of a stupid interpretation of the story line. I know most people will not feel this way, but I thought the battle scenes should have been more drawn out - I never got to a point thinking that Minas Tiras was surely lost - the city just never felt like it was in danger of complete destruction.

Anyway - best movie of the year - with "Bruce Almighty" coming in second.

poll...

[webtre]

shouldn't this be a poll?

Re:poll...

[DNS-and-BIND]

No, because then whoever it is who designs the polls would have a whole bunch of stupid options. I don't know what it is, but slashdot polls used to be fairly amusing. These days, they're just dumb, and worst of all unentertaining.

Re:poll...

[nelsonal]

chrisd did the polls for some time, I think there was someone before him, but that was before I was even lurking here, stopped doing the polls earlier this year, it was right around the time the poll came out with all the cowboyneal choices.

Re:poll...

[DNS-and-BIND]

Dude, you know waaay more about some website than you need to. Step away from the keyboard, and power down the computer

Re:poll...

[Mike McCune]

Only if Cowboy Neal was in a movie so we could have a Cowboy Neal option.

Re:poll...

[webtre]

I like how you think. Maybe we should start a movement to make user-proposed polls (along with poll options).

Re:poll...

[Anonymous Coward]

My brain can't handle infinite options, you insensitive clod!

Matrix down, ROTK up

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty clear I think. But I'm sure this thread is a good place for lots of people to disagree.

Noise.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Matrix triology, X-Men 2, and of course, LOTR: Return of the King

Meh, ick, oooh!

most over Hyped?

[Anonymous Coward]

Over hyped movie of the year is matrix reloaded...

Bad Santa

[buck_wild]

A little over-acting in some parts, but I liked it.

Re:Bad Santa

[shamilton]

I thought Reloaded completely bit when I first saw it, but I've liked it more and more with each additional viewing. I now hold it in higher regard than the original. I'm fairly sure the same thing will happen with Revolutions, at least for myself.

Re:Bad Santa

[shamilton]

Crap, replied to the wrong post... You know, the one above it.

Re:Bad Santa

[AttillaTheNun]

You're a thief... and a MUUURDEEREER.

Re:Bad Santa

[flacco]

Bad Santa was as close to a perfect movie as I've seen in a long time.

it was quite good until the last few minutes, when it seems pretty obvious the test audiences got hold of it.

Re:Bad Santa

[Belgand]

If you liked the film version of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen then read the comic and I think you'll suddenly see what's not to like. I do suggest also reading the online annotations along with it as they add significant depth and illumination.

Basically a highly enteraining and literate comic with loads of references to Victorian literature and themes is remade as a typical American summer movie lacking entirely in the charm, wit, or inventiveness of the book accompanied by changes in plot and characterization. It was... tolerable.

Re:Bad Santa

[forgotmypassword]

It's a month!

It was the fat black prostitute that said she couldn't shit right for a week.

I can't remember what the three B's were though. One was either beer or booze, and another was butt-fucking, but what was the third?

Re:Bad Santa

[Nept]

not listening, not listening

Re:Bad Santa

[perf_monkey]

While I think Return of the King was awesome, who couldn't like Bad Santa? Any movie is good when it ends with a kid riding a bike, flipping the bird, and wearing a tshirt that says "Shit Happens When You Party Naked"

Re:Bad Santa

[Geeyzus]

Jackson succeeded and the Wachowskis failed... because Jackson already had a solid script to work with, and the Wachowskis did not.

Yes, I know they said the story was already laid out, even before The Matrix was released. But IMO, a story that pathetic could not have possibly been written until dollar signs filled the eyes of the movie execs. At least for their sake, I hope not.

The dialogue was horrible... beyond horrible. I thought Reloaded was pretty good. The action was great, better than the first (although the first was more groundbreaking). Revolutions on the other hand, was pathetic. It was slow, the fight scenes were lame, the dialogue was the worst I've ever heard. Love this, love that, beginning and end, enough already.

Then the big climax of the movie, no, the TRILOGY, when Neo fights Smith.... PATHETIC!!! I can just see the Wachowskis brainstorming that gem.

"Well, we already pretty much had Neo and Smith do everything they could do in the first two movies... so... lets do it again, except... um... IN MIDAIR!!!!!!!" How incredibly lame.

I'll admit the (attempted) defense of Zion was incredibly cool, and the CG was great, but other than that the movie was pathetic.

Mark

Re:Bad Santa

[wolssiloa]

SVCDs as Christmas presents don't work very well when more than 75% of your friends don't have DVD players that play them, since it wouldn't be nice to expect them to sit in front of a computer to watch. Also it's just too cheap :P

Re:Bad Santa

[cmacmanus]

RotK > Bad Santa? Where can I get whatever you're on, because that's some strong shit! You also stated that you enjoyed The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen > X-Men II. I think if you said this in public in the Philippines you'd be smacked harshly on the bum with a wooden cane. Not to be an ass, but what the hell is wrong with you?

Re:Bad Santa

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of blessing pirates, has Finding Nemo been released on DVD yet?

Re:Bad Santa

[Professr3]

Indeed it has...

Re: Bad Santa

[Black Parrot]

> I think if you said this in public in the Philippines you'd be smacked harshly on the bum with a wooden cane.

And to think I've been paying a couple of 'ladies' to do that.

Re: Bad Santa

[Black Parrot]

> My guilty pleasure this year was The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It was much better than all the reviews led me to believe. I actually enjoyed it more than X2 by a large margin. It was a fun action movie with really cool steam-punk technology and "magical" mythical heroes. What's not to like?

A more formulaic movie was never made.

Re:Bad Santa

[rdnk]

My biggest disappointments were the Matrix sequals. WTF happened? Jackson did it right and the Wachowskis did not. My personal theory is that if the Wachowskis had been given the opporunity to shoot the three all at once The Matrix would be held up as a peer to LotR. The huge delay between The Matrix and Reloaded caused all kinds of subtle problems and gave the brothers too much time to think about the screenplay. Sometimes less is more.

What happened, you ask? It's hard to even compare these trilogies. The other has two very talented, young guns putting their lifelong influence on popular culture into screen, and the other has one of the best fantasy novels behind the story. If Wachowskis had the LotR-quality script to make a film of, I think they would've made it to the end. Now, the great deal of the best thoughts was already in the first part, the others were merely warming on it's afterglow.
I were on the impression, that the first part was made as an independent film, that is, they didn't know if there were to be any sequels. Naturally, the story became a little bit unbalanced. Stuff was merely added to the end (the sequels). It's all about the story...

Re:Bad Santa

[sBox]

The other has two very talented, young guns putting their lifelong influence on popular culture into screen, and the other has one of the best fantasy novels behind the story. If Wachowskis had the LotR-quality script to make a film of, I think they would've made it to the end. Now, the great deal of the best thoughts was already in the first part, the others were merely warming on it's afterglow.

Something to be said for asking for help when you need it. I keep thinking about how this compares to George Lucas blowing enough blown chances with his own material to need it wrenched from his graspy fingers. Think what the Wachowskis could have done had they relinquished some control to a decent writing team or even another director.

Re:Bad Santa

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't remember what the three B's were though. One was either beer or booze, and another was butt-fucking, but what was the third?

Booze, Bullshit and Butt-Fucking

Re: Bad Santa

[Moofie]

Formulaic!=bad.

Re:Bad Santa

[Trixter]

You only *now* figured out how to rip DVDs? Turn in your Slashdot login, son; you're not worthy.

Re:Bad Santa

[buck_wild]

Not a problem. My post was lonely. :)

Re:Bad Santa

[geekBass]

My happiest moment was when I discovered how to rip DVDs I rent to my hard disk. Then I burn those rips onto SVCDs to pass around to my friends as cheap Christmas presents.

This is offtopic but want to share what you use to rip to svcd? Yes, I have searched and tried a few things like 1click, dvd ripper etc but none is satisfactory in a single pass. Even better if it's free.

Re:Bad Santa

[krazo]

Billy Bob Thornton has my academy award vote for Bad Santa.

Hello, Mummy...

[Ironclad2]

3 words:

Bubba. Ho. Tep.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[TrippTDF]

HELLLS YEAH.

Bubba Ho-Tep is the best damn film I've seen in a long time. An instant cult classic.

Basic plot: Elvis and a black JFK take on a 10,000 year old mummy from Egypt. It's also got a great explination for Elivs's life, times, and thoughts on fame.

See this movie. Hopefully it will make it to DVD sometime soon.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[schwatoo]

Yeah I second that! Very funny. Only in limited release but seems to be in more cinemas now.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone have a clickable link to the trailer?

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[hikerhat]

Doh. What a horrible movie. And I like Bruce Campell's other movies. But they've become formula. This movie followed his formula point for point. The only thing the move reveals is what Bruce Campbell will be like when he is an old man. Turns out he'll be makeing the exact same movie for the rest of his life.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[CAIMLAS]

Lucky for you, you got to see it. It hasn't been released yet, it's just in pre-screenings right now to see if people "like it enough" to put it in theaters.

Unless you know of somewhere other than select theaters that it could be gotten/viewed, that is. I'd pay money for that. I've been waiting for the film for about 2 years now.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[CAIMLAS]

When you have a winning formula, you use it again.

Ever hear of Romeo and Juliet? Done -literally- dozens of times, and there have been untold millions of stories that take the same formula. This is the same thing, except instead of being a "tragic romance" or a "adventurous epic" or such, it's "mock horror".

If you went to it expecting shakespeare or a 'real' horror film, you'll be disappointed, just like you'll be disappointed with soemthing like "Terminator 3" (an action/adventure film) if you're expecting something like Star Wars (any of them, all epic adventures). It's your own damned fault. I don't like trash romance films and enjoy epics; some people are the other way around. Deal with it.

Re:Hello, Mummy...

[hikerhat]

When you have a winning formula, you use it again.

Spoken like a movie industry executive.

There's a difference between "formula" and "theme." There are lots of good movies based around standard themes. They are creative new takes on a standard theme. Even if you know the theme there can be lots of new ideas in the movie. With a formula movie there are no new ideas beyond minor cosmetic changes. Yeah, making Bruce an old Elvis was neat. But that's where the new ideas ended. I was expecting to see a "mock horror" movie, but not a formula movie.

Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[cOdEgUru]

I dont know which were the best ones..

But Gigli and Kangaroo Jack takes the cake for the worst ones..

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you actually see Gigli? I haven't, because everyone says it was so bad. But I'd think that would be tough, because J'Lo is in that, and therefore there's a good chance that J'Lo's ass will be, and I like J'Lo's ass...

So I'm conflicted.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out Girls of the Ivy League at your local Family Porn. You won't regret it.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[AEton]

But Gigli and Kangaroo Jack takes the cake for the worst ones..

Not exactly. Actually, according to the IMDB bottom 100 films listing, From Justin to Kelly (the American Idol movie) is the #1 hands-down worst movie of all time. AND IT DESERVES IT. cf. review here or on IMDB. Or..wow.

I am proud to have fought hard to get low votes for that movie. It was like Mary Poppins without Mary (or popping); like The Sound of Music without any Sound or Music worth re-hearing; like Oklahoma! only set on a god-awful Florida beach.

That said, if you want something to laugh at and have a friend who was foolish enough to pay for a copy of this tripe and you have free time and want to stare off into space for a while, From Justin to Kelly is the movie for you.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[cjsnell]

Kangaroo Jack? Please. That can't hold a flame to this gem.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[xigxag]

Doubtless many of you are wondering right now, Should I click on the parent's link or not? Is it worth my while using up my precious computing resources to spawn a browser window? He says it's a "gem". But maybe it's just Gigli again. Why couldn't he have just said the name of the flick, dammit!? Click or don't click? What a dilemma!!

That's it, I'm fed up with this air-of-mystery shit! What say you we all band together and boycott clicking on needlessly obscure url descriptors like "this gem"? We few, we proud, we slashdotters, we can resist the lure of enigmatic links!

Okay, I couldn't resist...it was "Air Bud Spikes Back."

Sigh, what a downer. Damn you cjsnell. Damn you and your low slashdot number to hell! I'm so depressed, I'll think I'll go watch Chasing Papi (See? How hard was that?) . I like my bad movies with a little eye candy.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[Anonymous Coward]

From Justin to Kelly is the worst movie ever?! That's a travesty; a complete miscarriage of justice. That movie is laughably bad, and you admit it. Anything that provides entertainment, whether intentional or not, is instantly disqualified from the running. Movies like Manos: The Hands of Fate are so bad, well, they're just bad. They can't even be laughed at. They're just... painfully bad.

And anyone who thinks Gigli is the "worst movie ever" is one of the sheep and, I'd wager, probably hasn't seen it. True, it wasn't a good movie, but, as you rightly point out, it wasn't even the worst of the year.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[Wolfrider]

"Baby Geniuses" took #23?? Unbelievable. I'm definitely *not* a likes-kids person, but I enjoyed that movie so much I went out and bought it. ...And I actually enjoyted "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever", "McHale's Navy", and "Kangaroo Jack" as well. (Altho pretty much everything else on that list is justified.)

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy crap, something beat Manos.

Manos is a movie so bad, you can't hate it. You can't. You can't say anything good about it, but you can't hate it.

You, however, also cannot stay awake through the entire thing.

And I *like* bad sci-fi movies.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[minusthink]

Hal Warren directed, wrote, produced, etc etc etc Manos. I like Manos just because this guy loved it so much.

Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby..

[hondo77]

And I actually enjoyted "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever"...

Worst...title...for a movie...ever.

Piglets Big Movie

[clifgriffin]

really sucked.

I mean it did.

Put that in the bad list please.

Thanks.

Re:Piglets Big Movie

[M. Silver]

It got moderated funny, but I'm the parent of a toddler and: that's exactly right. It was a lame tacking-together of a bunch of older footage that didn't even hold my three-year-old's interest.

On the other hand, he likes Kiki's Delivery Service a whole lot (but that wasn't 2003, so it doesn't count).

Re:Piglets Big Movie

[Wolfrider]

--Free advice: DON'T see the Cat in the Hat movie. FYI.

Re:Piglets Big Movie

[WombleNZ]

Oh come on, Poohs dialog with his tummy was fantastic!

School of Rock

[Ghoser777]

This movie was much better than I thought it was going to be. It was fun to watch and see how Jack Black interact with a bunch of high class elemtary school students.

Not an award winner, or even close, but still a lot better than I was anticipating.

Matt Fahrenbacher

Re:School of Rock

[Cyno01]

Good movie, but it was almost a disney movie, JB saved it from that though.

Re:School of Rock

[smittyoneeach]

I was afraid that it was going to be "Michael Jackson: Garage Days (Finally) Visited", but you knew when JB mentioned Motorhead that no, this movie has rock cred.
But please, no sequels.
And what's with the 500 errors?
httpd.conf got SARS?

Re:School of Rock

[Wolfrider]

--Hey Thx for the Motorhead link, I've been wanting a T-shirt of theirs for ages.

Re:School of Rock

[Lumpy]

This movie was the unexpected sleeper that cought all of the movie industry off guard.

Most theatres had only ONE copy and they were sold out solid for three days all over the country.

It's a success because it did not do what other movies did.... take a good script and then dump 10 tons of hollywood fecies on it.

Matrix rerereloaded

[poopy]

The fear instilled unto me from the second matrix film has made me too scared to even walk past a poster of the 3rd matirx film....let alone watch it.

Re:Matrix rerereloaded

[Motoboy77]

You shoud have posted that before I wasted my evening on the third one....

Best I've seen

[MikeCapone]

Mystic River was pretty good.

Les Invasions Barbares (transl. to The Barbarian Invasions) was excellent.

I still haven't seen Lost in Translation. I hear it's great. 21 Grams seems really good too.

Pirates of the Carribean was surprisingly fun. A mix between The Princess Bride (but not as good story) and old computer game Monkey Island.

I can't think of anything else right now. Haven't seen RotK yet. Hopefully it'll be better than The Two Towers.

Re:Best I've seen

[Anonymous Coward]

yep, Mystic River is the best movie i have seen this year. i Havent seen ROTK yet though.. :)

Re:Best I've seen

[amembrane]

I thought Mystic River could have been a good hour and a half movie, but at it's length was mediocre. I went because of the hype.

Re:Best I've seen

[MillionthMonkey]

Haven't seen RotK yet. Hopefully it'll be better than The Two Towers.

I went to see RoTK yesterday. Not knowing what sort of crowd to expect, my wife and I arrived 90 mins early for a 3:15 showing, and traded tickets for the 2:15 showing once we noticed (at 2 PM) that the 3:15 line was longer than the 2:15 line!

I was waiting for it to start, and remember some guy two rows behind me muttering about third movies sucking. "I hope it doesn't suck, because it's the third movie, and the third Matrix movie sucked. So this is probably going to suck." Heh heh, dumbass.

I liked the Two Towers more than FoTR, and I liked this even better. It has everything in it that made the Two Towers enjoyable, plus more stuff. I don't consider myself a Tolkien weenie, since I've only read the book once and that was ten years ago when I was in college. So I can sometimes remember something not being in the book, and it irks me when I see deviations from the book, but if they work in the movie then I don't care.

PRO:

• The battle scenes. The battle for Minas Tirith in RoTK makes the battle for Helm's Deep in the Two Towers look like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm. The orc army has new beasts and bigger war machines. More varied creatures and men take part in the fighting. More vehicles are used to get there. More people are killed by being carried into the air and dropped from great heights. Larger objects are smashed into castle doors. The Minas Tirith scene is the most amazing battle scene in the history of cinema. (Its only rival is Spartacus, since Kubrick didn't have CGI.) It is a triumph of production design. See it in the theater if you don't have a sixty inch screen.
• Gollum continues to become more of a conniving rat bastard. You get to see Andy Serkis in person as Smeagol (with Deagol) at the beginning of the movie, and you see his deterioration into Gollum explained without the need for any cringe-inducing narration. Although it seemed a bit hurried and I have a vague feeling that the Extended Edition DVD will contain a lot of scenes that were cut from here.
• Shelob is well done, exactly as I remember picturing her from the book. Jackson could have really messed this one up, too, as do many attempts at giant spiders in movies. Shelob was a mere highlight here, but that alone could have been enough material for a movie. Just think of all the stupid movies devoted to a single special effect like Godzilla.
• The signal fire scene. Watch a single bit of information travel across mountaintops all the way from Gondor to Rohan. Remarkably well filmed, and will surely help New Zealand's tourism industry.
• The volcano scene. I know the lava is all CGI, who cares. The atmosphere here and in the rest of Mordor is spot on. (Although I was bothered by the way [a certain major character] sinks into the lava. I'm pretty sure he would float. And show signs of being affected by the heat.) But it was really touching, seeing Gollum briefly reunited with his precious. I've never seen such a happy face in my whole life. It gives me the creeps now just remembering that happy face.

CON:

• The Aragorn/Arwen/Elrond subplot continues on its course as a slow motion train wreck through all three films. These include the Liv Tyler scenes that you use to check your watch.
• Legolas's required stunt scene retains the pornographic character it has in every movie. While they are extremely enjoyable, after you see them you feel stupid for having enjoyed them so much. But I have to admit that this movie has by far the best Legolas stunt scene of all three movies.
• Sauraman is already dead. He died an implied death in the movie you already saw last year. Put him out of your mind. Unless, that is, greedy executives at New Line Cinema apply pressure on Jackson to make a Scouring of the Shire "wedge sequel". You could fit the whole thing right in there as

Re:Best I've seen

[Anonymous Coward]

The battle scenes. The battle for Minas Tirith in RoTK makes the battle for Helm's Deep in the Two Towers look like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm.

Call me a contrarian but I thought Helm's Deep had more intensity. Maybe it was that the action was closer (more fighting on and inside the walls) than it was in the Pelennor Fields.

The signal fire scene. Watch a single bit of information travel across mountaintops all the way from Gondor to Rohan. Remarkably well filmed, and will surely help New Zealand's tourism industry.

Yes, there was something undeniably cool about that scene; I even liked the departure from the books (of having Pippin light the first one).

The volcano scene. I know the lava is all CGI, who cares. The atmosphere here and in the rest of Mordor is spot on.

In some scenes, Mordor didn't quite seem dark enough to me. As I pictured it in the book, it was all dark (not pitch black, but like a deep twilight). Some scenes felt more like an ordinary day with some cloud cover. This can be fixed in the EE (are you listening, Peter?).

The Aragorn/Arwen/Elrond subplot continues on its course as a slow motion train wreck through all three films. These include the Liv Tyler scenes that you use to check your watch.

I know this wasn't the most interesting part of the movie, but...You checked your watch? Did you have somewhere else you wanted to be?

Legolas's required stunt scene retains the pornographic character it has in every movie. While they are extremely enjoyable, after you see them you feel stupid for having enjoyed them so much. But I have to admit that this movie has by far the best Legolas stunt scene of all three movies.

I kind of liked his method of mounting a horse in the warg battle in TTT.

Sauraman is already dead. He died an implied death in the movie you already saw last year. Put him out of your mind. Unless, that is, greedy executives at New Line Cinema apply pressure on Jackson to make a Scouring of the Shire "wedge sequel". You could fit the whole thing right in there as an entire separate movie, right between the scenes where the Eagles are carrying Frodo and Sam off the volcano, and the next where the hobbits are drinking their pints of beer.

There's enough missing material to fill at least another hour of film. Voice of Saruman. Mouth of Sauron (I'll have to double-check this on second viewing, but did I see someone walking out of the Black Gate in a wide-angle shot to meet Aragorn and Gandalf in that scene, only to disappear in the closeup? Perhaps something was cut that will show up in the Extended Edition). Steward and King (surely viewers who never read the book are going to wonder what becomes of Faramir -- and of Eowyn!). Sam and Frodo marching with the orcs. And so on.

Re:Best I've seen

[daserver]

I must say that I was very possitively suprised by Mystic River. I had semi-high expectations and it lived up the them and even more.

That said I'm not sure if it can rivel LOTR ROTK. ROTK is very good, but I think it was cut considerable, seing that the extended edition of the movie is going to be minimum 4:50, that 1:30 movie extra! There were several parts that need some more justification, like Saruman and the Elrond's daughter/Aragon relationship.

Re:Best I've seen

[daserver]

Ohh yuah I forgot the worst movie. Clearly The Matrix Revolutions. Damn how can they ruin such a good movie series? The last movie was a plot-wrecking, action pa(tch/)cked, superman-like movie that made the first two excellent _no_ justice at all.

Re:Best I've seen

[the gnat]

Hmmmm, I saw it last night and thought it was thoroughly BADASS, but I have a few quibbles or additions:

The battle scenes.

I disagree. I would place the opening of "Saving Private Ryan", the first Coliseum scene in "Gladiator", or the massacre in "Last of the Mohicans" well above this. I'm probably forgetting something too. I would also rank the final fight in "Fellowship" above all the fights in the trilogy. It's important to note that these are all done on a smaller scale (even "Ryan" focuses on a small piece of beach) and with much less CG work. The CG work was excellent in RotK, but my suspension of disbelief only goes so far. The "Fellowship" fight, on the other hand, looked brutal and realistic.

Shelob

I didn't think Jackson could make a giant spider frighten me after at least ten viewings of "Aliens". I was wrong. Major, major props.

The signal fire scene.

I agree, but I doubt this was undiluted New Zealand. . . Jackson said very plainly at one point that while NZ was ideal for them, they did some doctoring to get it to look just right. Personally, after repeated viewings I still can't quite tell what shots that aren't immediately obvious as CG are manipulated, and what are original, but I doubt the signal fire scene was all natural. Still, very impressive.

Legolas's required stunt scene

I'm sorry, but the horse mounting in Two Towers fucking rocked, even if every female in the audience simultaneously climaxed. What made it so cool was the whole slo-mo lead-in from Legolas shooting arrows, and that what happens next is totally unexpected. When I watch the movies I keep rewinding that part (no, I'm not gay): I think it's the most impressively directed/coreographed scene in the trilogy. Just eye candy, yes, and nothing to do with the books, but utterly effective.

On that note, I was disappointed that they left out the part of "Fellowship" where Legolas shoots down one of the winged steeds at night (from a boat!). None of the elf stunts in the movies seemed out of place because I remembered reading that, but I wish they'd left it in - it really establishes that Elves are bad motherfuckers.

Re:Best I've seen

[MillionthMonkey]

I disagree. I would place the opening of "Saving Private Ryan", the first Coliseum scene in "Gladiator", or the massacre in "Last of the Mohicans" well above this. I'm probably forgetting something too.

OK, it was a bit of an overstatement. Still a decent battle scene, best battle of any fantasy/sci-fi film.

I'm sorry, but the horse mounting in Two Towers fucking rocked, even if every female in the audience simultaneously climaxed. What made it so cool was the whole slo-mo lead-in from Legolas shooting arrows, and that what happens next is totally unexpected.

If I remember right, according to Jackson the reason they put that scene in was that they had forgotten to get footage of Orlando Bloom mounting a horse.

Re:Best I've seen

[Wolfrider]

> The Aragorn/Arwen/Elrond subplot continues on its course as a slow motion train wreck through all three films. These include the Liv Tyler scenes that you use to check your watch.

--Nownownow, come on... Personally I think Liv Tyler is very attractive. However, the elf scenes at the beginning of ROTK did seem a bit forced and overdone.

Re:Best I've seen

[FuzzyFurB]

I'd also add another sore point of the film, where Aragorn, Gandolf, Legoglas and Gimli face the leader of the army from mordor at the black gates. In the book there was a sequence where they are confronted with Frodo's clothes, and his mithril. For a split second I was totally convinced in the book that Gandolf was convinced that Frodo was dead, that there was no hope. In fact, he basically gives in, but he doesn't. IMHO this is one of Gandolf's best lines and was sorely missed in the movie. If there is ONE thing I want to see in the extended DVD it is this (and Wormtungue throwing that marble out of the tower at Isenguard).

Re:Best I've seen

[Gudlyf]

The signal fire scene. Watch a single bit of information travel across mountaintops all the way from Gondor to Rohan. Remarkably well filmed, and will surely help New Zealand's tourism industry.

Was it just me, or did anyone else wonder who the heck had that ungodly task of sitting atop those mountains, waiting for years and years to light that signal fire? It's not as if the fires took at least a few minutes to light either -- they went up almost immediately after the previous one did! That means someone was sitting there....waiting. And waiting.

Captain: "You there! You're on torch duty."
Soldier: "Oh drat!"

I can just picture some ragged old hermit, sitting cold atop the mountain in the clouds, wiping away the crud from his eyes as he stares endlessly at the previous signal fire station miles away. Trying as hard as he can to keep the flame in the ignition torch he holds to stay alight against the howling, chilling winds. Poor bastard.

Re:Best I've seen

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the Mouth of Sauron was sorely missed. In the book, he had an amazing presence. I'm most hoping for him on the DVD.

Re:Best I've seen

[LDoggg_]

Man, did you hit the nail on the head there.

I loved the movie regardless of the scenes that were cut, but this part bugged me a little.
It was ok for the first couple of mountains still in Gondor and not so remote, but who in the hell would be waiting out in the extreme remote places on top of high snow covered mountain peaks?
I just told myself in a kid like voice "maybe it was magic", and continued to enjoy the rest of the movie

Re:Best I've seen

[amplt1337]

I'm sorry, but the horse mounting in Two Towers fucking rocked, even if every female in the audience simultaneously climaxed.

Umm, judging from the squeals of nerdly glee I heard around me when I saw it, it wasn't just the females that were climaxing...

Re:Best I've seen

[CAIMLAS]

Most definately, re: Liv Tyler. There is one particular point in the film when she beams an incredibly radiant smile at one of the hobbits (I think). So viciously and openly sexual, it's hard to explain. It just said, "I'm a mischevious nymph" in huge 72-point font.

Re:Best I've seen

[Dr. Mojura]

Sauraman is already dead. He died an implied death in the movie you already saw last year. Put him out of your mind.

That's not the impression I got. I thought Gandalf implied that Saruman was now powerless, and would be confined to the tower, but not dead. Did I interpret it wrong?

Re:Best I've seen

[Alkaiser]

I'm sorry, but BOTH of those instances you mention of Legolas looking badass looked completely fake to me.

The scene with him getting swept up onto the horse from the last movie was one of the most fake looking things I'd seen in a movie, and I saw both Tomb Raider 2 and Charlie's Angels 2 this summer. I'm not exactly sure why you didn't expect that to happen, because you KNEW they were charging...and without a horse, Legolas wouldn't get there until everyone was dead.

The scene in this movie didn't look AS fake, but it wasn't anywhere near the best scene ever. My favorite scene in Return of the King is where Aragorn decides it's time to be King, and goes to recruit the army.

The signal fire scenes weren't all that good for me...especially since the moment the second fire gets lit, you know it's all CG. (The fires themselves, that is.) It was one of the two moments in Return that just screamed of being flagrantly "off".

Re:Best I've seen

[bigbigbison]

Not only did he imply that Saruman was powerless, he came out and said it. He told Treebeard to watch him. So as it was presented in the film, Saruman is alive but captured in his tower.

Re:Best I've seen

[MuParadigm]

Not forgotten. Bloom had a broken rib or something. When they took it in to post-production, Jacksone asked them to animate the horse-mounting, and that's what WETA came up with.

Re:Best I've seen

[Yunzil]

On that note, I was disappointed that they left out the part of "Fellowship" where Legolas shoots down one of the winged steeds at night (from a boat!).

[geek]He didn't shoot from the boat, he jumped out and climbed up the bank.[/geek]

Re:Best I've seen

[astro-g]

your right - there should have been small fortresses / towers,(or indeed people! did anybidy see anybody actually light any of those wood poiles?) etc on those mountaintops.
Besides, Whet I want to know is why saruon didnt send his fell beast / nazgul to knock a few of those signal fires off the mountain tops.
Nobody would have noticed If they did it at night.

Re:Best I've seen

[erixtark]

What!? You're saying it was a TRICK SHOT!?

*/me rips the Bloom-posters of the wall.*

Re:Best I've seen

[balthan]

The scene with him getting swept up onto the horse from the last movie was one of the most fake looking things I'd seen in a movie,

I completely agree. It was horrible. I was completely shocked when I found out a friend of mine really liked that scene.

The scene with the Oliphant was horrible, too. When he slid down the trunk it reminded me of the beginning of the Flintstones when Fred slides down the mammoth's trunk.

Overall, I think there was some pretty bad CGI in the movies. It was really easy to pick out at which point they switched from makeup to CGI during Gollum's deterioration. The physics of a lot of objects (like most of the stones being launched from trebuchets) just looked wrong. And the scenes with Gollum have a look and feel similar to Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

Re:Best I've seen

[Bombcar]

Sauraman is already dead.

No. Go see it again. Tell people someone on Slashdot told you to. Treebeard says, "There is a wizard here to manage." And Gandalf says, "Here he must remain until you give me my staff. The one with 'Bad Mutha-fukka' on it.."

Well not exactly. But do listen again. Sauraman is not dead.

Matrix

[thesupermikey]

I really really like the 3rd Matrix film. I'm a sucker for Dragonball Z fights.

It gets my award for best ever.

Re:Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

I really really like the 3rd Matrix film. I'm a sucker for Dragonball Z fights.

What's it like having absolutely no taste?

Re:Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, tell me about it. I was just waiting for Neo's hair to turn blonde!!

Re:Matrix

[_xeno_]

He started to glow white as he defeated Smith. The group I was with considered it to be close enough...

Re:Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not his fault you've got less taste than my dick. He's seen enough film to appreciate what was there, and he might appreciate a little story with his action movie. Too bad for you.

I can't wait for the next decade where everyone remembers how badass they thought the Matrix sequeles were and how they were the lone voice of reason on the internet.

Fucking Richard Donner was in the audiance taking notes.

Re:Matrix

[rmohr02]

The gist of the movie was ok, but some parts didn't make complete sense, especially the "ok you really need to shutup and die now" scene.

Most overrated...

[i_am_syco]

Matrix Revolutions!

Matrix Revolutions!

Matrix Revolutions!

Matrix Revolutions!

Matrix Revolutions!

Matrix Revolutions!

Oh, and Finding Nemo r0x0r3d.

Re:Most overrated...

[Sivar]

Matrix Revolutions, overrated?
It was rated very poorly by nearly every crit...

Oh.

Re:Most overrated...

[FooAtWFU]

Hmm. If it's rated poorly, and it's still overrated... it must be pretty bad! (Have not seen it... =/)

Re:Most overrated...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you got the parent's joke! Good job Captain Oblivious!

Re:Most overrated...

[PeteQC]

The critics rated it really bad...

But the slashdotters rated it really good...
That's were it is overrated, if you don't enjoy geeky stuff, that movies has no interes at all.

Re:Most overrated...

[keeboo]

And each low rate was deserved.

Cut the FX off from Matrix Revolutions, and what remains is not usable for a 30 min soap-opera episode.

Lame-ass movies

[FrenchyinCT]

The second Matrix movie was just as pointless and boring as the first one, so I didn't see #3. But I did get a really good satire out of #2 for a mailing list I'm on. Honestly, why the hell are they always wearing sunglasses when they all live underground???

Re:Lame-ass movies

[Anonymous Coward]

uhh... there isn't a single pair of sunglasses in the 'real world'

Re:Lame-ass movies

[Anonymous Coward]

They only wore sunglasses in the matrix. When they were in the "real" world (the world in which they lived underground), they never wore sunglasses.

nemo

[Cheeze]

nemo was pretty darn good for a major released cartoon.

The matrixes were ok, but didn't live up to the hype the first one caused.

i personally though 28 days later was a good movie.

Re:nemo

[Cheeze]

oh, and kill bill vol 1 was awesome too. I can't wait for the rest of the series.

Re:nemo

[Anonymous Coward]

wouldn't that be 'matrices' and no matrixes

Re:nemo

[barzok]

I finally got around to seeing Nemo last weekend and while it wasn't a bad movie, it certainly didn't have the "wow factor" I've gotten from Antz, A Bug's Life, Toy Story, etc.

Maybe because I watched it cropped (not letterbox), on a 13" TV with mono sound, on VHS?

Re:nemo

[gmby]

Love your crappy site. ;)

I seem to miss the point tough.

Re:nemo

[JackDeth]

That's interesting because it blew me away. I think it's the best Pixar movie yet (followed by TS2). Maybe it's because Ellen Degeneres didn't annoy me nearly as much as I thought she would. Actually, I thought she did quite well.

I would definitely recomment that you give it another shot, except this time watch the DVD version and use at least a 25 inch TV. :)

BTW - Did you know that non-letterbox is not necessarily "cropped"? Each frame on the digital source is usually much larger than what gets framed out for the movie. So when they make the full screen version, instead of just cropping the widescreen frame, they simply use more of the frame from the original source. If you watched the extras on the DVD you would know that. :)

Re:nemo

[jpmkm]

28 days later was horrible. It started out pretty damn well and it had a good storyline. Then about halfway through it fell apart and the story disappeared. "Oh no! The men want to have sex with the women and possibly have a chance at repopulating. Can't have that! Let's escape." It turned into a standard fighting-type movie with the "good" guys trying to escape and the "bad" guys trying to hold them hostage.

Re:nemo

[metachor]

>The matrixes were ok, but didn't live up to the hype the first one caused. Don't you mean "matrices"?

Re:nemo

[Platupous]

(Off Topic, But here goes anyway...)

I think Dory (The blue fish) was a stoner. Think about it, short term memory loss, red eyes, and she enjoyed being inside the whale WAAAAY too much.

She been smokin too much sea weed.

Re:nemo

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, O.T., and I know that comment was meant as a bit of satire and all... but last I checked rape is still generally considered a bad thing.

Re:nemo

[Anonymous Coward]

lol! sea weed! good one!

Re:nemo

[Cheeze]

off topic, but

it's funny when i get 100k hits a day from some crappy spider trying to go to every link on the internet.

Re:nemo

[pi radians]

"The men want to have sex with the women and possibly have a chance at repopulating."

Ummm, if you replace "rape" when saying "have sex with" and "a woman and a child" when you said "the women" then you'd be a little more accurate.

The fact that that premise not only doesn't bother you but is being used as a way to mock the movie is highly disturbing.

28 Days was not only a very good movie, but it also has the rare quality of getting better every time you watch it.

Re:nemo

[Zoshnell]

I didn't find 28 days later very entertaining myself. It had its interesting points, but I prefer my Zombie actionmore visceral, ala Resident Evil or Night of the Living Dead. Plus I found the premise kind of weak for 28.

Re:nemo

[jpmkm]

So how does them trying to escape the fortress tie into the whole 28 days later thing? The first half was good because they were trying to survive and fight the zombies. Then they go to the fortress and the want to escape. For half the fucking movie. If they were there for only 10 minutes and went and did something else then I wouldn't have a problem with it. What I'm trying to say is that you could put the second half on ANY movie and it would fit. Well, except for the occasional zombie that came up to the perimeter.
Were the women planning on never having sex again? They didn't know if ANYONE else was alive. Those could be the last people on earth. So they don't want to have sex with these men so that humans die out. They didn't want to rape them, they just wanted to have sex with them. Then the women went all stuck up and wouldn't have sex with the men, so it became an issue of rape. I think it would have been a much better movie if they had sex and they all lived there together and tried to survive. That would have been much more likely then a few of them wanting to go back out with the zombies. That just doesn't make sense.

Re:nemo

[bar-agent]

She had too much energy to be a stoner-fish. She was "high on life"!

Re:nemo

[Gulthek]

Because there is more to being human than simply being alive.

Re:nemo

[Serapth]

I think you missed the point... It wasnt the end of the world... the UK was put under quarantine. Double rape with one person being a child, is a bit harsh... I can more then understand wanting to get away from something like that... even in a post apocolyptic future! I think they did a good job of showing the horror of the circumstances without being vulgar about it. I also thought they did an exceptionally good job making you empathize with a group of people ( mostly the commander ), then having them turn into the villan(s) of the film... even in the face of zombies.

I for one, thought 28 days later was a good movie... great atmosphere... there is this weird sterile environment that only the british seem to be able to pull of ( Dr Who and Red Dwarf come to mind immediatly ). My only complaint is, with a bit more environmental effects, and having a few more characters ( personable ones ), it could have been a much scarier film.

if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[i.r.id10t]

"What about all of us who don't go to the movies or buy dvds, etc. and practice what we preach you insensitive clod!"

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[NaugaHunter]

You can tell us which wall or ceiling in your house was the best to stare at.

Or do you just watch the potato, like Dana Carvey's "old man" sketch?

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[MalleusEBHC]

"What about all of us who don't go to the movies or buy dvds, etc. and practice what we preach you insensitive clod!"

What about those of us who aren't so caught up in the swarm mentality of Slashdot that we can still think for ourselves? I don't have that big of a problem with the MPAA. Sure, there are some things I would change on how they go about things, but in the end I'm not going to boycott the film industry. There are many good movies out there to choose from and prices for both the theatre and DVD experience are reasonable in my mind. Sure, those anti-piracy ads are annoying, but if they want to spend their money on it I could care less.

(On a side note, why the hell do they run those ads AT THE MOVIE THEATRE? I can understand on TV, but when you've already got my 7 bucks, shouldn't you assume that I'm not the kinda guy who downloaded the movie 2 weeks before it came out?)

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[sharkey]

You can tell us which wall or ceiling in your house was the best to stare at.

You know, you don't have to just sit around staring at the wall. There's this thing you can do with your hand...

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[i.r.id10t]

Actually, I do watch a little tv, but not much. Most of the time I'm either playing with my daughter or doing computer stuff - programming or playing ET, etc.

And its not a /. mentality - I just don't like the thought of paying nearly $10 to watch a movie where I have to deal with others. Easier to wait until the drivel comes to HBO, etc. At least then when I get bored I can go back to programming, etc.

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[tbannist]

(On a side note, why the hell do they run those ads AT THE MOVIE THEATRE? I can understand on TV, but when you've already got my 7 bucks, shouldn't you assume that I'm not the kinda guy who downloaded the movie 2 weeks before it came out?)

Because they're ignorant, self-righteous and short-sighted?

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[Anonymous Coward]

You can still go to indie movie houses and buy indie DVDs, you know.

Re:if it were a poll it has a missing option...

[UserGoogol]

We have ads in theaters because Movie Companies charge theaters quite a bit of money to be able to show their movies. As a result, tickets alone don't make anywhere near a decent profit. To supplement their revenue, theaters sell overpriced food and ad space.

It is a bit stupid, but unless theaters are run directly by the movie companies, (which is sort of true of National Amusements, which has links with Paramount) theaters have to be manage to make their own profit. Middle-men, ya see.

I'd have to say

[mOoZik]

Master and commander!

Re:I'd have to say

[fjordboy]

I agree. That was fantastic. I saw that on Wednesday night and then saw RoTK today. I'd have to say that those two along with "Finding Nemo" are the best of this year.

For movies that were absolutely terrible I vote: "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days" and "Anger Management" and "American Wedding" (I didn't bother finishing that even).

Re:I'd have to say

[BizDiz]

It should have been called "Master and Commander: The Charles Darwin Story".

They turned a good idea for an action plot into a horrible attempt at explaining evolution. I was half expecting to hear that their ship was named "The Beagle".

The movie was watchable, but far, far, far frok "great".

Re:I'd have to say

[trotski]

They turned a good idea for an action plot into a horrible attempt at explaining evolution. I was half expecting to hear that their ship was named "The Beagle".

The movie was watchable, but far, far, far frok "great".

I think you may have missed the point. The plot of Master and Commander was far from convincing, but that was more than made up for by the incredable atmosphere of the movie.

Master and Commander makes you really feel like you're on a 18th century scooner. It's perhaps the best done sailing movie I have ever seen. In terms of the atmosphere of the movie, I think it rivals ROTK, which I saw today.

Re:I'd have to say

[Silburn_Luke]

What trotski said - it wasn't an action film, it was a hammock; that is, it was an examination of a close-knit community slung between two action sequences.

The battles bookend the film and provide motivation/consequence, but the meat of the film is the hammock in between.

Regards
Luke

Re:I'd have to say

[PhalanxPunk]

Master and Commander was the biggest load of shit I have seen all year. Although it did do a fiarly goo job of representing what life was like on a ship in that era, it sucked ass as a 18th century naval flick. It would have been better as a documentary on the History channel.

Re:I'd have to say

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, whatever. the best part was when the one-armed kid was leading a boarding party onto the enemy ship.

ack

[Anonymous Coward]

where is the link???? how can we slashdot when there is nothing to slashdot???
at least link us to SCO or NY Times or goatse for christ's sake!!

Re:ack

[wo1verin3]

Here is the link to /.

Pirates of the Caribbean

[Quobobo]

Yes, it was totally predictable, and standard.. but even so, it was awesome. If this is an indication of what Disney might make more of in the future, than I'm glad.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Beer_Smurf]

Agreed, Depp's added quirk made it one of the years best. The movie wouldn't have been the same with anyone else in the roll.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[stefanlasiewski]

I enjoyed it also, but mostly because of Johnny Depp's character. He was anything but predictable and standard, and saved the movie from being just yet-another-pirate movie.

And my god, Pirates of the Carribean 2 ???

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[darco]

help me out here... If it was totally predictable and standard, how was it awesome?

humor me, I'm interested in your answer, because most everyone I know said that the animation was one of the least inspiring disney films to date. I have yet to see it.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Samari711]

wow if they bring back barbosa in the sequel it really will turn into monkey island. scrawny clean cut kid ends up being a pirate, voodoo ghost captains, mysterious ships, curses. all it needs now is an annoying ship salesman, vegitarian canibals, and a three headed monkey.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Quobobo]

The animation? As far as I know, Pirates was only a ride before it was turned into a feature.. anyways, by predictable and standard, I mean that it was simply a Disney adventure movie at heart. I can think of a lot of beloved movies that aren't by any means thought provoking (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, etc) but are immensely entertaining anyways, and Pirates was one of them for me.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[ReaperOfSouls]

I did enjoy the movie and thought Johnny Depp was good. My only nit pick, is his charater reminded me too much of a pirate version of Dudly Moore playing Arthur..

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Kirth]

Yes, that one took me by surprise. And its the darnest fine piece of a pirate-movie ever since the crimson corsair set sail. Yarrr!
--

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[rdnk]

In this case, predictability was indeed a good thing. I wish more of these old fashioned adventures were made, they have to have some plot and story in them (and over their bones in this case), instead of running purely on CGI.

I guess (and hope), that this is about to be the revival of the adventure film genre, judging by the popularity of the LotR-trilogy. We want heroes, not antiheroes!

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Lumpy]

If this is an indication of what Disney might make more of in the future, than I'm glad.

no it's not.

The "Haunted Mansion" absolutely and completely sucks... I really wonder what kind of leash they have tied around Eddie Murphy's neck to force him to do that crud.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, it's a live-action movie.

Are you perhaps confusing it with Treasure Planet? That was indeed a terrible movie with horrendous animation.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Dr. Manhattan]

Actaully, there's a tiny bit of plot to tie it together... suppose "Bootstrap Bill" got free and was above water at the time the curse was lifted. Now, he's in danger, and Will needs to go save his father? Not much to work with, but the writers did a heck of job turning a theme park ride into a movie.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[babbage]

Animation? Unless you're thinking of the special effects, you may have it confused with some other movie; Pirates of the Caribbean was great, because the subtitle may as well have been, not Curse of the Black Pearl, but The Adventures of Pirate-silla, Queen of the High Seas. I'm not normally a fan of gay comedy -- Wong Foo, Priscilla Queen of the Desert, Will & Grace, etc -- not because I'm offended, but because it usually just isn't that funny to me. But in PotC, Johnny Depp played his pirate pretty much like a high seas drag queen, and it was just hilarious. Far better than it had any right to be. I saw it 3 times last week on an 8 hour flight because I couldn't stand how bad "Charlies Angels 2" was -- that and it was just a wonderful movie. Give it a chance.

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[JCholewa]

> I really wonder what kind of leash they have tied around Eddie Murphy's neck
> to force him to do that crud.

Check his filmography. Eddie Murphy has been doing exactly this sort of crud for a good many years now.

On the flip side, while I thought this movie was indeed of rather low calibre (eg, it more or less sucked), I must defend it in a small way by noting that Terrence Stamp and Wallace Shawn gave spot-on performances.

--
-JC
http://www.jc-news.com/

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[darco]

lol, sorry, my bad... For some reason I was thinking about Treasure Planet when I wrote that.

*sigh* I need to have my head screwed on tighter... Or perhaps escape this sea of code that I work in...

Naa...

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[darco]

Yeah, I'm going crazy... For some reason I was thinking "Treasure Planet"...

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Rob Parkhill]

Seeing as Disney is now making movies based on theme rides at Disneyland, I can only hope that a new Indiana Jones flick is close at hand (a movie based on a theme ride based on a movie... why not?)

But with my luck, the next flick will be "It's a Small World".

Re:Pirates of the Caribbean

[Keith Russell]

I really wonder what kind of leash they have tied around Eddie Murphy's neck to force him to do that crud.

After The Adventures of Pluto Nash , anything's a step up. Heck, I'd rather see him actually make "Chubby Rain".

Quentens masterpiece

[tanveer1979]

Kill Bill was a surprise. But on second thoughts you never expect the Pulp fiction chap to churn out shoddy things. Though it was too violent for some people's taste, the action scenes are choreographed to perfection. No CGI etc and pure raw martal arts and it beats matrix hands down in the fights. The volume one of Kill Bill was released this year. Check out IMDB

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[ottothecow]

Yup...terrific

Go see it if you havn't

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[tentimestwenty]

I think Kill Bill will probably go down as one of the greatest action/martial arts movies of all time. It has no plot other than "kill bill (and his henchwomen)" yet, manages to have deep characters and constant excitement. Most other recent action movies have just been computer animation exercises. They're more boring than watching someone play a video game for 2 hours. Kill Bill is this millennium's answer to Seven Samurai.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[DenOfEarth]

I actually found myself getting pretty bored with the action scenes. After at leat 20 minutes of uma thurman cutting up bad guys, I began to wonder, "what's the point?", and coupling that with the fact that it didn't really have an ending, and I rank it as one of my least favourite movies this year.

My favourites: Mystic River, and X-Men 2.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[ValourX]

Are you JOKING?

Kill Bill was not only the year's worst movie, it was humanity's worst movie. No matter what is produced in the future it cannot be worse than Kill Bill. It was an entire movie about violence with the most minimal plot that a movie can possibly have. What story there was didn't make any sense or provide any real motivation for the characters to do what they did.

Trying to describe the plot of Kill Bill actually makes it sound more interesting than it is on the screen. If you like watching people lose arms and legs and be impaled, dismembered and disembowled in strange and unusual ways then you need psychological help... Kill Bill was like a purposefully fake Faces Of Death without the pretense of reality.

I walked out of Kill Bill and I swore I would never walk out of a movie, ever. I didn't anticipate the level of shittiness that QT attained in Kill Bill. In fact, I'm going to invoice the bastard for the cost of my movie ticket.

I will never see another QT film again. Actually, I'll never see another Uma Thurman movie either. Oh yes, the movie is that bad...

-Jem

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[mcbunny29]

Right on!

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[single_user_mode]

and ppl complained about ROTK being too long! pfffhh. my god, they could have cut (edited) kill bill in half (any ole bits removed, it would not have mattered as there was no plot to runi) and it would still have been boring long.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

fucken eh! I agree with you 100%. I was as close to walking out as i can get. I put it with "Life with Mikey" and "The Mangler".

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Comatose51]

Seven Samurai actually had characters and a theme. It contrasted the ideals of Bushido with the reality of living (as peasants to be specific). Mifune embodied that contrast because he was really a farmer's son who pretended to be a samurai. Crude and unsophisticated, he was able to capture the essence of it nonetheless.

Kill Bill had...

for (time = 0; time length; time++){
if (time % 2 == 0){
scene.coolFightScene();
}
else{
scene.shock()
}
}

Nerd humor.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[DarthTaco]

I'm glad I'm not the only one here on the dot that thinks kill bill was a crap flick.

I think even with all its weirdness there were really just three things that ruined it for me. The dialog, and the lack of editing, and the silly pressurized bleeding. and the dramatic pauses every 2 seconds. so I guess that was four things.

If I heard uma say "wiggle your big toe" one more time, I think I might have killed someone.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[rhuntley12]

It didn't have an ending because it didn't end. It's only part 1. It was originally one movie but they broke it in into two parts. And how can a lady cutting things ever get old?

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[rhuntley12]

I don't know about you but I enjoyed it a ton more then LOTR. I would much rather see non CG fight scenes, without a bunch of guys crying and hugging. No plot? Were you stoned? It might not be ground breaking plot, but it was mainly an action film. The blood spraying was abit much but it made me giggle. Cmon a japanese schoolgirl with a ball and chain? What is better then that?

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Bryan Ischo]

My friend and I both walked out on this one, about an hour and a half into it. He wanted to leave after about half an hour, but I made him stay because I was just *sure* it was going to get better. It didn't. It got worse.

Totally boring, totally stupid, totally a complete and utter waste of time.

How someone who could make a movie as incredibly good as Pulp Fiction could make a movie as incredibly bad as Kill Bill will remain one of the greatest mysteries of my lifetime.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[laxcat]

I guess I'll have to comment on the general negativity being expressed by people who didn't like this film, both here in this thread and elsewhere.

Most of the complaints seem to stem from a general misunderstanding of QT's intentions and motivations for this film. The film's main motifs are ACTION and REVENGE. There is nothing particularly deep or difficult to comprehend in either of these themes. Action is Hollywood's favorite device. Revenge is something that is very close to the human heart. There is no need to really look for any meaning further than this. If you do you risk missing the simplicity of this film. (And then you may not like it.)

We complain about Hollywood films being too predicable and shallow, but there is something noble in QT's quest to make a movie DELIBERATELY simple. Action is its purpose, not a device. Its plot can be implied to: Injustice, then revenge. If poetry is minimalist communication, then well... far be it from me to say spring-loaded decapitations are poetic... but it looks like I just said it anyway.

To sum up, you are DEFINEATLY allowed to not like the very graphic nature of this film. I can respect that. But otherwise you may have missed the fact that this move is intentionally simple.

One of the years best for sure.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Dark Bard]

I take it you didn't see Jackie Brown? I haven't even bothered to catch Kill Bill. I got tired of Tarentino a few years before the rest of Hollywood. The only reason he got another shot is people were afraid he might have another hit in him. Kill Bill made money so the arrogant little SOB will get to make more films. I loved Pulp Fiction and thought True Romance was an excellent film but he's largely a one hit wonder. Where as I think Fincher has another Seven in him Tarentino is unlikely to make another really good film. He believes his own press and it went straight to his head. Maybe after he starved for a couple of years he could do it again. The dry years humbled Travolta long enough to make a couple of good films. Then Battlefield Earth happened. Need I say more.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny that you bemoan the the cliff-hanger ending of Kill Bill yet go on to tell us that X-Men 2 is one of your favorites. If you ask me, X-Men 2 is no better.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if you're John Wayne Bobbitt, a woman cutting things can get old pretty fast.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

"No CGI etc and pure raw martal arts and it beats matrix hands down in the fights."

I agreed with you up untill that point. At which time I decided to retroactively disagree with you.

Ass.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[unborn]

I had never seen so many people walk out on that movie.

It actually made the enjoyment by the end more thorough and intimate. All characters were just lovable and that speaks well about it ( most all characters were "villains" that were actually pretty cruel ).

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[idiot900]

But there wasn't *supposed* to be a plot to Kill Bill! It didn't even pretend to have one! Anything that you might have mistaken for a plot was just to make the action scenes cooler.

Kill Bill succeeded doing the only thing that it set out to do: cut people into tiny pieces. I didn't expect a plot, didn't get one, and enjoyed the movie thoroughly.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[jhunsake]

Well next time I make a movie, and then people complain about it, I'll just claim that I intended for it to be shitty and lack everything that one would expect. Now pay me a million dollars.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[mirko]

if (time % 2 == 0)

I'd suggest :
if !(time & 1)

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[CrackedButter]

Ximinez: NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

On Rottentomatoes it is rated 84%. I guess you are not qualified to comment on what is a good or bad film.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[ValourX]

Okay so if his next film's "motifs" are CAT FOOD and IGNORANCE, which are equally favored by TV commercial producers and just as close to the human heart, does that mean that I need to kiss another $7.50 goodbye so that QT can smoke pot and screen crappy 70s B movies (which, I might add, are B movies because they suck) for his friends?

-Jem

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

worked for Rocky Horror

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[RyosukeFC]

Agreed, Kill Bill was awesome. Not only did QT and UT come up with an awesome character, they had a very healthy supporting cast to, well, support. Lucy Liu is always a joy to watch, and the fact that they all (much like the Matrix cast) had to learn Japanese and Kenjutsu (Samurai Sword Martial Art), they aren't just faking it to look good. Sure it's a popcorn movie, and most people will forget about it until "Best Movie of..." questions like this are raised, but it's a damn fine popcorn flick and I can't wait for Volume II. Though my pick for best movie since sliced bread would be The Last Samurai. It was more dramatic, serious, and historical. And seeing someone I've never been impressed with (Tom Cruise) actually turn in an exceptional performance was a pleasant surprise. Props to the people who greenlit TLS.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[tentimestwenty]

I'm not saying they're the same movie, or that SS doesn't have a theme, just that Kill Bill is the evolution of SS as an action film. I think if you watch the two, you'll see that the pacing is quite similar.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Genrou]

But on second thoughts you never expect the Pulp fiction chap to churn out shoddy things.

Like From Dusk Till Down?

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[watzinaneihm]

I did feel the movie was a letdown, but it was not that bad. You just have to have watched a lot of hong-kong movies (i did ) beginning from the "drunken master" to like it.
Everything including the introduction " XYZ cinema presentation...... Our feature presentation ....Kill Bill" ,on a black background that too, was a spoof on the eastern movies. (Golden harvest movies usually start like that IIRC).
The action scenes were typically eastern, down to one (wo)man against a hundred scene . The excess of swords bit and lack of comedy was more Jetli'ish than Jackie Chan (and their hong kong movies not the hollywood ones).
Overall I think that this was the best "eastern-style" action movie ever to come out of hollywood.No bombs, no guns, no 30-wheel trucks being chased by helicopters. But then again, its an acquired taste and quentin probably was hanging out in hongkong for too long for his own good.
I also like the chapterwise progression, very much anime like. Also the background scores were great if you can follow it
Anyway there is a second part coming up, if you watch the first half of "Pulp Fiction" it would have been plain boring. Just let him get out the second part and pray it doesnt end up like matrix.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

I loved Kill Bill. It was great fun. However, someone should hunt you down and kill you for comparing it to Seven Samurai.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[fodder69]

Kill Bill...Greatest movie ever made...nuff said...

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[jsebrech]

OTOH, temporarily losing his penis resulted in him starring in two porn video's (bobbitt uncut and frankenpenis), getting a penis enlargement, and jobs with both a brothel (where he broke the rule of not sleeping with the girls) and a circus (where he was fired because he couldn't stand still in a knive throwing act). I'd say that as far as making life more interesting, lorena did him a favour.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

My god, to hear anyone say that this is realistic sickens me. The fight scenes and gore were laughable. If they actually had accomplished swordsmen doing the choreography then maybe this movie wouldn't have been such a mess. Heck, if they actually had memorable dialogue this movie wouldn't have been such a mess. "Wiggle your big toe"? I'll wiggle my middle finger instead...

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[daserver]

It's faster to do: for (time = 0; time length; ++time)... ;)

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[armando_wall]

It was fun to watch this movie!! A lot of people complains that this movie sucks, that there's no point, no plot, etc... but that's what this film is about!

I've thrown up with things like "Godzilla", "The Italian Job", "Jurassic Park 2" and "Matrix Revolutions", and was thrilled with masterpieces like "A Beautiful mind", "Lord Of The Rings", "Awakenings" and "The Shine" (the original one).

Then this friend of mine comes with:

He: Dude, there's this new movie, and we should go see it now, because it won't last to the end of the week.
Me: What is it?
He: Its name is "Kill Bill".
Me: Not interested.
He: Uma Thurman kicking ass to hundreds of guys with a japanese sword.
Me: Let's go NOW!

No need to think too much. The girl wants to kill Bill, and that's it. Having that idea in mind from the beginning, you really, really, really enjoy te movie. It was brilliant and a lot of fun to watch!!!

It was cool to hear the crowd at the end of the movie: "WHAT? Is that it???? Man, the worst movie ever!!!!!". Venezuela has no culture for "cult" movies. They stopped showing it the week later. Anyways, I managed to watch it three times.

Ah, hell, I'm still waiting for them to show "Bubba Ho Tep".

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Bryan Ischo]

Look around you man. McDonald's, Starbucks, The Bachelor on TV ... the general public's taste SUCKS. 84% of people have no clue.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Neural Assassin]

Agreed. Those that were disappointed with Kill Bill are those that are naive enough to have been waiting for 'Pulp Fiction II'...which ain't gonna happen.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[DenOfEarth]

I'm not trying to troll here, but if I were to tell you I was making a movies whose main motifs are BOREDOM and SILENCE, and then produce a movie that's over 2 hours long and makes you thankful to leave the theater due to its being the most boring movie you have ever seen, then you should still like it because it was the movie I was trying to make? I don't think so. If the movies boring and you don't like it, the intentions I had when making it have nothing to do with whether you liked it or not.

So, normally I don't get so worked up over things like this, but I liked the first half of kill bill, and then I got bored, and I knew ahead of time that there were two parts to the film, but the cliffhanger ending, if you can call it that, didn't really strike me as that poetic. I still think the movie is one of my least favourite films of the year.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[DenOfEarth]

nice choice...I queried the parent post with a film about BOREDOM and SILENCE, which might not go over well, but since quentin is such a "genius", people will lap it up. It's a shame, because I thought pulp fiction was an original entertaining film, and expected more out of kill bill.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, if they actually had memorable dialogue this movie wouldn't have been such a mess.

i dunno. i found the dialoge with Buck (i'm here to fuck) in the hospital to be rather memorable.

kinda makes me want to go back to school to become a nurse.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Ithika]

Mmm, so wonderful. I went with a friend to see Matrix Revolutions last week and it was horrible. As soon as it was finished we bought tickets for Kill Bill and walked back in to the cinema. I was a bit apprehensive because I'd just sat through an incredibly long film for absolutely no reward and I didn't want to do it again. But am I ever glad we did. If I'd gone home that night without seeing it how could I have slept thinking Matrix Revolutions was the epitomy of modern cinema? The Wachowski brothers need shot; long live Tarantino! - Ithika

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Razor Blades are Not]

The general public doesn't contribute to the ratings on rottentomatoes - they're compiled from movie critics all over the country.

Take a long hard look at yourself - you're part of that general public which you so disparage.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight! I'm working on it now.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Bryan Ischo]

Oh jeeze, that's even worse.

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[Haeleth]

No, it isn't.

prefix.c:

int main (void)
{
int t;
for (t = 0; t < 1000000000; t++);
return 0;
}

postfix.c:

int main (void)
{
int t;
for (t = 0; t < 1000000000; ++t);
return 0;
}

Both compiled with gcc, default options.

$ time ./prefix.exe

real 0m3.776s
user 0m3.755s
sys 0m0.020s

$ time ./postfix.exe

real 0m3.779s
user 0m3.775s
sys 0m0.010s

Re:Quentens masterpiece

[daserver]

You can't "prove" anything by an example. The compiler probably could optimize that one easily but with larger and more obscure code chunks it might not. The reason why t++ is slower is because it might have to make a temporary while ++t never has to. Please read exceptional c++ for a the details.

My nomination

[Anonymous Coward]

Britney Spears in Crossroads.

Very touchy and intellectual.

I cried all night.

Re:My nomination

[KU_Fletch]

Too bad it came out in 2002, but we'll accept Gigli as a replacement answer.

Re:My nomination

[barzok]

Laugh if you must (hell, I did), but I was in the video store Sunday and nearly every copy (over 2 dozen) of Gigli was rented out.

Re:My nomination

[Anonymous Coward]

Its because its a new Ben A-flake movie and the women wanna drool over him :P

Re:My nomination

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure it wasn't through mind-numbing agony?

Re:My nomination

[EMH_Mark3]

Let me guess, they had precisely one copy? :)

Re:My nomination

[Anonymous Coward]

What is it about the (over 2 dozen)-remark you just don't get?

Re:My nomination

[cdf123]

Britney Spears in Crossroads...
...I cried all night.

Me too, the pain was unreal, and the nightmares still haunt my mind...

Re:My nomination

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one don't want back the time I invested in this movie. Sure, it sucks golfballs through a garden hose, but it's really quite unintentionally funny. I laughed out loud lots of times. Plus, it has britney spears AND taryn manning in it, so worst case scenario you'll have to unzip your pants and press the mute button.

Anyway, if britney's porn career doesn't get off the ground, she should try going into comedy. Or maybe she could try a whole new category of movie: porn comedy, mixing the two things people like to do most.

Re:My nomination

[Theaetetus]

Laugh if you must (hell, I did), but I was in the video store Sunday and nearly every copy (over 2 dozen) of Gigli was rented out.

You live in a sad, sad town.

Re:My nomination

[barzok]

HA! I don't actually live there. Though I might end up there in a few months.

The store was pretty much stripped bare (snowstorm - people just settled in for the weekend with some movies), so I'm thinking there was either a lot of desperation or morbid curiosity.

Re:My nomination

[wilhelm]

I cried all night.

As in "I laughed, I cried, I kissed eight bucks goodbye"? That's the only possible explanation.

"In Slashdot's opinion..."

[PseudoThink]

With regard to these movies, Slashdot doesn't have opinions. It has geekloads of rock-solid, indisputable facts. Though these facts might vary and occasionally even conflict, they are all absolutely true, from a certain point of view.

Re:"In Slashdot's opinion..."

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Though these facts might vary and occasionally even conflict, they are all absolutely true, from a certain point of view.

[Aged, wise voice] You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view...

28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[fetta]

28 Days Later may be the best horror movie that I've seen since the original alien. An amazing amount of tension - but what really got me was that it didn't rely on special effects. From an effects perspective, you could have made the same movie in 1970.

Watch this movie and realize that you can do sci-fi and horror without relying on the crutch of CGI effects.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[The Only Druid]

Actually, I think the value of 28 Days Later lies not in the fact that it somehow managed to reinvent zombies: I cant think of a single movie/video game in the past few decades that had a zombie move quickly. Any movie that takes what would reasonably be called a standard like "zombies", and reinvents it, deserves a hell of a lot of credit.

It had scientific flaws - such as the speed of the viral infection, or the fact that the rageaholics dont attack each other - but what story isn't a little fantastical?

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[mantera]

it also won the privilige of being on a recent list of "movies which menstruate" that included, among others... ; "28 days", "28 days later", "red dawn", ""blood on the moon", "sunday bloody sunday", and "my bloody valentine"

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Anonymous Coward]

28 Days later was an excellent flick. I was kind of leary about renting it from Netflix, but thought why not. I am glad I did. I highly recommend it.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[bckrispi]

You can't forget "Crimson Tide"

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Anonymous Coward]

28 Days Later may be the best horror movie that I've seen since the original alien. An amazing amount of tension - but what really got me was that it didn't rely on special effects. From an effects perspective, you could have made the same movie in 1970.

Watch this movie and realize that you can do sci-fi and horror without relying on the crutch of CGI effects.

28 Days had quite a lot of CGI. It's called digital erasure. Did you think London was actually evacuated? In that case, perhaps the movie deserves an award for CGI effects.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[rhuntley12]

London wasn't evacuated, but the scene at the start with no one on the streets was REAL. Look it up, think imdb talks about it. They bribed people to stay off the street with breasts I believe.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Polyploid Pimp]

IIRC, they shot most of the scenes at odd times of the day. For example, the scene where the protagonist is walking around the streets at the beginning was shot very early on a Sunday morning.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[mantera]

hahaha.. i deliberately forgot that... typed it in then then cut it out

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot "The Longest Day"

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Belgand]

Return of the Living Dead from the early 80s had fast-moving, intelligent zombies. It's also largely regarded as the first film in which zombies moan "Braaaiiiinnsss!!"

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Belgand]

I was totally underwhelmed. As a complete zombie-movie fanboy I was lusting after this for a while. Being a bit short on cash I waited until DVD assuming that a DV feature wouldn't look bad at home and might actually end up looking a bit better. Anyhow it just didn't really go anywhere. The first half was ok, but not great and then things meander off to cover some vastly uninteresting characters and become a big fight scene with the zombies almost totally forgotten.

The alternate ending in storyboards on the DVD though? That could have been an amazing film.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[n3m6]

If you like tarantino's style. and want to catch a zombie movie.
get "Versus"
it's japanese.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Pete (big-pete)]

mantera's reply to "You can't forget "Crimson Tide"":

hahaha.. i deliberately forgot that... typed it in then then cut it out

I guess he was just thinking ahead...it'll help to sell the edit again later if he has "extras" to include...

-- Pete.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Geeyzus]

No offense, but you think that the movie would have been "amazing" if they only had substituted the alternate endings?

Spoilers below, be warned,

But seriously. One of them has Jim die from the gunshot. Big deal.

The second, was exactly like the first, except Jim was already dead, and therefore left out.

They wouldn't have added or taken away much from the movie, IMO.

On that note, I loved 28 Days Later, it was the best movie I've seen all year for sure. The best horror movie I have ever seen also. I thought the characters were excellent, the movie moved quickly and with purpose.... it was just great. I recommend it to everyone.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[camrdale]

What do you mean fast? I don't remember any of the zombies from RotLD sprinting!

28 days later definitely takes best horror for me, though the plot kinda reminded me of Oryx and Crake.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[JMJ]

28 Days had quite a lot of CGI. It's called digital erasure. Did you think London was actually evacuated? In that case, perhaps the movie deserves an award for CGI effects.

Bollocks. They filmed it very very early in the morning with loads of guys stopping traffic while they filmed the scenes. Most of that had to be done in one take as they didn't have time to reshoot.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[szmccauley]

They did, it was called Omega Man, and starred that idiot gun nut ... leader of the rest of the gun nuts. Wasn't nearly as good as 28 Days Later, but at the time it was fun, and Charleton Heston wasn't, on the surface, a heartless fucking bastard.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Theaetetus]

Return of the Living Dead from the early 80s had fast-moving, intelligent zombies.

And so did Gigli!

Oh, wait - they were supposed to be alive??

-T

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Anonymous Coward]

If the DVD box had said 'dumb zombie horror' instead of 'thriller', I would have had enough hints not to watch it. Now I had to endure a totally boring script with unrealistic characters and zombies so 'angry' they don't even attack eachother.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[EvlG]

It was great....up until the last 20 minutes or so. Then it was just terrible. Seriously. Once the rape, and the banishment, and all the saoldier fighting started, the movie was just not the same. Watching the DVD extras showed they had a decent idea for what to do instead, but couldn't because of continuity issues. I wish they had solved those and proceeded down that path, because it would have been much better IMO than the soldier slug fest.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[rev063]

Their main problem was that with the London club scene, there really isn't any time any day of the week when the streets are empty.

They had to bribe or otherwise persuade drunken clubbers emerging into the light at 5AM on a Sunday not to interfere with the zombies :)

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Alkaiser]

What makes 28 Days Later such an awesome movie for me, personally is a story I heard from my friend when he was in line at Blockbuster:

In irate woman comes in screaming about the movie. (a paraphrase)

"I thoguht this was the sequel to 28 Days! The Juila Roberts movie! But it's got all sorts of zombies and creepy stuff in it!

You have it RIGHT NEXT to 28 Days! Why would you deliberately trick people like that?!"

Ah...the gene pool.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[bar-agent]

I don't remember any of the zombies from RotLD sprinting!

There was a mob of zombies that rushed out of the trees to attack the two cops. There was an army of zombies running out of the fog and hitting the cops roadblock.

Return of the Living Dead had three great qualities aside from the fast zombies. First, a zombie on walkie-talkie ("Send...more...cops..."). Second, a naked chick/zombie queen. Third, a nuked city ("It's the only way to be sure").

I'd say it's the coolest zombie movie I've ever seen. The title of scariest zombie movie would have to go to Resident Evil, though -- I haven't seen too many of the classics. I'm looking forward to the new Resident Evil.

As for 28 Days Later, I think it sucked. It was all hype.

• It was more a post-holocaust film than a zombie film, like Reign of Fire or something.
• The Blair Witch camera-work gave me a headache. Obviously pretentious.
• It was like the characters were intentionally stressed-out and hard-core -- that level of tension is not natural over a period of time.
• The fort men wouldn't have become that uncivilized that quickly. A few of them should have rebelled against the rape orders.

The only redeeming feature was the British accents.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[elemental23]

Return of the Living Dead from the early 80s had fast-moving, intelligent zombies.

And so did Gigli!

I think you misread the parent post.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Belgand]

Sounds wonderful! I'll have to hurt people until I get a chance to see it. Thanks!

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Belgand]

No no no. On the DVD. The radical alternate ending that was done only with voice-overs and storyboards. They mentioned not going with it due to problems in the proposed cure. Basically it kept the film small with a focus on the core group. It presents a nice return to the original lab and keeps up the tension and focus on zombies (or rather, they're not so much like zombies as it seems more like very, very bad rabies) much better.

As to the other two endings I agree wholeheartedly. They weren't really different in any significant way, which is a shame as none of them were any good.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Belgand]

Best horror for me is only two films: The Exorcist and The Shining. Both are excellent and both remain the only two movies that have ever actually scared me. When a film about demonic possesion can scare an atheist you know you've got a winner.

Re:28 Days Later - best horror movie in years

[Zerbey]

[SPOILERS]

Sorry, got to disagree with you there. It was good up until they reached the military guys, then it got stupid.

The unfilmed alternative ending (which didn't have the military guys) on the DVD edition looked much more promising, but also had a silly ending.

If you want a really good most-of-England-just-got-killed story read Empty World by John Christopher.

My Thoughts

[m3rr]

I thought the X-Men sequal was even better than the first and it did a great job of setting up the obvious third installment. As far as The Matrix, I feel that trilogy took a turn for the worst. The stories of the 2nd and 3rd movies wasn't quite as intriguing as in the first movie. Although, I will say that The Matrix did a hell of a lot better job working in a love story than those crappy new Star Wars movies... ((((shudder))))

Re:My Thoughts

[Anonymous Coward]

Inspite of the bad views Matrix II & III got here I liked them all. True, it would be hard to beat the surprices of I. They should all be watch in short time. After reading the spoils here I thought I would not see the last one. But once I went with my 13 year old daughter we both loved it and were not left with unanswered issues.

But the best one (not having seen LOTR yet) has been The Last Samurai. If integrity is high on your list, you'll love it as much as we did!

The authoritative list

[Anonymous Coward]

Matrix Reloaded: Great
Matrix Revolutions: OK
Terminator 3: Lame
About Schmidt: Pretty good
Finding Nemo: Great

You can all stop debating now.

Lord of the Rings

[Anonymous Coward]

Worst... Trilogy... EVAR.

Ghey, boring, stupid, appeals to dorks and gamers, plotless, dumb.

The Matrix: Revolutions

[Anonymous Coward]

If I wanted to see a religious movie I would have watched Jesus Christ Superstar.

The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got this Paris Hilton mpeg, see, and...

Re:The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Battlefield Earth. It was so bad it keeps smearing itself into successive years. That kind of momentum of awful takes a long time to stop!

Re:The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[Scorchio]

I only found out yesterday that Paris Hilton is a person. For weeks I've been deleting all these junk mails appearing to offer me security tapes from some French hotel. Suddenly, the world made a little more sense. Or less. I'm not sure.

Re:The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[mortal_enema]

Yep. A lot of us thought that this stinker would single-handedly put the Scientologists of of business.

Alas Babylon...

Re:The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yes, I hate watching attractive women having sex.

Re:The worst movie? That's an easy one.

[Tika]

Oh, never say they'll go out of business...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0286343/

looked frightening.

my picks

[frission]

surprised no one has mentioned it, but I think Kill Bill was probably my favorite movie this year. i can't think of another movie that i had more fun at, and thought that everything about the movie was basically "cool" the soundtrack is amazing, props to the RZA. i liked X2 and a couple of indies like Lost in Translation and Thirteen as well...

new concept

[slunk1]

wow. a thread designed just for trolling. interesting concept.

Re:new concept

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! Quit meta-trolling the troll thread!

Re:new concept

[ls -lR]

...and that differs from the majority of slashdot articles, how??

Re:new concept

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the diff? Slashdot forums are a haven to trolling cretons anyway, why not start designing the topics for them instead of skirting around it?

No best, plenty worst

[squiggleslash]

I can't say there was a best film because there wasn't a film that particularly grabbed me. Most films I saw were disappointments, or if they weren't disappointments (Matrix Revolutions, Italian Job) it was because I had spectacularly low expectations before I saw them.

The worst film, in my view, this year was Kill Bill. Tarantino is a fantasticly talented scriptwriter and director, and while usually a little self-indulgent, it's almost always forgivable. Kill Bill wasn't forgiveable - it was entirely self-indulgent, it lacked everything that made Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and Jackie Brown, great films. It was just plain stupid. Visually it sucked. The plot was virtually non-existant - the premise certainly was AWOL. Gah!

Matrix Reloaded was a disappointment but not on the same level. The Wachowski brothers have never proved themselves to be substantially better than average in all respects, The Matrix had plenty of faults, so Reloaded didn't have the same "let down" feeling Kill Bill did.

Re:No best, plenty worst

[yamcha666]

Visually it sucked.

If I heard the rumors correctly, Tarantino was going for that old Kung-fu bootleg look with Kill Bill. I just got Swordsmen II the other day, and comparing the visuals of the two, I think Tarantino got the effect down pretty well. He definitely wasn't going for fancy, but really, are kung-fu movies supposed to be fancy?

Re:No best, plenty worst

[Anonymous Coward]

Being entirely self-indulgent is what made Kill Bill Vol. 1 so good! There's no pretense of a story. It's just an excuse for cartoon violence. Every Tarantino movie has been a little over the top, this one is entirely over the top. It's brilliant!

-nb

Re:Gandalf dies!

[l0tu53at3r]

Gandalf dies!
Talk about fucking Tolkien's corpse with a 2x4! wtf! This, imo, makes RotK the worst move EVER.


That, my friend, ALL of that, is a matter of perception and opinion.

Bad Santa

[crispy1083]

A truly hilarious film. There was some controversy that people might have confused it for a lighter Christmas parody, but it was an excellent dark farce.

Best quote from Billy Bob Thorton, while in a Santa suit, while having anal sex with a woman: "You're not going to shit right for a week."

X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[runfaster]

I was really surprised how entertaining X-Men2 was... I didn't enjoy the first terribly, but Nightcrawler alone sold me on the third. Plus, there was better (but still weak) character devolpment, plus tiny peeks of some old favorites (Shadowcat, Colossus, etc.) Surprisingly good... After Reloaded, I don't think many were surprised that Revolutions was as bad as it was though... Reeves' acting started to get cheesy, and the storyline? Good grief...

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[eln]

What do you mean his acting "started to get cheesy?" Have you SEEN the Bill and Ted movies?

Good Lord man, the reason they got away with Keanu Reeves in the first movie is because all he really had to do in that one was act confused the whole time. They ran into trouble when they actually tried to get him to act in the second and third films.

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[KReilly]

Yea, you are right... But then again, nobody plays a confused guy better than him!

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[Hektor_Troy]

Yeah ...

But I would claim he can act. Have you seen The Gift? He can certainly play a bastard son of a bitch.

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[runfaster]

the reason they got away with Keanu Reeves in the first movie is because all he really had to do in that one was act confused the whole time.

Exactly. If they're tied to Keanu, keep him confused. It only "got" cheesy because he started to have lines/charisma/interest (well, in the script, at least)

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[runfaster]

To be honest, he wasn't all that bad in "A Walk in the Clouds" The movie was extremely sappy, but he wasn't nearly so bad as later...

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Good Lord man, the reason they got away with Keanu Reeves in the first movie is because all he really had to do in that one was act confused the whole time. They ran into trouble when they actually tried to get him to act in the second and third films.

But I'll forgive him for that because of his one-liner at the start of Reloaded, when he starts to fight the agents. It's not that funny on reflection, but at the time, I thought it was hilarious.

Re:X-Men2 surprise, matrix revolutions

[syle]

No way.

"Ted, Strange things are afoot at the Circle K," may be one of the most brilliant lines ever written.

WORST MOVIE EVER

[Anonymous Coward]

In The Cut. Period.
I cant believe Meg Ryan, let alone a movie studio would make that garbage. I still have nightmares about it. I dont know why I stayed through the whole thing. Maybe it was because I shelled out 8 bucks to see that crap. Ughhhh..

NEVER SEE IT. EVER.

Re:WORST MOVIE EVER

[guarddonkey]

There was a sign outside our local theater playing this movie: "No Refunds Given For the Content of 'In the Cut'" Who knew Meg Ryan going topless drove that many people to demand a refund?

best movie

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, I'd have to say, "Cowgirl Dora." Of course that's the only new movie I've seen, but hey, Swiper gets some cookies. I always feel bad for swiper ...

Worst: Kill Bill

[Vicegrip]

Although Kill Bill did have a certain comical "this is really bad" value that reminded me of some of the finer moments of some sewer grade anime I've seen-- still, that anime was better.

Re:Worst: Kill Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to watch more old kung-fu movies. It was a great tribute to those movies... right from the first "Shaw Productions" frame at the beginning

Re:Worst: Kill Bill

[mcbunny29]

A TRIBUTE?!?! Who gives a rat's arse! I want a decent film, not a filmography fest.

Most asian KungFu movies suck grass. The characterization is comical and the fights are just plain stupid. I'm sorry to say this, but Hollywood usually does a better job (except of course Flying Dragon and Croutching shitbag).

The Ring

[RealProgrammer]

This is probably the scariest movie I've ever seen. It was released in 2003, right? If not, it's *still* my pick of 2003.

At first it looks like a juvenile cross between "Conspiracy Theory" and "The Net", but then it shifts gears and scares the living shit out of you.

I'm still freaked (can you tell?), and I only saw it once.

Re:The Ring

[malkavian]

That one gets my vote. :) Quietly, unassumingly scary.
Not many movies get me on the edge of my seat, but The Ring did just that. :)
I was pondering not seeing it, as I thought it'd be a standard 'blood and guts' horror, which I find both boring, and irritating.
It's anything but. True psychological horror. :)

Re:The Ring

[cujo_1111]

Try watching the original Japanese 'The Ring' movies...

Re:The Ring

[Kris_J]

I watched the Japanese one first. The US version is so dull by comparison I didn't even finish it.

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

This is probably the scariest movie I've ever seen

Absolutely agree with you there. I came home and *unplugged* my TV. To prevent me from dying of fright if one of the cats decided to sleep on the remote control and powered it up (this has happened before).

If you've not seen it (or even if you have), The Best Trailer is still a treat (there were some crappy trailers for this movie out there as well).

(I can't figure out a direct link - bastard stupid retards refuse to let people copy their god-damn *ADVERTISING*).

Re:The Ring

[flacco]

At first it looks like a juvenile cross between "Conspiracy Theory" and "The Net", but then it shifts gears and scares the living shit out of you.

agreed - i thought i was going to hate it, but it completely absorbed me.

some of the visuals were quite compelling.

Re:The Ring

[JFMulder]

Yeah. Actually I was kinda worried at the beginning because you had those two school girls with miniskirts and I thought "Crap, this is going to be another lame naked breasts and monster kinda horror movie", which it didn't turned out to be at all.

Re:The Ring

[darco]

The Ring was easily the scariest movie I have ever seen. I usually laugh at horror movies, but this one really hit a nerve for some reason. I mean hell, the premise doesn't even sound that scary. Watch a video tape, and a few days later you expire in a rather grotesque fashion. Peh.

It sounded lame to me, but I went to go see it anyway... And then it scared the shit out of me. It ends with a disturbing twist that I think most people will not anticipate--I surely didn't.

In short, it is a brilliantly executed horror flick. I highly recommend it. This movie is bound to influence pop-culture for years to come.

Re:The Ring

[Locmar]

I watched the American version first, and it scared the piss out of me. I watched the Japanese version, and thought it was pretty good, but not NEARLY as scary (barring the final scene, which I thought was much better in the original Japanese version). My then-girlfriend watched them both with me, and agreed. Fast forward to a couple months ago: I watched the American version again. It scared the piss out of me again. I just don't think Ringu could do that; the American version's timing and pacing is simply much better, in my opinion. The Japanese version reveals too much too early, whereas in the American version, you are led to believe things that come around to bite you in the ass in the end.

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

Go and see the Japanese version. It's scarier than the american version. You might also want to see The Grudge (Ju-On), another Japanese horror movie

Re:The Ring

[epsilon720]

Here is the direct link. Just look in the source, man.

Re:The Ring

[Kris_J]

I was scared by neither and simply found the US one boring. Does it have the photo stuff that the Japanese one has -- with the energy, where the girl had been peeping round the corner, half her face gives of this weird energy? Was there any energy stuff at all? I found that to be particularly well done. I should watch it again...

Re:The Ring

[Cabaal]

If you are into scary movies forget the Ring. The Grudge (Ju-On) is a Japanese movie in the same genre as The Ring. Ju-On, much like the Ring, is being re-made for American audiences. If you have an all region DVD player buy this movie. You will not regret it. (It helps to have a good sound system since the sounds are really part of the horror) Ju-On

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

u gotta be f***** kidding me!

this movie totally blew! just like the filthy critic used to say, if this is a scary movie, ppl 2day are a bunch of pussies.

naturally this opinion is purely subjective

Re:The Ring

[Geeyzus]

The Ring came out in 2002, actually.

However I agree, this was an EXCELLENT horror film. I think 28 Days Later might edge it out, but as far as pure FEAR, this one is much scarier.

I'm trying to get a friend of mine to come over and watch it with me. Of course, in my opinion, if you want to watch it, you have to rent a VHS tape, NOT a DVD. You'd have to see it to know what I'm talking about.

Then in your pocket, have your cell phone (in silent mode) pre-dialed to your friend's cell... after the movie, push the "Send" button as you walk up to the VCR to push rewind or get the tape. Sure to ruin a perfectly good pair of pants. :-)

Mark

Re:The Ring

[(-mas-borracho-)]

My mum and sister got The Ring out on video. Halfway through, the phone rang!

Suffice it to say, my brother had to go and rewind the tape.

Cheers,
Chris

Re:The Ring

[Wolfrider]

--I've been surprised at my tolerance for "scary" movies, but to this day I refuse to see "The Ring". Everyone I know who's seen it has been seriously freaked out by it.

--I kind of like being able to walk to my bedroom in the dark without getting paranoid, mmkay?

Re:The Ring

[ragnar]

My fiance doesn't go for scary movies, so I watched this one myself on DVD (I know VHS would be more apropos, but I'm hooked on the fidelity). I like to think I have a pretty firm grip on reality and have rarely seen a good horror film.

In a word, The Ring kicked my ass. Let me just say I watched it with the lights on. ;)

Re:The Ring

[MrNemesis]

If you did watch The Ring on DVD, how would you copy it to escape with your life?

If you don't copy it, you get killed by a scary psycho-child-demon.

If you do copy it, you get fucked over by the MPAA.

I don't know which one is worse.

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

The ring is the first movie in almost a decade that actually scared the shit out of me. Kept me up all night, which is kind of embarassing for a 24-year old.

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

Scary? Reality check. My 14yo daughter made me take her to the theater to see it. Half by mid movie we were both giggling every other scene. She was PO'd by the hamburging of the horse though.

Girls with manky hair do not scare me. Still, quiet contrysides do not scare me (I'm, a hick from the sticks -- the number of movies that rely on isolation and darkness to create a "scary" atmosphere is really beginning to bug me. Walking a couple miles down a country road on a dark miserable night is just uncomfortable, not at all frightening, and when not raining it's just boring).

The Ring is on my list of mildly amusing, unintentionally very funny films. Doesn't quite rate up there with "Green Slime", but it's on the list.

Re:The Ring

[Recessive Gene Boy]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this, but the DVD is definetly worth seeing. Not necessarily for the movie but the extras. Supposedly, the authors of the DVD did a lot of extra tricks that play with the hardware of the DVD player. My roomate was looking through the extras section and saw you could watch the "tape" from the movie. After watching it, hitting stop and walking away, the movie started up and played again without any prompting. Scared the crap out of him.

Re:The Ring

[Anonymous Coward]

The one that died in the closet left a pretty good opening to skull fuck. Though she looked kinda like the scream

Re:The Ring

[bender179]

I loved both Conspiracy Theory and The Net. They at least had the courage to show the world for what it really is-one big conspiracy. Props to Mel Gibson also, for revealing the first true conspiracy in his new movie: the plot of the Jews to kill Jesus. They rule the media also, in case you all didn't know. Wait, where was I?

Re:The Ring

[Monkey]

Filthy also thought The Exorcist remake was the scariest fucking movie he'd ever seen, even giving it a 4 out of 5 finger rating.

I didn't think the remake added very much to the original. It was basically the same 30 year old movie with a couple new scenes. Personally I would have given it the middle finger for wasting my time with that warmed over shit.

Finding Nemo...

[cujo_1111]

I would have to say I enjoyed 'Finding Nemo' far more than any other movie all year.

Although 'Bad Boys 2' kept me entertained, not a great movie though.

Re:Finding Nemo...

[Yenhsrav_Keviv]

watching Finding Nemo in spanish was definitely way more entertaining than in english.

Re:Finding Nemo...

[cujo_1111]

I might have to do that when the DVD comes out...

I still don't know why i found Ellen DeGeneres talking to whales so funny, but I laughed so hard at that. Great movie.

Terminator 3 - ick

[UnderScan]

Kludge of a story that was hacked together to sell tickets. Inclusion of a new stronger, faster, & harder to kill Terminator that also oozes with sexual energy & is not scary or intimidating. Film score that didn't use the Terminator2 theme to inspire awe & fear.

T2: "Hasta la vista, baby!"
T3: "Talk to the hand."

eww. I feel dirty just thinking about that film.

Re:Terminator 3 - ick

[cheekyboy]

Thats one thing that I thought the producers of the film stuffed up on most, the music thundering metal CHUNK like t1/t2 , was it that the person who made it had his own (C) and wouldn't let them use it? Damn pitty, surely he could have done it for $2-3m

Maybe we should have 'unofficial edits' cut some boring scenes, add the t2 music score etc...

There should be a whole festival for 'custom edits' by aspiring directors.

Re:Terminator 3 - ick

[crashnbur]

Now you know how Arnold knew it was time for a career change.

Re:Terminator 3 - ick

[MyBeeswax]

Local obnoxious radio personality, Howie Carr, was interviewing an old hand from Hollywood who used to work the TV sets in the 60's/70's. This guy remembers seeing a rubber fish monster walks off the set of 20,000 Leagues Under the Seas, get toweled off, and walk right on to the set of Lost In Space. I felt the same way watching Terminator; there was nothing original about the movie. Even the robots were right from Robocop/Lost in Space[new one]. Ick. This was the word of the bunch if you figure in the expectations.

Re:Terminator 3 - ick

[Zork the Almighty]

Truely, the good people of California have bestowed a blessing upon the world.

ROTK BAD.

[DAldredge]

I mean the already published the book for the 3rd movie! How much does that suck? And don't get me started on how much it stole from that satanic game D&D! I mean anyone who has anything to do with D&D is evil and should be shot!

Re:ROTK BAD.

[TechnoPops]

Seriously, D&D really is Satan's game. I fear my children will be attracted to this game in their weaker years, and then be drawn deeper and deeper into the bowels of El Diablo.

Re:ROTK BAD.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, The Lord of the Rings parallels the Bible quite a bit. I'm not sure if it's by accident or not, though I know Tolkien was a Christian.

FWIW.

-nb

Re:ROTK BAD.

[ishmaelflood]

It is a shame you have so little confidence in your own parenting ability.

Re:ROTK BAD.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's very easy to make a lot of things parallel... well pretty much anything. Tolkien himself said that the book was definately not meant as an allegory, though.

Re:ROTK BAD.

[tyndyll]

Seriously, D&D really is Satan's game. I fear my children will be attracted to this game in their weaker years, and then be drawn deeper and deeper into the bowels of El Diablo kudos to Technopops for the inspired Dr Demento quote. time to break out the dark robes and dim the lights again.... and all because i couldn't do one single pull up

Re:ROTK BAD.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I mean anyone who has anything to do with D&D is evil and should be shot!

Would that be Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil...?

Re:ROTK BAD.

[DAldredge]

It is nice to see that some of the mods on /. are still on CRACK!

Damn it, he was telling a joke about a 'famous' d&d skit!

Re:ROTK BAD.

[BigFootApe]

This is just dry humour, right?

If you tell me it is, you will restore some of my confidence in humanity.

Thank you.

Re:ROTK BAD.

[obeythefist]

Actually, given the amount of litigation the MPAA/RIAA/DMCA producers of these films is involved in, I'd say LAWful evil.

Re:ROTK BAD.

[TechnoPops]

Yes, this was meant completely in jest. It's actually a lift from a quite humorous D&D skit by a group called the Dead Alewives. You can give it a listen at the Funny Stuff section of their site.

(Mental Note: When you're trying to be funny, don't forget to put the obligatory smiley. :P)

Kill Bill Volume 1++

[wackybrit]

Went into Kill Bill without really knowing anything about it, and enjoyed myself as much as when I saw Clockwork Orange at the theater after it was unbanned (I'm from the UK).

Why? Because of the fighting. I'm not really into violent movies or the whole escapism thing, but seeing Uma Thurmann kick some major ass was almost sexual. A nice pastiche of the last 50 years of kung-fu cinema.

Re:Kill Bill Volume 1++

[Anonymous Coward]

Uma Thurman is butt-fucking ugly. Of course you Brits are used to ugly, bad-teeth, wenches, so I don't blame you.

Re:Kill Bill Volume 1++

[Professr3]

I agree, she's ugly... but man, what a flame that post was...

Re:Kill Bill Volume 1++

[wackybrit]

Yeah, fair enough, I figure if you're American you prefer 'buxom' ladies like Anna Nichole Smith, Roseanne, and Oprah Winfrey. ;-)

I had huge hopes for 2003

[PovRayMan]

When I found out I was going to conclude The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings in 2003 all within months of each other, I was jittered with excitement. Both movie series filled in two seperate geek aspects; computers and epic fantasy. Some say The Matrix fell short with the sequels, but I won't get into the argument. I for one enjoyed all three Matrix films, and that's that. The ending of Revolutions left me somewhat satisfied, but not filled with joy knowing and seeing the end. Now just the other night I watched Return of the King and that void of emotion has been completely filled. Not only did The Lord of the Rings movie series end, it gave a full out conclusion. Most people not familiar with the books (That's me until I saw FOTR and then read the books for the first time) would assume that when the ring is destroyed the movie would end. Instead we're returned to the purity of Middle Earth as it once was before the corruption of the ring where the king of men rules once more, and the Hobbits drink, dance and sing joyfull songs. Unlike Matrix Revolutions we just get the idea that the Matrix lives on, but those who want out are freed and the machines no longer go off patrolling and killing humans from Zion (Assuming the humans don't go off killing the machines). That ending is nice and non-conventional, but it leaves an emotional gap. Return of the King fills the void, and even overflows it.

"You bow to no one..."

:'-(

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

" Instead we're returned to the purity of Middle Earth as it once was before the corruption of the ring where the king of men rules once more, and the Hobbits drink, dance and sing joyfull songs."

Yes... but that's not the way it should have been. I'm sure PJ would have put it in if he could have had another 40 minutes in the theatrical release, but I'm still a bit disappointed that the scouring of the Shire was left out. In the book, the point is that you can't just go back - some things change everything. In the movie, everything is happy again.

Ah well.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

Godammit! Get it into your head! He doesn't fucking like that part of the book. He didn't like it in the book, he didn't put it in his screenplay, he didn't even fucking think about filming it. The reason the scouring of the shire was left out is that Peter Jackson fucking hated it. Deal.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[JFMulder]

In the book, the point is that you can't just go back - some things change everything
Well, we still get that point with Frodo going to Valinar with everyone else, because Frodo has been broken by this adventure. He can't turn back to being normal. In fact, he's the tragic hero in this because he saved the world but in the end he couldn't save himself.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

It made the film worse by not being there. (I'm aware it wasn't in the screenplay, but I've never seen Peter Jackson say he hated it).

Settle down, or better yet go to bed, you sound like a twelve year old hyperactive twit.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, the world doesn't go back to way it was. The point is that it can't, ever. The elves left remember?

Men (Humans) are in control => the shit hits the fan.
The point is that the old gods (the elves) leave, and then history as we know it follows.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[etesla]

In most movies, I would find that moment in the movie very over-the-top and emotionally manipulative, which I generally *hate*. But in Return of the King it worked; it had legitimacy because it was appropriate and, well, *deserved*. I thought I'd had enough after seeing the movie twice opening day. But I'll be going back for more with friends who haven't gotten to see it, and I'll look forward to that bit in the film.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[CAIMLAS]

The conclusion of the original Star Wars trilogy is similar to the ending of the LotR movies in that fashion: they conclude on a happy note of bliss, not the resolution of the disaster.

IMO, such conclusions don't work too well with shorter films, but when you've got an epic story that spans several films, it's almost a necessity to bring closure, completeness, and a "human" touch to the films.

That said, I wish they'd had the Battle of Hobbiton in RotK: they could have cut out some of the excessive emotional hobbit-blathering between Frodo and Sam, reduced some of the battle scenes slightly, and had less "pensive waiting" scenes, etc. Surely they could have carved off 10 minutes of the film in such a fashion - enough for the Hobbiton battle, I think. And really, that would have aided a lot of "hell yes" coolness to the film: after all, one of the nifty things about the books is that it puts much more emphasis on Merry and Pippin kicking ass in battle scenes, and that's not really grasped in the film. Showing a bunch of hobbits kicking the shit out of a bunch of half-orcs and men would be great.

Re:I had huge hopes for 2003

[Syrrh]

I've seen specific mention that PJ didn't like the SotS chapter, he'd said something along the lines that it felt awkward and out of place. I do agree a little, but the book did lean on the idea of lingering scars left by such events. There has to be some kind of a wind-down too, you don't end that kind of epic suddenly unless you're angling for another sequel later.

Haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm guessing PJ fills that need by bringing Arwen back in for more screen time than she deserves, *again*.

So many flicks, so little worth watching

[rueger]

Before posting I tripped over to the Internet Movie Database and looked at what has been released. I realized that there had been almost nothing that was sufficiently interesting to get me to watch.

The one film that REALLY stood out was a 2002 release, The Hours. Even Nicole Kidman impressed me.

Face it - Hollywood has lost all interest in making good films.

Big Disappointment (cheat: was on TV)

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, so it was on TV, but the biggest disappointment for me was Battlestar Galactica. I admit the original was cheesey, but it was the 70's (okay, maybe 1980 or so), when everything was a bit overdone. While this seemed more realistic, everything that made me like the first one (the buddy relationship between Apollo and Starbuck, the Starbuck-Athena-Cassieopea triangle, and the tension between Apollo and Sheba...) were gone. Basically, I felt the characters in this were almost completely undeveloped or cliche, or nothing more than a setup for a series.

But then again, the writer/producer (Ron Moore) was never actually known for his ability to create a strong character arc. Other than his first 2 eps of ST:TNG, seeing his name on the writing credits usually told me the episode would not be character based, or would be about Klingons.

While he seems to be a nice guy, I still don't think he could develop a character to save his life.

Re:Gandalf dies!

[rob_hines]

It'd be nice if people who criticize something are actually familiar with what they're criticizing. There are plenty of things to pick at in the LotR series, but this isn't one of them. Read the book. Gandalf died fighting the Balrog. He was returned to Middle Earth as Galdalf the White because he still had things to do. He was a demigod, and a bearer of one of the three elven rings of power. At least get your facts straight before you make a stupid comment like this.

My vote.

[Anonymous Coward]

Glory Hole is one of the best movies I've seen this year. I watch it constantly when my girlfriend is on the rag. Muy bueno.

21 grams, kill bill

[ankit]

Both very different movies, and imo would easily figure in top 10 for most people.

Kill Bill was perhaps the first movie that made me want to see it again even before I had left the movie hall. Amazing direction, camera work, and the anime was icing on the cake.

21 grams was a nice first english movie by a non-english speaking director. It seemed to lose itself towards the end, but had a nice overal effect.

ROTK would have to come close, but read here why I would not call it the best.

Re:21 grams, kill bill

[Bryan Ischo]

I cannot fathom how an obviously intelligent person such as yourself could like Kill Bill. It just doesn't make sense to me. It's like a normally compassionnate, caring person saying, "Hey, the holocaust was really great!" The Holocaust and Kill Bill are two things which should never be repeated and should never be praised. Period.

Kill Bill was so mind-numbingly boring and stupid that I could not believe it. I admit, the very first scene, the black and white of Uma gasping her last breath and saying "the baby's yours" or whatever she says, had some visual and emotional impact. But the rest was just DUMB. It was an insult to my intelligence. Its dialog was wooden and contrived. The fight scenes were repetitive and completely dull. The plot didn't go anywhere. Nothing fit together. I was not drawn in emotionally to any of it. Uma looked old and spent. There were so many bad things about that movie that I can't even remember because I think I blocked it all out.

Also, the anime was well drawn but dumb. A ten year old kid watches her parents disgustingly murdered, then disembowels a guy, then shoots the knees out of a couple more. Boring.

If you like Kill Bill I can only imagine that you're the kind of person who really gets a kick out of watching a dog get run over by a car. Oooh look, blood and guts spewing everywhere. What a masterpiece!

Whatever.

Re:21 grams, kill bill

[ankit]

Its interesting that you mention the "dog get run over by a car" analogy. No I am not someone who would like blood spewing everywhere. I am not a sadist.
The reason why I really liked Kill Bill was not because of the story (I agree there was none), or the "intense" violence. It was because of the great use of colors, the music, the amazing camera work, the editing, and a director why made use of almost every known technique in movie making!
The blood and gore that you mention was disturbing at first, but after a while it seemed almost funny and exagerated. One you can notice is that nowhere are intense emotions/facial expressions shown when someones arm/leg is cut off. That is what would have made the movie gross in my opinion.
Anyways, its one of those movies I cant really explain why I liked so much. But looking at imdb ratings for the movie, it is clear that I am not alone.

btw, if you really want an intense movie to watch, try Requiem for a Dream - I would say that is a more disturbing movie without a drop of blood.

Re:21 grams, kill bill

[noisehole]

21 grams was the finest movie this year imho.

i saw rotk and finding nemo... everyone loves those two and they were just awesome, no doubt.

21 grams is just a different movie. do yourself a favour and watch this one, you wont regret it.

everyone makes the experience in his life to loose someone very close and you will see the world with different eyes, will start thinking about things you never had. the movie tells a sad story with such a view, and i must admit its been told beautifully.

this movie really has a meaning, watch it and maybe you will see what i saw.

I 2nd the nomination: Gayniggers from Outer Space

[pr0ntab]

as the worst movie of not only this year, but every year since it was released (1992). It was so bad, people kept asking to re-evaluate it, just to see if anyone could do any worse.

Agreement

[aSiTiC]

I was impressed by 28 Days Later too. Small budget + small-name actors + good writer = High impact movie. Lots of fun :)

Re:Agreement

[rilister]

Liked it too: but 'low-budget'? A lot of money went on that modish DV grainy look.

28 Days Later's $15m budget is actually pretty darn huge for a movie made outside Hollywood, y'know.

Low budget film making is PI ($60,000), Clerks ($27,000) and El Mariachi ($7,000!) That's why you'll never see a non-US movies action movie compete in the US marketplace unless they were forced to include good plot, characters, acting, etc, etc...

oh, hang on.....

Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[MBCook]

OK, so I never saw it, but I'd like to nominate a movie from January 17th. That instant horror classic (the horror being what you expiriance at even having to watch the commercials for it)...

Kangaroo Jack

Best movie? Pirates of the Carabian was good, I haven't watched Seabiscuit yet (I've got it on DVD near me right now), I liked X-2, and I thought that The Matrix: Reloaded was entertaining, Nemo was fantastic, I loved A Mighty Wind, and those are the only 2k3 movies that I've seen (that I can think of) as I only watch DVDs.

Does Chicago count? It came out Dec 25th of last year, so that's within the last year (not last calender year though).

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, that's not 2003 movies, that's, like, 7, 8 tops. Pfft, learn to count man.

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[Anonymous Coward]

i watched airbisquit last night...

after i took off my underwear...

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[forgotmypassword]

I loved A Mighty Wind

Then I hope you have seen the other fake documentaries made by the same people.

"This is Spinal Tap"

"Best in Show"

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[Anonymous Coward]

Being an engineer, I must say that The Core comes in as the worst (or most dangerous) movie ever. I swear, I lost 40% of all of my rational engineering knowledge just by watching it.

Word of advice: If any one dares see it, check your scientific knowledge at the door (or lock it away for later retrieval). You might be able to enjoy it if you do so.

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[jCaT]

oh, MAN, kangaroo jack came out on my birthday... No WONDER this year sucked so bad!!

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[crashnbur]

I thought Chicago was good, but not deserving at all of the Oscars it won. Maybe best Musical/Comedy -- I can certainly give it that -- but the others were just way over the top. My high school's performance of Chicago some six years ago was much better than the movie. When a high school outperforms Hollywood, I can't enjoy the Hollywood version. Sorry... And, no, I wouldn't count it as 2003 since it was released in 2002, and also because it already won Oscars in 2003.

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever....

[MrDolby]

I assume you've read "Intuitor's Pick - Worst Physics Movie Ever" review of The Core. Its very entertaining.

Intuitor's Pick - Worst Physics Movie Ever

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

Dogville

[Shipud]

No doubt. Powerful stuff. Too bad Kidman won't be there for the rest of the trilogy, but I don't think von Trier will disappoint... 'nuff said. Wouldn't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen it.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[KiwiEngineer]

I agree with your opinions on the matrix, but with respect to LOTR I have to say that you are a troll of the highest order. I am not a LOTR freak, and have only seen the first two movies a couple of times each, and read the book only once, about ten years ago.

LOTR uses CG to better tell a story that is played out on a massive scale. It is not used simply for the joy of running animation engines hot for a year or so. I will concede that the Matrix did fall into the trap of CG for its own sake after the first movie.

Many others plainly disagree with your opinion on the text of LOTR based on its taking out readers surveys of favourite books again and again.

The Matrix [take your pick which one]

[popisdead]

People don't realize IT'S JUST A SCI FI MOVIE. It's not that great or impressive. To all those people who use 'Neo' as a handle Get a grip! The second one was so bad I didn't bother with the third. Best: D'uh! I haven't even seen RoTK but I can't put my vote anywhere else.

Seabiscuit:

[pr0ntab]

It'll probably make you get misty eyed at times, but you'll still feel empty inside afterwards.

Re:Seabiscuit:

[Anonymous Coward]

airbiscuit got me misty eyed all right!

damn...light a match

X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[tstoneman]

Who would have guessed the X-men 2 would be so great?

I literally shed tears when I saw the way they did Nightcrawler... it was perfect. The attack at the beginning of the movie was perfect... I just wish that I hadn't seen the previews so that I would have been completely caught offguard.

The portrayal especially his religiousness was amazing.

The only minor problems that I overlooked:

1) He wasn't fuzzy (ie. Fuzzy Elf)
2) In the attack scene, he was clearly teleporting behind walls and such, something that he wouldn't be able to do properly. The only reason that I could think of that he would do that was because he was under the mind control and that forced him to do crazy things.

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but X2 is the one film that stands out in my mind as being least worthy of the praise dumped upon it. Sure, the Matrices were massive let-downs, but at least they were widely criticised for it. It seems to me that nobody has a bad word to say about X2, which is just confusing. The characters in X2 are two-dimensional and stereotypical. The writing is uninspiring. The action is entertaining, but mediocre. The moral of the story is the same as the first one, and shoved in your face just as much. It seems to me that a lot of it is simple pandering to the comic book fans. Recognising characters and their little quirks makes you feel in-the-know and invokes your sense of nostalgia. That doesn't make it a good movie.

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[Drathos]

As much as I loved Nightcrawler, I have to add one more nit:

He's too old.

He's supposed to be Mystique's son, but, looking at them in the movie, Nightcrawler and Mystique are roughly the same age. In reality Alan Cumming is 7 years older than Rebecca Romijn-Stamos.

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[synth7]

Sooo... how old does a shapechanger look? How can you tell?

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[Drathos]

Well.. Given that Nightcrawler should be in his teens, the similarity is close enough. Then again, a lot of the character ages are rather off.

I'm willing to overlook a lot of these and enjoy the movies, but I know several X-Men (comic book) fans who don't like the changes.

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[bar-agent]

The characters in X2 are two-dimensional and stereotypical. The writing is uninspiring. The action is entertaining, but mediocre.

Well...it's a comic book!

Re:X-men 2 - I cried when I saw Nightcrawler

[alanmusician]

It can be noted that in the Uncanny X-Men comic book Mystique is about as old as Wolverine and has lived through many lifetimes with different "skins."

However, at the point Nightcrawler joined the X-Men he was a young boy. This is silly to pick at, though, because Rogue's origin is all different, too. Not only that but there are several different threads of history between the comic book X universes, of which the Uncanny X-men is only one.

That said, the movies rock, and I believe unifies and protrays the spirit of the X-Men perfectly for today.

The Best

[Anonymous Coward]

Citizen Cain and Casa Blanca. Or were you talking about movies that came out during a year when creativity in the hollywood movies has been zero to nil? I am waiting for Bubba Ho-Tep to come out in my area, but so far the classics win out compared to the trash that came out this year.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[damiam]

didn't have anything new to offer viewers except a nine hour fantasy-boy masturbation session.

And what's wrong with that?

Bad Santa

[foo fighter]

Bad Santa was as close to a perfect movie as I've seen in a long time. It stayed true to itself, managed to be funny, thoughtful, and obscene all at once, and the characters and plot developed while still having plenty of action and slapstick.

LotR: RotK was second in my book. I'm a geek who reads the book every year. Yet somehow I don't hold the book or its author up as holy items beyond reproach or critique. Peter Jackson has done a marvelous, magnificent thing with these three movies and I hope he wins some awards this year (best director, screenplay, and/or movie) from the big shows like Oscar and Globe. I find the nitpicks humorous and interesting as pieces of trivia, but feel sad about and pity towards those who get up in a bunch about minor inconsistencies, mistakes, and additions/omissions in such a masterpiece.

My guilty pleasure this year was The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It was much better than all the reviews led me to believe. I actually enjoyed it more than X2 by a large margin. It was a fun action movie with really cool steam-punk technology and "magical" mythical heroes. What's not to like?

My biggest disappointments were the Matrix sequals. WTF happened? Jackson did it right and the Wachowskis did not. My personal theory is that if the Wachowskis had been given the opporunity to shoot the three all at once The Matrix would be held up as a peer to LotR. The huge delay between The Matrix and Reloaded caused all kinds of subtle problems and gave the brothers too much time to think about the screenplay. Sometimes less is more.

My happiest moment was when I discovered how to rip DVDs I rent to my hard disk. Then I burn those rips onto SVCDs to pass around to my friends as cheap Christmas presents.

God bless us, every pirate!

X men 2 rocked! (Matrix 1 sucked)

[Sparky69]

X men 2 was absolutely perfect. Sure the hardcore comic book readers had some gripes about imperfections in the stories (like where Jason 143 came from) but here is a movie that had the budget to "Lucas" but decided instead to put those FX dollars to good use. The CG was flawless and not overbearing.

On the other hand, the Matrix 2 and 3 were absolute garbage. I couldn't stand watching either one and the last one was almost a personal insult it was so bad.

What about Kill Bill? That was also an awesome movie (moving away from Sci-Fi..sorta)...

Re:Worst.... Movie.... Ever.... (Updated)

[MBCook]

I'd like to add that I have watched Terminator 3, which I also liked, along with The Animatrix which was fantastic (if you count it as a movie). I guess that means that I've see 6 movies from the last year that I liked, I didn't see any that I didn't like (but I haven't watched Seabuscit yet, so I guess that could change).

What am I waiting for? LotR:RotK (almost a palendrome!) and The Matrix: Revolutions (I'm going to rent it even if it is supposed to be terrible). I also think Kill Bill Vol. 1 sounds interesting. I also think that new Big Fish movie sounds interesting. I'm straying close to off topic here, so I'll quit while I'm ahead.

Two that I forgot

[MikeCapone]

Finding Nemo was really fun and Kill Bill Vol.1 was very entertaining. I can't wait for volume 2.

Re:Two that I forgot

[Boing]

Finding Nemo was really fun and Kill Bill Vol.1 was very entertaining.

I can see why you'd pick those two movies... they're so similar. I love the scene in Finding Nemo where Nemo severs the heads of an entire school of fish.

Re:Two that I forgot

[MikeCapone]

I can see why you'd pick those two movies... they're so similar. I love the scene in Finding Nemo where Nemo severs the heads of an entire school of fish.

Well, the dentist scene was pretty horrific...

Re:Two that I forgot

[CaptMonkeyDLuffy]

Well, Finding Nemo(or, the begining of it at any rate), was something rather dark for a kids movie. Yes, all the classic fairy tales were originally rather gruesome, but given what is generally produced for and considered proper for kids these days, I was rather surprised...

That said, a really good film for kids, entertaining enough to be worth a watch by adults(doubly so if you happen to be a computer generated animation nut).

Re:Two that I forgot

[Anonymous Coward]

There won't be volume 2. Bill has not been a M$ CEO a long time ago.

Duh

[E-Rock-23]

LotR:RotK by far, hands down, the best flick of 2003. Everything else was crap. And I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that, despite Gigli, the two newest Matrix films were the worst of 2003. Never have I seen (or in this case, heard of, since I didn't see them) such dissappointment in a series.

Individual suckiness includes that horrible Hulk movie, Gigli, and a host of others I don't care to mention.

Kudos to X-2, though more could have been done with it. Am I the only one who can't wait for Shadowcat to grow up? Good kitty...

The Matrix v. LOTR

[boobox]

The story's the thing. The Matrix started strongly, with enough subtlety and interesting ideas paired with killer wire fights and excellent effects to capture the public eye; the 2nd film, however, floundered on screen (though I thought it was still worth the price of admission) with less story and more special effects and CGI. By the end of the third film, It was like watching a hurricane, that once was beautifully coiled, rippling with power and newness, dissipate into just another tropical storm named Huey, or something similar. I still thought the third flick was worth my ten bucks but was let down, ultimately with the 2nd and 3rd, because the beginning was so strong. With the LOTR, the story's already there and strong. Tolkien knew more world mythology by rote than most people have ever heard or read. I remember in college chuckling when coming upon certain dwarf names in some obscure book of the Dead Sea Scrolls. With that background and perspicuity already in the work, Jackson had to "merely" transfer one great media work to another format (and I applaud his efforts). Did he also make use of the best CGI available? Certainly. Did it work? Yes. Of course not everyone is pleased with casting, cuts, etc., but I've found the three Tolkien films a much more pleasing crescendo when compared with the Matrix.

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[plorqk]

Yeah, but how long did tolkien have to work on LOTR? Was he pressured to write The Tow Towers and Return of the King so they could be rushed to the box office?

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[Jannorr]

Hmm.. Too bad that Jackson really screwed up the story of LOTR. For all that he tried to boast that he was accurate to the books he wasn't. Now, don't take me the wrong way, his movie trilogy is a master piece of movies. However, it doesn't even compare to the books. He missed a lot, he changed a lot, and despite this he still attempted to make everyone believe that his, transfer as you put it, from the print to the screen was accurate to the print. It wasn't.

As compared to the Matrix trilogy, well that is quite impossible. We are talking about completely different genres, not to mention different stories, points of view, and meanings. You can't compare them. I apologize, but it is simply not logically possible.

With that said, I loved both trilogies. As a whole they are wonderful. Certainly each particular movie has its share of flaws, inconsistencies, and otherwise, but as movies go they are certainly the Star Wars of our generation, and I am quite proud to have witnessed their births.

If I desire the true story of the LOTR, however, I will stick with the books, as Jackson's depiction is far lacking. If I want a simpler, and easier entertainment, I will save my eyes the reading and watch the movies.

~Aaron

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[boobox]

I certainly don't disagree with you regarding your overall view of both trilogies.

When it comes to an adaptation of a book to a movie, there is definitely going to be changes, omissions, additions and so on, that aren't necessarily justified by the text. A lot depends upon the text, itself, and how it was written. With Shakespeare, for example, the words and directions are fairly literal (though much liberty has been taken in the various films made) and it's probably easier to adapt that to film than it was with Burroughs' Naked Lunch. The same applies to Herbert's Dune. I enjoyed the movie and the Sci-Fi channel adaptations, though both took their own approach in adapting. I suppose I'm just happy to see something visualized that I enjoy, and know that I'll still have the books to devour on my own terms.

Regarding the comparison, I think one could make a pretty good case juxtaposing LOTR and the Matrix films, if you look broadly at them. Good v. Evil? Sure. Frodo needs to destroy the ring to save Middle Earth. Neo needs to fulfill his destiny to save his world. Gandalf to Morpheus? Trinity to Aragorn? Sauron/Saruman to Smith? Of course the differences are in the details but I don't think it's an unfair comparison.

All in all, it seems that we both immensely enjoyed the films (all six!) but just have a different seat to view them from. It's all good.

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[boobox]

Actually, Tolkien spent many years (decades?) while writing the Hobbit and LOTR (I forget the actual timeline but know there was a large gap), so no, he didn't have any set deadlines (that I'm aware of). That said, any work of art, compared to something intended more for commerce, IMHO, should be able to stand on its own when presented while the commercial work just needs to make money. And by standing on its own, I mean that the artist should be pleased with it first, everyone else second. At least, that's what writing for spec generally entails, or so I've found.

I think a large part of the reason I (and possibly others) enjoy the LOTR more, in general, is the connection made by repeated readings, the emotional attachment garnered over the years. It's something I've reread every year or every other year for some 25 years. But I also am willing to cut the movie-makers a lot of slack in order to enjoy the film.

But I don't mean to denigrate The Matrix trilogy. I enjoyed them very much and value them for both their artistic and commercial realities. Tolkien's waters, to me, just run a bit deeper and, warts and all, so does Jackson's adaptation. And, in the end, both camps will get plenty of my money.

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[camrdale]

I think a lot of the dislike for Matrix can be chalked up to perception. Given the 4 years between original and sequels, and the unmeetable expectations that sequels produce, it's going to have to disappoint a lot of people.

LOTR is more like a three part film, with everyone knowing about the 3rd when the 1st came out. The hardest expectation it had to meet was from fans of the book. (Lucky for Jackson, I don't think many people read anymore.)

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

[Jackson] missed a lot, he changed a lot, and despite this he still attempted to make everyone believe that his, transfer as you put it, from the print to the screen was accurate to the print.

To be fair, I don't think that's true. The movie team, up to and including Jackson, said from the start that they were going to take certain liberties in order to turn good books into good films. They've never pretending they weren't going to change anything.

I'm more surprised by how few deviations there seem to be (having never read the books all the way through before the films, but reading them now). The emphasis is different in places, a few details move to a different point in the story, and of course there are one or two glaring changes to the plot (ahem... Arwen), but the overall story arc, most of the subplots and a lot of the atmosphere are transferred very effectively, IMHO.

Re:The Matrix v. LOTR

[Anonymous Coward]

Jackson in no way tried to make everyone believe that his movies were accurate to the books. There are large sections of the DVD features where he explicitly talks about the changes they made from the books, for pacing and other reasons.

You may not like the fact that the movies don't follow the books, but to say Jackson tries to pass them off as if they do is simply a lie.

Worst: Lord of the Rings!

[Anonymous Coward]

You know it, you just don't want to admit it!

The Triplets of Belleville.

[Peganthyrus]

Also known as "Belleville Rendez-Vous".

French animated feature, very bizarre and entertaining. Lots more fun to look at than any American feature cartoon in recent memory. It reminded me why I got into animation in the first place.

Re:The Triplets of Belleville.

[ader]

For UK folk, the BBC are showing it this xmas.

Ade_
/

28 Days Later

[Lord Kano]

End of story!

Seriously though, it was the best horror/sci fi movie that I have seen in at least a decade.

The night that I saw it, I stopped to pee outside in a wooded area and every time I heard ANY sound I would spin around to make sure that it wasn't an infected coming for me.

No movie has made me get up and check to make sure my doors were locked like 28 Days Later.

I've seen more movies this year than I did since I was about 9, and there have been some real Gems. Like X2 & Underworld, but 28 Days Later really spoke to me.

Re:28 Days Later

[Scaz7]

Man I have to agree,

Just the sheer intensity put's it at No.1 of horror/thrillers in everything I've seen in the past 3 years easily!

Re:28 Days Later

[nelsonal]

Yeah, I didn't sleep too well that first night, I have this window that occasionally comes unlatched in the wind, and every time it banged I was sure infected were going to come streaming in to the house. X2 was excellent, RotK was excellent, Mystic River was quite good, I still would like to catch Last Samurai and Master & Commander, but overall this was a great year for movies.

Re:28 Days Later

[Cederic]

I think Dog Soldiers worked better, from a 'shit, whats that noise' scariness perspective.

But 28 days is probably the better film..

Re:28 Days Later

[fruey]

You are right. Psychologically, that film just gets to you. I had trouble sleeping after watching it, and I felt like really strange the next day too.

Empty London, emtpy motorways (an effect that seems simple today, but is incredibly complex when you think about it) were amazing - you could not have done that in the seventies. Vanilla Sky had already done it for New York, but this was like the whole city, and whole motorways which the UK viewers would especially appreciate.

I just need to get hold of the DVD for the alternate ending, I left the cinema (doh!) before the end of the credits.

Re:28 Days Later

[rocnar]

>>No movie has made me get up and check to make sure my doors were locked like 28 Days Later.

For proper household security, you might want to check your doors like that same day.

Re:28 Days Later

[spectecjr]

Empty London, emtpy motorways (an effect that seems simple today, but is incredibly complex when you think about it) were amazing - you could not have done that in the seventies. Vanilla Sky had already done it for New York, but this was like the whole city, and whole motorways which the UK viewers would especially appreciate.

bah... it was pathetic compared to The Quiet Earth.

God I hate Alex Garland for what he did to Danny Boyle's sense of style.

Re:28 Days Later

[fruey]

I haven't seen the Quiet Earth. So explain why it was so 'pathetic' in 28 Days Later

Re:28 Days Later

[spectecjr]

I haven't seen the Quiet Earth. So explain why it was so 'pathetic' in 28 Days Later

Because the deserted London scenes were incredibly short compared to those in The Quiet Earth. That, and the movie didn't end well.

What amuses me is that people actually were scared by 28 Days Later.

Re:28 Days Later

[fruey]

If this is the movie you're talking about then it would appear that it suffers from the same problem in the ending:

This film flirts with greatness, but the unsatisfying second half leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.

That you are amused by other people being scared by 28 Days Later says a lot about you. However your comment that the movie didn't end well is something that I sort of moan about too : films in general don't end well. I would give you a link to a rant about that but it's no longer on my comments page.

Re:28 Days Later

[Anonymous Coward]

It started excellently. The deserted London was very well done, though you could see from the light that it was very early on a summer morning rather than whatever time of day it was supposed to be. But it was still impressively atmospheric, especially if you know London at all.

However, once they met-up with Christoper Ecclestone's army officer character it all went a bit down hill. And that bloke that worked in the lab at the beginning (the one who used to be on the BBC show 'The Friday Night Armistice') is just too silly to play a serious character.

Re:28 Days Later

[Lord Kano]

Empty London, emtpy motorways (an effect that seems simple today, but is incredibly complex when you think about it) were amazing - you could not have done that in the seventies. Vanilla Sky had already done it for New York, but this was like the whole city, and whole motorways which the UK viewers would especially appreciate.

I've never been to the UK, nor am I likely to ever visit, so the impact of an empty London missed me. I just kept finding myself thinking "This movie wouldn't work if it was set in the US. Too many guns here for the infected to overrun the place."

The alternate ending that they never filmed was just plain stupid. They use storyboards and narration to walk the viewer through it. The "normal" alternate endings were OK, but I feel like they chose the right one to include in the film.

LK

Re:28 Days Later

[spectecjr]

That you are amused by other people being scared by 28 Days Later says a lot about you.

Well, maybe it's just that I'm desensitized to horror movies. Or maybe I just know too much about how they're made. I mean, heck, it's just a guy in a suit on the screen. And you can measure the pulse of a horror movie very easily. It's usually on the 3, with one or two fakeouts in between. But you always go on the three.

The best bit, in fact, of the whole film was the deserted scenes - simply because there were pretty much no zombies wandering around. The zombies themselves didn't do anything for me. *shrugs*

Still, having said that, I know people who found the skeletons in Pirates of the Carribbean scary, so there is a spectrum of responses out there.

I actually liked the ending of Quiet Earth; the biggest problem for most people was that the pace changed - it was no longer just one man against the deserted world.

Choices choices...

[GatorMan]

Which is this, News for Nerds or Stuff that matters??

My favorites

[LardBrattish]

Good:-
"Gettin Square" - David Wenham in Leopard print budgie smugglers anyone? Maybe not but I'll happily watch Freya Stafford getting hot & sweaty any day of the week :)

"Standing in the Shadows of Motown" - like Buena vista social club with a better soundtrack



Bad:-
Kill Bill - easily the worst movie Quentin Tarantino has ever directed (because the other three are all 5* classics) and a huge disappointment didn't pay to see the Matrix or the Hulk so I can't comment on their suckiness

matrix...

[Anonymous Coward]

matrix sequels most disappointing followed by rotk because of the changes of many of the character's character and some of the other completely b.s. changes he made from the books... some were needed, but others were unwarranted. i believe he could have made just as good a movie and followed the books better

Surprisingly bad

[gubachwa]

Lost in Translation

Surpise ... as in surpisingly bad considering all the rave reviews?

Lost in Translation was mildly amusing, but I definitely would not call it among the best of 2003. There was very little plot. The jokes repeated themselves (how many times can you make fun of the way Japanese people talk?). And the music was horribly out-of-place. The Jesus And Mary Chain's 'Just like Honey' in the closing scene as Bill Murray rides away? PLEASE! It was cool to see My Blody Valentine and JAMC get some mainstream play by being in the soundtrack of this movie, but they just didn't fit IMHO.

Re:Surprisingly bad

[neiffer]

I can't speak for the way a film talks to one person and not to another, but I thought it all fit together very well. The fact that it is out of place, IMHO, is a reflection of the theme. The last five minutes are some of the best acting I've seen in years.

I was duped!

[lamasquerade]

Of the movies I've seen, Cabin Fever takes the cake. It's easy to avoid obvious shit like School of Rock and Scary Movie, but against my better judgement I was duped into thinking Cabin Fever might have something going for it just because Peter Jackson said it was "bloody fantastic, and I do mean bloody". It may have been bloody, but it was the usual boring as batshit teen scripting that made me want to flee half way through. I can't believe that Peter Jackson betrayed me like that! And incase you don't know he is responsible for the best horror movie (slapstick) ever and the most disgusting (and hilarious) movie involving puppets. Not quite as well known as LoTR, but masterpieces nonetheless. Anyway I thought given these accomplishments his opinion would have been spot on, but how wrong I was!

Re:I was duped!

[cens0r]

School of Rock shit? I laughed pretty fucking hard at it... of course I'm a big tenacious D/Jack Black fan...

How COULD the matrices live up to the hype?

[xanthines-R-yummy]

I mean, come on! How could ANY movie live up to that kind of hype? In a way, they set themselves up for failure. OK, so $1B USD isn't exactly a failure, but still...

My shot

[fserb]

The best movie goes for The Barbarian Invasions (France) or The Man Who Copied (Brazil).

There were lots of bad movies...but I'll give the award to one that really fought for it...Terminator 3 (USA).

Re:My shot

[Wawazuzu]

"Les invasion barbares" is from Quebec, not France.

Re:My shot

[fserb]

Ops, my mistake. 8)

2.6.0

[DJ Rubbie]

How about the movie 2.6.0?

I think it's going to rock the world!

I am very glad I will get to watch it soon!

Kill Bill = Pedantic drivel

[mcbunny29]

I watched Kill Bill with great anticipation but was thoroughly disappointed. I mean anyone who starts the credits with "Quentin's 4th Film"... WTF!?! I mean I like his movies but this was just a piss take. I didn't feel involved during the action scenes. We knew Uma would win from start and I didn't even notice most of the people she killed. Deja-vue to death. Then this all this slow-motion shite to make it 'super-emotional'. That coupled with supposedly 'cool' humour and - ohh my God!!? - REFERENCES TO OTHER FILMS... How soooophisticated.

Not only was I bored during 40% of the film, but I felt ripped off at the end because I only got half a film. I might download KB II but that's as far as I'll go.

I use to like Tarantino. But he's hot-headed and cliche-driven now.

Re:Kill Bill = Pedantic drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

He's anything but cliche driven ? That was the only thing driving his movie.. his phenomenal original style. He's got it coming out of his wazoo.

Re:Kill Bill = Pedantic drivel

[CanadaDave]

I agree with everything you said.

And to add to that, how about those bad lines... Some of the worst lines were in the kitchen with Vivica Fox. When she says "I'd say that would be about square" (as she traces out a square with her finger. There were some other horrible lines in the kitchen but I can't remember them. Also, of course the "Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids line" made be cringe. And then there's another Uma line in the restaurant, "Yeah for a second there, I did". I can't remember why she says that, but it was really awkwardly spoken... Quenten Tarantino's a fucked up kid that's all I know.

Best so far

[zealott777]

Last Samurai, I am actually surprised no one has mentioned this yet... I have yet to see ROTK but until then hands down Last Samurai takes the cake.

uh oh

[Joe the Lesser]

In Slashdot's opinion

Please keep us focused on applied technology.

Just use this simple form:

[movie] was totally overrated! [Producer's name] ruined it because [it wasn't like the books/didn't match the 1st movie]. I was so dissapointed when [character] did [action], that's sooo unrealistic. [Continous whining]...

Angels in America

[Checkered Daemon]

It might not qualify as a movie, since it was on HBO, but it's the best thing I saw this year.

Don't know how it would play with the geek crowd, though.

Ghey?

[fenix down]

Is that supposed to be what Professor Frink says all the time or are you just spelling gay wrong? I'm honestly curious.

Re:Ghey?

[Anonymous Coward]

I meant it in the durogatory sense that people use "gay" to mean, but I didn't actually want to offend the gay community.

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

[Bob-o-Matic!]

I thought that LoEG should have been much better... So much potential, given the list of pro- and antagonists.

But I suppose that any movie with Allen Quatermain as the main hero will leave something to be desired... Maybe they should have booked Indiana Jones? ;)

Re:League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

[coolgeek]

I thought the League was an excellent film. No doubt my favorite I plunked down ~$10 to see in 2003. I got completely immersed in the film, and the writing/storytelling was more on par with a good book, compared the watered down crap that is most movies these days.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

Bumbledore? That would be his cousin from the Harry Potter films?

IF YOU LIKED THE MATRIX 1, 2 or 3

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an irredeemable moron and should kill yourself immediately.

TEXAS chainsaw massacare.

[Anonymous Coward]

and some people hting that movie "really happened"

no it didnt, "loosely based " is not equivalent to based on.

it was by far the worst movie ever made.

it may be 90 minutes long, but its overdrawn, and complete crap from begininning to end.

Re:TEXAS chainsaw massacare.

[cens0r]

but the original is classic. It invented low budget slasher movie.

A good documentary

[KUNGwill]

I really liked Winged Migration. Its a movie about birds. While that doesn't sound that interesting, the movie is really kick ass. The directors managed to basically fly along with the birds. After you see it you feel like you can fly!!! Okay that sounds dumb, just check out the trailer.

The Reagans/worst

[aggiefalcon01]

Worst movie: The Reagans. And no, this ain't flamebait. Think of it this way: look at who made & starred in the movie. Now, what if Sean Hannity was in charge of a biography movie on The Clintons? Fair's fair, 'tis simple. Best movie: uh ... um ... I'll go with "I'm an underemployed recent computer science graduate and can't afford movies, you insensitive clod!" Yeah, that works ...

Best? Overrated?

[guarddonkey]

Not Trolling, but I just didn't find Kill Bill all that amazing. It's like Tarantino is the nerdish kid that the cool kids let hang out with them, and tell him he's cool, even when he pulls down his pants at the party and shows his wang to all the cheerleaders after one too many O'Douls. Every scene was just screaming "LOOK HOW FUCKING COOL I AM MOTHER FUCKER" and it just got tiring after about ten minutes. All the "odes" to the Shaw Brothers and other 70's style Kung Fu just felt like he was asking for validation, for everyone to tell him just how cool his pet project was.

By contrast, Return of the King, shows how to deliver. It was easily one of the best movies this year, for nerds and for "normal" moviegoers alike. There are few, if any, unnecessary scenes in the over 3 hours the movie played. In the previous two, you could count on the Arwen dream scenes for a chance to get to the bathroom, but ROTK gave you no such opportunities. The battles dwarfed Helms Deep and the incomprehensibly presented battle for the dock in Matrix Revolution just paled in comparison.

I would say the Matrix follow-ups are the biggest disappointments, giving a great example of how throwing cash at a franchise always isn't the best thing to do, while X2 shows how upping the budget and actually having a script that makes sense and stays true to the spirit of the overall story of the franchise can give it huge momentum for the years to come.

My biggest surprise was Dirty Pretty Things. After writing this off as a wife movie (due to Audrey Tautou being in it), I really enjoyed the movie and look forward to it coming out on DVD. It was in limited release and come out around here in the later part of the year, so it may still be playing where you are. Do see it if you have the chance

You missed the point

[SuperKendall]

The post was an ultra-lame attempt at a fake spiler for ROTK. They meant to imply he died for good in ROTK...

The worst movie of the past 13+ years

[Anonymous Coward]

Entered its 13th year of footage this March, and continues today with no clear end in sight. What movie is that? Operation Iraqi Freedom

I've got high hopes for Paycheck

[Anonymous Coward]

Despite it being an Affleck vehicle, I'm hoping they've taken a very cool PKD story and turned it into a decent sci-fi action flick that hasn't been dumbed down for the negative-IQ majority of the moviegoing public.

Either way, I'll find out at the first showing of it on Christmas.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[Tyir]

Sorry, I know EVERYONE was thinking this too... exponentially, not logaritmically

The Last Samurai: GOOD!

[phorm]

Maybe it's just my penchant for Japan-themed movies, but I found this one to be excellent. Great acting, good plot... and somehow they managed to pull it off without gobs of arterial spray (yes, there is blood, but for the concept of the movie it is limited) and/or gratuitous sex.

In fact... it's the first movie I've seen in a long time that pulled the romance theme without a down-and-dirty-sheets moment. Imagine that.

It also reminded me of Shogun... for any that remember the old miniseries (recently re-released on DVD) with Richard Chamberlain as a European naval pilot stranded in Japan. Could just be that Cruise resembled Blackthorne in this one, but man the guy had style! In fact... not normally being much of a Cruise fan myself, I'd recommend this movie all the movie because he really did do a good job of it.

Re:The Last Samurai: GOOD!

[grolschie]

Filmed in New Zealand too!

Re:The Last Samurai: GOOD!

[Wolfrider]

> it's the first movie I've seen in a long time that pulled the romance theme without a down-and-dirty-sheets moment.

--You know, I really respected them for doing it the way they did. DNDSMoments don't go with 1800's Japan, and tend to get fast-forwarded by me when they *do* get included with a movie, because they are annoying and get in the way.

Re:I 2nd the nomination: Gayniggers from Outer Spa

[Necromancyr]

Surprisingly, parent is NOT trolling. The movie DOES exist. And looks to be horrendous.... hehe.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[Comatose51]

It's not as though he wrote LoTR in those fantasy languages. Then he would be pompous. He was being incredibly imaginative when he invented his own language. I mean, honestly, how credible would the story have been if English was the elves' primary language? It's not something we can't get over but the languages are another level of detail that Tolkien is willing to go.

I can't convicne you otherwise in regards to the story of LoTR but calling Tolkien pompous for trying to add another level of detail is really unfair.

Controversial!

[Xarius]

Pirates of The Carribean. Worst film this year. Coming close to Matrix Revolutions.

Underworld. Medium. Went in with low expectations, actually liked it. Just a note

Best movie ever, this year at least, would have to be RotK. Mind you, it's the best of the worst. Not seen a memorable movie this year at all. The industry is going to the shitter.

opinions.slashdot.org + Best Anime in 2003?

[chendo]

I reckon we should put a new section specially for opinion related stuff, as stuff like this can usually start flamewars and the such...

On the other hand, I'd like to hear slashdot's opinions on the best anime of 2003. I put my vote in for Full Metal Panic: Fumoffu and Full Metal Alchemist (which is still being subbed, AFAIK, and no, the names are just a coincidence, I swear.)

Oh, and I reckon Matrix 3 disappointed me. Stuff like DBZ fightscenes are far too unreal and the ending probably made fans feel like the fans that watched End of Evangelion, the creator(s) flipping the finger at the fans while saying "FUCK YOU!". At least most people survived in the Matrix. I didn't get to watch Kill Bill, so I'll probably grab that later on DVD. And did anyone else apart from me notice that the Neo vs 100 Smiths fight scene in Reloaded was sorta similar to xiaoxiao 3? One guy verses many, including the whole pole fight scene where Neo kicks it into a Smith and it rebounds back and stuff.

My picks

[AsmordeanX]

The good:
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King - I battled a full bladder and still enjoyed it.
Finding Nemo - Pixar just gets better and better at what they do.
XMen 2 - Quite entertaining
Kill Bill - Fun but not the best
Pirates of the Carribean - Suprisingly good movie

The bad:
Once Upon A Time In Mexico - I'm told it is good, I disagree
Matrix Reloaded - Dissappointing end to a series that started good, went stupid and got worse.
Daredevil - Need I say anything?
Terminator 3 - Ugh. Not DD level but not much better.

The King of bad movies came out this year.
Gigli - I witnessed a few minutes and I am scared for life.

Does the average /. reader often goes to movies ?

[jdifool]

Hi,

WOW WOW WOW
Amazing.

Sincerely, how many movies did you see that year ? Come on, can't you speak about anything else that Matrix, LOTR, Xmen2 and Finding Nemo ? This is crazy. I can find only two explanations here : or I didn't get that the article was about how crappy Matrix Revolutions was (I guess this has been /.ed already), or the /. guy only goes once/twice a year to the theater. Can you think of something else than sci-fi and heroic fantasy ?

However, I thank various people, but *so* rare, for mentioning other movies. And I disagree with mods that should have +5ed these posts. We want original posts, insights, interesting links and/or analysis. I hope I'm not the only one to think that rants about LOTR and Matrix, well, we all had enough of it.

Eevntually, I think this was for giving some advices, so here I go.
Hero : I think it's not out in the US yet, but take two hours to get there ; this is a good dive into the chinese movie tradition.
Kill Bill obviously : thank you so much Quentin for making us feel that we all shared the same popular culture in our childhood (even if it is a *fake* impression), and then putting it up on a wide screen.
Dogville : no comments.

And for the worst, I'm not finding anymore. BattleField Earth made me feel happy. "Battlefield Earth should be shown only at maximum-security prisons when a prisoner is tossed in solitary for bad behavior." FILMCRITIC.COM

Regards,
jdif

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

YHBT. YHL. HTH. HAND.

Bad Santa

[wsherman]

Being in science/engineering is like playing Santa in a mall: people like the superficial image of benevolence but not the underlying reality of harsh disappointments.

What did it for me, though, was the bit about the hot bartender that is so obsessed with the superficial image of Santa that she completely ignores the underlying realities of Bad Santa and throws herself at him.

If there's hope for Bad Santa, there's gotta be hope for me.

lost in translation, matrix, mystic river, bebop

[arbour42]

lost in translation - bill murray and scarlett johanssen are great - she's one of the best actresses today (and only 20)

mystic river - just to see a film where actors can act, and there aren't 30 jump-cuts a minute. well done

matrix 2 & 3 - some of the most creative movie-making i've ever seen - visually, artistically, and thematically - i never knew where it would go, ie -> the Wachowski's never played it safe.

Just like it took 10 years for people to see the genius of the ending to Apocalypse Now, the same will happen with the Matrix: all the philosophical questions and ruminations over whether choice exists simplify in the end to acting out of irrational love - which is the mysterious basis of all creativity and thought and religion. Genius.

Cowboy Bebop - yes, the Bebop made it to America, and in a damn fine vehicle! Faye Faye, Radical Edward, Spike, and the man, Jet.

Ghibli films

[T0t0r0_fan]

While not really _made_ in 2003(but more or less properly(if you can call a horrible(imho) dub proper) released in North America, I think Sen to Chihiro no Kamikakushi(Spirited Away, that is) would definitely be the best of the movies that I'm aware of, with the other two Ghibli films released in April being very close...Don't know about the worst, but imho The Two Towers was not worth going even once(I fell victim to all the hype...not going to happen anymore :) The question itself is too much of a potential flamebait, so perhaps I'd better not expand anything and stop here...

Winner, Loser, Disappointment...

[PSaltyDS]

Just got back from seeing LOTR-ROTK, it simply IS the winner. As a 40-something who read LOTR first at about 12, I can only say WOW! To see a story I love dealt with so well by artists who seemed to also love the story... well, they win.

Like every year, there were so many losers it is hard to pick, but Timeline gets the nod for the same reason LOTR did - how they handled a book I had read. I really liked Timeline when I read it about 4 years ago, but the hollywood hacks (no artists involved) thought all that boring history stuff would just get in the way of the big yellow fireballs. They seem to say "The book you read didn't have enough explosions, we know you'd rather have explosions than any respect for the story."

Since it inevitably came up - The Matrix finale was a disappointment, but not anywhere near the worst of the year. Seeing it in IMAX made the explosions and big yellow fireballs kind of mesmerising...

Re:Winner, Loser, Disappointment...

[Belgand]

I have to agree that the handling of Timeline and ROTK were similar. ROTK showed that Peter Jackson doesn't really have that much respect for the story when he can instead have a bunch of ghost warriors running around and rampaging war elephants in place of oh... let's say, the houses of healing.

I don't even like Tolkien. I have serious problems with his style of writing and I'm not terribly into his story (I've read better fantasy even if I do sort of respect him a bit for his role in grandfathering most modern works) but at least I have the decency to accept that what's written is what's written. Yes, cuts must be made, background is often dropped and sub-plots fall by the wayside, but still... the drastic changes made were unwarranted and unnecessary.

Re:Winner, Loser, Disappointment...

[PSaltyDS]

You seriously misunderstood me, or I failed to make myself clear. I _LOVED_ LOTR as a book, and _LOVED_ the movie, too! Stict compliance with the story was not an issue to me down to the tiniest detail. They didn't faithfully reproduce every detail in the book, but respected the tone and themes very well.

Timeline, on the other hand, took a book I _LIKED_ and made a sorry pyrotechnics fest out of it.

Re:Winner, Loser, Disappointment...

[Belgand]

I would have to say that the removal of the scouring failed to respect the tone and themes. Likewise I take offense at gratuitous changes that are not particularly necessary for any reason whatsoever (e.g. Merry present at the battle outside the black gate... no reason at all). Anyhow, I was feeling a bit upset and confrontational about the whole thing, hopefully the extended cut will make it better as I currently see it as the weakest film in the trilogy.

So Timeline was actually worth reading? Wow... I'd totally given up on Crichton.

My Two Cents

[windside]

Good: A Mighty Wind
Very funny movie by Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy. Same "mock-u-mentary" vein as Best in Show, Waiting for Guffman and Spinal Tap. Indeed, the best part of the movie is a not-so-subtle nods to fans through the reunion of the boys from Tap in a folk trio. (For those of you who are fans - CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT THEY DID TO DEREK SMALLS!?)

Bad: Matrix Rehashed/Revolted
Dear God, these films were horrendous.

Re:My Two Cents

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus, are you kidding? Why was that movie supposed to be funny? Why are 60s folk singers a target for parody -- they're relevant here in 2003?

Do ya think maybe these loser bozo filmmakers were just looking for any easy target? Folk singers? Are you fukking kidding me?

What are they gonna make fun of next? Dog shows or something?

The Last Samurai was better!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree that Kill Bill was good. The fact that they didn't use any CGI made it significantly better, IMHO. Does anybody else feel like they're overdoing it with computer graphics in some movies??? Maybe I've just seen so many well done CGI scenes that the majority of computer aided action shots just seem lame to me..... but it really makes me appreciate so much more those movies that DON'T use computer graphics (or @ least not that much of it). My vote for BEST movie of the year is by far the Last Samurai. I think they used some CGI when Tom Cruise was overlooking all the Japanese regulars in formation, but scenes like that don't matter too much. All the action scenes were PERFECT! Not only were they cinematographically awesome, but they were AUTHENTIC!! Yeah Kill Bill had some awesome fight scenes, but a lot of the moves in there were just simply stunts with a sword... Tom Cruise went through something like 8 months of martial arts training so he could perform the REAL techniques, not just something that looks cool on film.... The Last Samurai had an awesome plot/storyline, great close-in fight scenes, & an amazing grand-scale epic war scene! The ideals of the samurai were portrayed exquisitely! The ending was nice.... a bit too hollywood-ish for me though... I thought it would have been better if he performed seppuku @ the end.... it would have finalized the tranformation of Cruise's character that the whole movie was about.... more samurai-ish =P

identity, most pleasant surprise of 2003

[epidemic99]

I really enjoyed the movie Identity. I had no expectations when I saw it though. It was a horror/mystery/psychological thriller all in one. The writing was excellent, the director did a good job, and the cast was impressive. IMO this movie was the most underappreciated/undiscovered good movie of 2003.

Three words:

[Blondie-Wan]

A Mighty Wind. Funniest thing I've seen in a theater this year...

Re:Three words:

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus, are you kidding? Why was that movie supposed to be funny? Why are 60s folk singers a target for parody -- they're relevant here in 2003?

Do ya think maybe these loser bozo filmmakers were just looking for any easy target? Folk singers? Are you fukking kidding me?

What are they gonna make fun of next? Dog shows?

Sorry, not a very geeky list

[mwigmani]

Here are my top 10 of 2003 (IMDB ratings in parentheses):

10). School of Rock (7.7)
9). Kill Bill (8.2)
8). Mystic River (8.1)
7). 21 Grams (7.9)
6). Elephant (7.6)
5). Talk to Her (8.2)
4). American Splendor (8.1)
3). Gerry (6.2)
2). Spellbound (8.5)
1). Lost in Translation (8.2)

A few movies that I've heard good things about that haven't reached us yet in Boston that may end up displacing some of the above are:

- House of Sand and Fog (?)
- Girl with the Pearl Earring (7.2)
- Japanese Story (6.5)
- The Triplets of Belleville (7.2)

Movies that I can't fathom why everyone liked:

3). Better Luck Tomorrow (7.6)
2). Swimming Pool (7.1) (I didn't understand this movie until about a week after seeing it, so maybe it is good and I'm just an idiot).
1). Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (7.5)

Re:Sorry, not a very geeky list

[bobbozzo]

My Hits:
Hero (Ying xiong) (8.1) was released this year in the U.S., and was incredible. I believe it is on DVD now.

Also, I found Intolerable Cruelty hilarious.

Runaway Jury was a very good legal thriller.

Misses:
Once Upon a Time in Mexico was horrible, especially compared to its predecessors (El Mariachi & Desperado). Additionally, I felt cheated Selma Hayek was only briefly present as a memory, though she had primary billing.

Haunted Mansion was extremely boring. A complete waste of Eddie Murphy's talents. "Wow, those knockers are huge" in reference to the door knockers was the only apparent attempt at humor in the first hour.

Re:Sorry, not a very geeky list

[Anonymous Coward]

That 'knockers' joke was filched from Mel Brooks' 'Young Frankenstein', too.

Re:Sorry, not a very geeky list

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree on school of rock, but I understand why some people won't like it. It's VERY cheesy. I was feeling utterly depressed when I saw it, and afterwards I was all pink clouds and lullabies.

Re:Sorry, not a very geeky list

[mwigmani]

Nice... a few days ago I ordered Hero off of Ebay based on the reccomendations of people here.

Re:Sorry, not a very geeky list

[mydigitalself]

you have excellent taste! i missed a few of these (i haven't even heard of 21 grams!??!?!) so i'm looking forward to catching them up on DVD next year.

I can't even remember what films I saw this year

[Kris_J]

Was Matrix Reloaded released this year? I tried going here to workout what I might have seen in the last 12 months, but there's so much crap. Anyone got a short list of this year's movies? I haven't seen most of the titles being discussed in this thread.

I bought Bowling for Columbine on DVD and it was probably the best movie I watched all year, but I think its original release was last year, possibly earlier.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[Anonymous Coward]

The original Japanese version of the Ring is much much better than the English version.

Much scarier, better plot, less reliance of cgi special effects.

"Russian Ark" = Astonishing

[Anonymous Coward]

How about "Russian Ark" by Alexander Sokurov as "best" film? It's a sterling example of how technical accomplishment in film is about more than endless waves of CG baddies. It may not make much sense to viewers without a good sense of Russian history, but anyone chronicling the past year in film would be negligent not to mention it.

Gigli

[Anonymous Coward]

From imdb: 1.8/10 (5,838 votes) bottom 100: #7

The movie doesn't deserve such a low score. No, it's not a good movie, but it isn't terrible either and it's certainly not the worst movie of the year.

The things that makes it look so bad are probably the stupid title, Bennifer, and a quote that sounds really lame out of context. I think most reviewers jumped on the bandwagon. Who the heck wants to like a movie starring Affleck and J-Lo?
I think Ebert's review is pretty good.

The Good Thief

[Ubergrendle]

Nick Nolte in a believable role. You ~know~ the movie is going to be good when Ralph Fiennes shows up in an unbilled cameo.

Another Ralph Fiennes film, Spider, was also very interesting. Dark, depressing, but what else do you expect from Cronenberg?

This summer was filled with utter dreck. I was forced to watch Under the Tuscan Sun, and was painfully aware that it was a much better film than X2, T3, or The Matrix Reloaded I saw beforehand. :(

another category

[dollargonzo]

there should be another category: most disputed. i think matrix 3 goes into this category. when i saw it this chic came up to me after the movie and said "i honestly enjoyed your obnoxious comments more than the movie." that and the fact that one person clapped and he was stoned. *sigh* i guess everyone is entitled to their opinion

Re:another category

[Wolfrider]

> one person clapped and he was stoned.

--Waitaminute... They STONED him just for clapping??? Now that's some harsh critics...
Oh. You meant something else, I guess.

Re:another category

[dollargonzo]

ironically, no, i meant the prior :)

Shattered Glass

[R-66Y]

Shattered Glass , starring Hayden Christensen as former contributing writer to The New Republic Stephen Glass, chronicles Glass's fabrications of his stories and the lies he told to try to further his young career. I really enjoyed it, and although it was a very limited release, it's nice to know that the movie industry hasn't forgotten that special effects and computers haven't always around and some pretty good movies were made without them. This is easily one of the better movies of 2003.

Later,
Patrick

Re:Shattered Glass

[Anonymous Coward]

I was posting this at the exact same time. Read the post above yours.

I really liked this movie.

House of the (freakin) Dead!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but this turkey takes the cake. You know it's bad when you F*CK up a ZOMBIE FILM! 1) Basically giving away who lives/dies in the FIRST FIVE MINUTES (H3LL, the first 2) of the film is stupid. 2) AD PLACEMENT!...lmao (not gonna say any more, just see the flick if you must). 3) Having actors/actressess in their late 20's or 30's act like college age "teens" is just LAME! All the more so when they are so bad at it. 4) There are too many WTF moments in this film to count. Call it poor continuity and/or editing. 5) You know it's bad when the BIG zombie battle has such poor camera work and editing that the most interesting thing is the "bullet time" sequences (which each "main" character gets one of...geez. It's the, "if one is cool, 8 will be AWESOME!" syndrome). on a good note... 6) The best acting performace came from Jurgen Prochnow (He played the Captain in Das Boot). (SPOILER...wait, it would have to actually spoil something to be a spoiler right?) I discovered one thing watching HotD. A black person does NOT have to be the first one to die in a horror film as long as a girl shows her b00bs first. She'll be the first one slaughtered 9 times out of 10.

Elf was better

[JW Troll]

Pirates of the Caribbean: well, it's about pirates. It's got swords and battles and skeletons and treasure! Most of all, Kiera Knightley's involved.
Elf: it was so funny the kids beside me peed themselves, and I was laughing so hard I didn't even notice at first. It's got levels of humour for ANYbody in the audience. Will Ferrell. Fun. Funny.

Re:Elf was better

[bubkus_jones]

Most of all, Kiera Knightley's involved. mmmmmmmmmmm. Kiera

Re:Elf was better

[Dimensio]

I was surprised that I liked Elf. I've normally not been much for Ferrel's more "over the top" characters (I loved him as Alex Trebek, though), yet he worked so well in Elf. Perhaps it's because his character is arguably not over-the-top, and even believable given the context.

Re:Elf was better

[JPelorat]

MMmmm, Keira. Hot grits and jailbait.

Re:Elf was better

[Moofie]

Bathe her, and bring her to me.

OK, forget about bathing. I'll put up with it.

Re:Elf was better

[bubkus_jones]

Jailbait? She's 18, she's legal.

Whale Rider

[shiffman]

The first movie I've seen in years that didn't feel like a movie. It felt like I was eavesdropping on real people living their real lives.

Re:Whale Rider

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry but I cant watch a movie where I think the main character is a male then 5 months later I find out shes a female.

Matrix went downhill, LotR up

[avarame]

Matrix series started off excellent with the first movie, but Reloaded was crap and Revolutions was just a normal regular movie really.
OTOH, LotR started awesome and got awesomer, TTT > FotR and RotK > TTT. I think the three of them are one of the best film series ever made, up there with (or above) the original Star Wars.
Are you listening, Academy?

KILL BILL

[soundofthemoon]

The movie I thought was the best of the year was the one I least expected to like. Kill Bill (Vol 1) was just astounding. The sense of style, the attention to detail, the outright chutzpah, the buckets of blood... Usually I hate bloodfests, but this movie was just so well executed that I got over the blood and just loved it to pieces. I guess his goal was to make a live-action anime, and as far as I'm concerned it was perfection, even down to all the names being like stupid translations from Japanese.

And you have to give QT props for dressing Uma up like Bruce for half the movie!

Re:KILL BILL

[Capt_Troy]

I can see why some people like this movie, but I hated it. I'm no kung-fu movie fan, so that's probably the problem, but all I saw was a bunch of blood shooting unrealistically all over the place. I see that he was paying homage to some older films and the ways in which they were made, but it wasn't all that entertaining for me. I'm glad you liked it though.

Re:KILL BILL

[Inda]

And you have to give QT props for dressing Uma up like Bruce for half the movie!

Half a movie more like. Yes I know it is Vol 1 but I still felt cheated at the end. Why not tell the story in one go..?

Re:KILL BILL

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, Kill Bill is more a study of the style of various movie categories (like westerns and samurai movies) interspersed with understated comedy than a real bloodfest (though there is a lot of blood).

To me the textbook definition of bloodfest is still Braindead A.K.A. Dead Alive. Especially the scene where he straps the lawnmower to his chest and runs all the zombies through it. Hilarious.

Re:Kill Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

It should have called Kill Ballmer. The M$ chairman has not been M$ CEO anymore.

Re:KILL BILL

[Anonymous Coward]

THUMBS DOWN! This movie is nothing but a cheap hack of a movie trying to exploit everybody's favourite former CEO, and fails to deliver!!! They should have call it Kill Ballmer, Kill Valenti, or Kill Bush!

Thirteen

[Anonymous Coward]

Kickass flick...a bit exaggerated and open-ended but mesmerizing all the same.

---
BTW, luke was a tool.

Shattered Glass

[adzoox]

Shattered Glass with Hayden Christiansen was overlooked. In some ways it was a better Catch Me If You Can. A story about a serial liar.

Has anyone else seen this?

I liked this movie (and Catch Me If You Can) ... they relate to a website I do work for: www.jackwhispers.com - a website dedicated to a serial liar in the Mac community.

Pitka's very short film...

[Thagg]

My favorite movie was very short, only 90 seconds. It was IBM's Linux ad titled 'Prodigy'. It was the most moving thing I've seen all year.

Unfortunately, it can't win any film awards.

thad

Re:Pitka's very short film...

[otis wildflower]

Is that the one starring a very young Eminem?

The Trouble with the Matrix

[Anonymous Coward]

...was what it lacked in plot it tried to make up for by copying the look and feel of Subaru commercials, prescription drug, and GAP advertisements from the year 1998.

A Great Flick You Probably Missed...

[cjsnell]

I'm absolutely shocked that nobody mentioned this movie. This film is destined for the AFI's Top 250 Movies of All Time. Just you want and see!.

What film am I talking about? You'll just have to see for yourself!.

Re:A Great Flick You Probably Missed...

[Anonymous Coward]

thanks for wasting one minute of my life. I want it back.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Cowboy Beebop the Movie

[daddy norcal]

I have to admit, I enjoyed the cowboy beebop movie quite a bit. While some critics panned it, I tought it was engorssing and beautiful. Definately my animated pick for 2003.

Looking for BHT in Dallas

[wurp]

I've been looking for Bubba Hotep, but the only theaters I can find are in CA, Canada, or the northeast US. Is anyone showing this around the Dallas Fort/Worth area?

After the astonishingly good finale to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, I'm hungry to consume some more excellent movies.

Re:Looking for BHT in Dallas

[Anonymous Coward]

The Angelika, www.angelikafilmcenter.com/dallas/nowshowing.asp , is showing several times a day.

Re:Looking for BHT in Dallas

[xRIOTxTX]

That is where I saw it. If you've never been, the Angelika is a very nice theater and it's right at Mockingbird Station so it's cheap and easy to ride the train there.

Re:Looking for BHT in Dallas

[wurp]

Hey, thanks a lot!! I know what I'm doing this week.

IF i only had mod points...

[Zane Edwards]

LMAO, please someone mod the parent up!

The Barbarian Invasions

[swordgeek]

OK, now THAT was a work of art! One of maybe half a dozen made in the last decade, probably less.

Brilliant, beyond fault.

A spectrum

[snStarter]

In descending order from wonderful to OMG that SUCKED SO BAD...

If you didn't see it at the flicks check out this first one. It's incredibly compelling. Nemo was wonderful entertainment and gorgeous. PIXAR gets it.

Winged Migration
Finding Nemo
Lost In Translation, Master and Commander
Pirates of the Carribean ...

Matrix II & III

These last movies demonstrate that when anything is possible nothing is interesting.

Why Slashdot Users Disliked "Kill Bill"

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that "Kill Bill" has been given negative reviews by quite a few people here. And I might know why.

Several of them went to it, thinking that it was a movie about an assasination attempt on a certain CEO from Redmond, Washington. They went to it only to find out that they have to settle for watching the South Park movie to see a dramatization of their dreams coming true.

Re:Why Slashdot Users Disliked "Kill Bill"

[Anonymous Coward]

You suck. And you're not funny. Then, on top of that, you suck at not being funny.

Re:Why Slashdot Users Disliked "Kill Bill"

[Professr3]

^ now that was flamebait... i kinda liked the joke.

Re:Why Slashdot Users Disliked "Kill Bill"

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a joke, and I certainly hope that the community here can take one. (I posted AC as I was afraid that the anti-M$ people would consider it flamebait.)

infernal affairs

[Anonymous Coward]

not only the best movie to come out of hong kong last year, but also the best police / crime movie that i've ever seen

Re:infernal affairs

[cens0r]

technically it came out in 2002, though the DVD was the only way to see it in the states, and that wasn't released until 2003. I just recieved my copy of Infernal Affairs 2 and while not as good is still very good. I've heard bad reviews of the third movie though.

My favorites -- all from Asia

[MEK]

Salinui chueok a/k/a Memories of Murder (BONG Joon-ho)

A serial killer strikes women is provincial Korea in the 80s. Unfortunately, due to poor training and poor logistical support, the local police tend to rely on hunches to identify suspects -- and then torture to extract confessions. A Seoul detective is assigned to help crack the case -- and friction ensues. The film tells us, as it starts, that it is based on an unresolved criminal investigation. So, the telling (and showing) is what counts here. The cinematography is superb -- and the acting equally fine. The story is, ultimately (as one has been warned) heart-breaking -- and frightening. Bong's first film, "Barking Dogs Never Bite" was a comic masterpiece. "Memories of Murder" is leavened with humor -- but is ultimately a tragic one. Perhaps Korea's best film this year artistically -- it also was a major box office success.

Janghwa, Hongryeon a/k/a Tale of Two Sisters(KIM Ji-woon)

Not so much a ghost story (as it has been billed) but the depiction of a young girl's mental unraveling following the death of her mother, her father's remarriage and then the death of her younger sister. This film, like Henry James's famed ghost story "Turn of the Screw" is the epitome of unreliable narration. It is not until the film is over that we can begin to piece together what is real and what is simply "in the head" of our heroine. So, one needs to re-watch this promptly -- which is no hardship due to wonderful cinematography and moving performances, especially by the two sisters. Another artistic triumph that was also a major box office hit in Korea.

Tasogare Seibei a/k/a Twilight Samurai (Yoji YAMADA)

Heart on the sleeve emotionalism need not be "schmaltzy". It can be utterly sincere -- and tremendously moving. This film (set in the last days of the Shogunate) of a down and out widowed samurai, who has two young girls and a going-senile mother to support, is as visually beautiful (and wonderfully acted) as it is unabashedly sentimental. Mainstream movies can be masterpieces -- and this, one of the most successful domestic films in Japan -- rates as a master work by a 71 year-old master of (almost) countless populist romances. Hiroyuki SANADA's performance as the title character utterly marvelous -- he stands along with Koji YAKUSHO as the finest of middle-aged Japanese actors. Rie MIYAZAWA is also wonderful as the "little sister" of Seibei's best friend (a far more prosperous member of the same clan), who has idolized Seibei since her childhood -- and who is now divorced after a disastrous first marriage to a highly-connected noble drunkard (played with grat panache by Ren OSUGI). Recommended without reservation to all (but the most hardened of cynics). A success at the Japanese box office -- and Japan's nomination for the "best foreign film" competitions at the Oscars.

Yomigaeri a/k/a Resurrection (Akihiko SHIOTA)

"Yomigaeri" involves mysterious mass resurrections in a rural region of Japan. It's plot seems rather like something concocted by Philip K Dick -- but the tone is far gentler (more like Clifford Simak). The story centers around a bureaucrat sent by Tokyo to investigate (and, if necessary, cover up) the strange phenomena -- and a young woman who was the fiancee of his deceased best friend (but for whom he has always had a secret yen). The film also depicts the lives of various returnees, one of whom is a rock star (who mysteriously disappeared and was rumored to have died) who rejoins her bandmates for the ultimate farewell performance. Shiota, best-known for his more uncompromising arty films (like "Gaichu" -- "Harmful Insect") managed in "Yomigaeri" to make a masterpiece of a movie aimed at a mainstream audience -- and which would have been a piece of hack work in lesser hands.

Re:My favorites -- all from Asia

[m1chael]

When was Battle Royale released? ^_^

Re:My favorites -- all from Asia

[qsysopr]

I guess you missed my favourite..."Takeshi Kitanos - Dolls"

Re:My favorites -- all from Asia

[MEK]

Nah, I didn't miss "Dolls". It is one of my favorite films from 2002. (Since most of my favorites NEVER get a US release, I tend to group them by the year of their domestic release).

I won't get to see Kitano's "Zatoichi" until next year (when the Japanese DVD is released). Since Miramax hold US rights, who knows when (if ever), this will show up in theaters here. I'm still waiting for Zhang Yimou's 2002 "Hero" to show up (and it's not clear Harvey will let us see this in theaters even in 2004).

MEK

Help Me With My LOTR Homework

[KidSock]

I've seen each of the LOTR movies *once* and I'm really exited about The Return of the King but I did not read the books and I'm having trouble keeping track of everything that's happening. I want to go into The Return of the King with a prepared mind so my question is; is there a good resource on The Internet regarding the characters, plot, middle-earth history, etc without spoilers that I can use to study-up beforehand? I would prefer something that references important passages in the books that cannot easily be communicated in film (e.g. the history of the relationship between Elv's and Humans).

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Anything Lord of the Rings was the worst

[SiliconJesus101]

Ack, this isn't a troll. I just don't get what most people see in these movies. I attempted to watch them but unfortunately couldn't make it past the first 20 or 30 minutes of any of them.

As for the new Matrix movies, I saw reloaded and felt as though they should have left the story where it was instead of trying to pimp out the franchise for more than it was worth. The original Matrix was a very good film and I think it left the story right where it should be.

As for movies that I thought were good this year: Seabiscuit, Blue Car, Finding nemo, The Italian Job, Kill Bill (Tarentino fan..so I may be biased), and an honorable mention to 28 Days later.

I'm probably not the person to be replying here as my movie tastes typically stray far away from my geek buddies. I'm more of a "Run Lola Run", "Interstate 60", "Natural Born Killers", and anything Tarentino kinda' guy.

Re:Anything Lord of the Rings was the worst

[Farscry]

"Ack, this isn't a troll. I just don't get what most people see in these movies. I attempted to watch them but unfortunately couldn't make it past the first 20 or 30 minutes of any of them."

"I'm probably not the person to be replying here as my movie tastes typically stray far away from my geek buddies. I'm more of a "Run Lola Run", "Interstate 60", "Natural Born Killers", and anything Tarentino kinda' guy."

I think you answered your own question here. :) You're more of a non-traditional, in-your-face, gritty side of life guy, and the Lord of the Rings films are more traditional, conservative, and romantic (in the literary sense, not the Valentine's Day sense). They're basically an orgy of classical/fantasy fanboyism. Hence why I love them.

Re:Anything Lord of the Rings was the worst

[Pelerin]

You are not alone, and the problem is not with the movies (which are very well crafted) but with the story itself. From what I thought was a good article on the subject:

But finally it is what is left out of The Lord of the Rings that makes one wonder if this is really a book for adults. Tolkien invented his own mythological world, but it lacks the dignity and the sinew of a real mythology, for it is without religion and essentially without sex.

Hobbits may have fur at the bottom of their legs, but they have seem to have no balls at the top; and that pretty much goes for the rest of Middle-earth, too. The women in The Lord of the Rings are few and pallid, while The Hobbit has no female characters at all [ ... ] The film of The Lord of the Rings seems to have tried to beef up the female quotient; but it was surely an uphill struggle.

If one is to regard The Lord of the Rings as a book for adults, what disturbs is not so much the absence of women [ ... ] as the absence of desire. In this work that presents itself as the representation of a whole world, there is hardly any awareness that we are sexual beings.

[ ... ] even if it can be shown that The Lord of the Rings is religious as a book and I doubt whether even this is true [ ... ] the objection is that the people within the story have no religious beliefs or practices, and are thus unlike any real human society. Tolkien always insisted, and rightly, that his work was not an allegory, but the construction of a self-subsistent world with its own history. The trouble is that it is an emotionally impoverished world, in which the blood runs very thin.

[ ... ]

Tolkien, in sum, was unable to develop his hero. Frodo has learned nothing: he is essentially the same person that he was when the adventure started, except that now he is depressed. All that Tolkien can imagine is regress, a return by the hobbits to the darling little Beatrix Potter world from which they began. Admittedly, Frodo is no longer at ease in this world, but Tolkien is unable to convey anything beyond the fact of a psychic wound: no enlargement or transformation of experience, and no philosophy of grand disillusionment, either. He is merely a person who has had a terrible time, and of course you cannot expect him not to be a little queer after all he has endured. As for Sam, the faithful retainer, he settles back quietly into tubby rusticity and picturesque anecdotage as though nothing much had happened. Contrast Parsifal, to turn to Wagner again: the hero of that opera starts as a man without experience, but he learns and changes. He discovers sexuality and self-mastery, compassion and understanding. All such growth is beyond Tolkien's range.

If all this sounds interesting (or at least controversial) the whole article is worth reading.

Re:Anything Lord of the Rings was the worst

[SiliconJesus101]

I agree, the story line was just too little to keep me interested. It's also that the whole "fantasy" theme never really grabbed me; I'm not much for the wizards and dragons type thing at all. It also seems that I am one of the only people I know that actually didn't like any of the Star Wars movies and also thought of Logan's Run as a satire on religion rather than just a "neato" sci-fi flick. Of course that's the beauty of movies; Different people have different interpretations that allow them to enjoy them in their own way.

Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets face it. Most people hated the sequels because Neo didn't kick MACHINE ass!

Remember when he turned around and ripped Smith a new one, from the inside out, in the original? That is what people wanted in he sequels.

There's a lot of stuff about choices. The need for both humans and the machines to survive for the future.

But most people didn't want the machines to survive. When Neo wanted *peace* many people though it was failure. They wanted him to jump on the big baby face and rip him apart from inside.

It was a great movie (Dock scene!) but in the end Neo didn't "show these people what you (the machines) don't want them to see."

Re:Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions

[m1chael]

I believe many of the people who say they hate these films only say that they do because others said they didn't like them.

Personally I liked them, I had a little smile I get when I walk out of a movie I like when I walked out of these half-way through (just kidding!). Seriously, I'd buy the boxset... maybe.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[JFMulder]

I wouldn't rate the original Japanese movie as better, I'd only rate it as different. The Japanese version had more fantasy elements like the mind-reading guy and put a lot of emphasis on the powers of the girl's mother.

The american version tried to tell a story that could be real, weren't it for the fact that ghost don't exist in real life. That's why it was so good. It felt like reality, whereas movies like Freddy vs. Jason don't feel real for a second.

In fact, I know quite a few japanese purists who actually prefered the american version.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[gerf]

Sorry, I know EVERYONE was thinking this too... exponentially, not logaritmically

Sorry, i know EVERYONE is thinking that they're essencially the same thing. Have you ever heard of a BODE plot?

Come On...

[Telent]

Not that anyone's going to read this by now, but only one post at +3 or higher that mentions Kill Bill?

Come now, Slashdot. Lots of gore, lots more hot chicks (I say that and I'm a chick), cool swords, amazing choreography, tons of in-jokes, anime, and a sense of humor.

Say it with me, guys. Best. Movie. This. Year.

contrast w/ Eight Crazy Nights

[bodrell]

My brother tends to like cheesy movies (think "Jean Claude Van Damme"), and in January we went to the theatre with the intention of seeing Eight Crazy Nights, but due to a snafu we got there late, and ended up seeing The Ring. I can't remember another movie I saw in the theatre that scared me like that.

Earlier this month I finally saw Eight Crazy Nights, and have to say it's a stinker. There were two or three funny moments, but for the most part it was a bizarre train wreck. If you have scatalogical tendencies, you might enjoy seeing a bunch of reindeer crapping all over themselves, laughing. I am not kidding.

I did think The Hot Chick was unexpectedly funny (disclaimer: I didn't say it wasn't stupid).

Can't think of anything that particularly blew me away, but plenty of entertaining, throwaway stuff.

Oh--and though it's bound to get Oscar nods, The Hours was the most depressing thing I've ever seen. Just a heads up for those who may see it on the shelf and think, "well, I think I'll pick up this lighthearted fare for a Friday night." You have been warned.

Re:contrast w/ Eight Crazy Nights

[Oylpann]

Eight Crazy Nights made me think of another movie with Adam Sandler. My wife LOVES Adam Sandler so we stop and pick up Punch Drunk Love. Now I dont know if it came out in '03 but regardless, it has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Both Eight Crazy Nights and Anger Management both beat the hell out of Punch Drunk Love. And as far as my favorites: Anger Management, Bruce Almighty and Pirates of the Carribean.

Worst Movie

[Anonymous Coward]

MPAA anti-piracy trailer

Re:Does the average /. reader often goes to movies

[cens0r]

I have to agree with Hero, though it came out in 2002, I don't think the DVD was available here until 2003. When it will be released in the US is anyone's guess. Two other movies from china/hong kong people should check out are: Shaolin Soccer and Infernal Affairs.

Batman Dead End

[Anonymous Coward]

Batman Dead End was probably the best movie I have seen all year. It's a short indy kind of film, but I wanted more when it was done

**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[Enonu]

Great post man. You just ruined the ending of the movie for me! Next time put in a spoiler warning or two for Christ's sake.

Re:**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[Caeda]

Oh for christs sake.. ITS A FRICKEN BOOK TOO YA KNOW.. its not exactly a spoiler when you could have read it at any library and half the country already knew the entire story before watching the movie!

Re:**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[syrinx]

um, how can you spoil something that's been out for 50 years?

rosebud is a sled, by the way.

Re:**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[Kippesoep]

Sshh!! Unbelievable as it may be to you and me, there are apparently some people who haven't read the books.

Re:**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[Wolfrider]

BEGIN standard-hollywood-plot

o There is a girl involved
o There will be Conflict (usually defined as Violence and/or Chases)
o Everybody dies at the end
o There WILL (most likely) BE a sequel, because we are doing this for Money, not Art

Re:**SPOILERS ABOVE**

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the book has a different ending, at least in regard to the Shire.

Off year for movies

[dze]

Maybe I just didn't see enough movies this year (16 in the theatre so far) but I wasn't overly impressed with this year's releases. I guess my five favorites this year were

1. Return of the King
2. Matrix Reloaded
3. Pirates of the Carribean
4. School of Rock
5. Master and Commander

The bottom three would have to be

1. Kill Bill Volume 1
2. Marci X
3. X2 (not terrible, just not that great)

Geez People!!! THE CORE!!!!

[Trent05]

C'Mon people, why haven't I seen The Core on anyone's sh*t list. It was Sci-fi...well fiction at least.

You can hate it on so many levels:
-Factually inaccurate
-Horrible dialog
-I think my grandma has a better understanding of technology (and she's been dead for 15 years)
-Armageddon ripoff (Not the greatest piece of work, but the shuttle scenes were great, and it had Steve Buscemi in it)
-This movie had better special effects

If any Nashvillians are interested

[UWC]

It's playing at the Belcourt theater on 21st ave this week. I saw it on Sunday. Great movie. Campbell was Elvis, not Campbell playing Elvis.

Firefly! Not a movie, but one of the best of 2003

[apophenia]

The dvd set just came out for Firefly the cancelled Fox TV show.

It is/was the all round best TV series that i have ever seen with near Movie production quality.
The acting, sets and writing are better than all but one of the movies that i have seen this year. (Lost in Translation)

Yes, yes i'm trolling a little bit here but have you actually sat down and watched an episode? I would reccomend the DVD set, you won't be dissappointed. (until you get to the end)

Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[GuyMannDude]

I made the mistake of renting Hulk on DVD. Well, at least that wouldn't have been as big a mistake as watching it in the theater. I was pretty stunned at how terrible the CGI was. Sure, I had seen the TV commericals but I naively figured that those commericals had been thrown together before the complete rendering had been completed and that the CGI in the final product would be much better than the trailers. Nope. I was really surprised.

But in watching the DVD extras my surprise turned to bewilderment and a little anger. While there was an entertaining featurette on the history of The Hulk from early comic books to TV to movies, most of the extras consisted of the movie makers going on and on about how incredible their CGI effects were and how they were doing something at a level of realism that no one else had ever tried. Now, I'll accept that perhaps what they had tried to do might have been quite ambitious but to suggest that they succeeded admirably was just too much to take. Quite frankly, I don't care how difficult the CGI technical problems are. If some average moviegoer like myself cringes at the poor quality of the effects, then you haven't succeeded at shit. It was really impossible to feel any kind of emotion because every time you saw that green bunch of silly puddy bounce around the screen you were instanteously "taken out of the movie". The poor quality of the CGI completely ruined whatever effect the director tried to accomplish.

Here on slashdot we oftentimes like to point to the extras on DVDs as a model for the RIAA to follow in terms of adding value to their product. But the more of these extras I watch, the more I'm really doubting whether they add any value. Most of these extras are simply interviews with the cast and crew gushing over what a great job they've done and how thankful they are to work with such a talented group of individuals and so on. It's really just a bunch of self-serving, back-slapping crap. The 'deleted scenes' featured on many disks are really awful to watch -- there's no wonder they were deleted! In times I've come away from a movie having a lower opinion of the film after watching these extras. Attack of the Clones is a prime example. Now, I certainly wasn't under the impression that this was some kind of masterpiece originally. But after watching the featurettes where Lucas agonizes over minute, insignificant details of the CGI characters yet doesn't seem to give a shit about the awful acting and gaping plot holes, I found myself feeling more negative about the film!

CGI has its place but it's clear that Hulk suffered tremendously because clearly the technology isn't there yet. And filmakers, make those DVD extras something worthwhile for a change, please.

GMD

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[Dr. Manhattan]

Now, I'll accept that perhaps what they had tried to do might have been quite ambitious but to suggest that they succeeded admirably was just too much to take.

I dunno. I submit that maybe if the Hulk had moved like a real human it might have worked better. Consider, the 'hulk dogs' - did they look convincing to you?

Human brains have some highly refined hardware for recognizing and predicting human movement. (Humans have been way more likely to fight other humans than animals throughout our history.) We're not as finely tuned to pick up on, say, quadruped motion.

Now (faithfully to the comics, I'll note) the Hulk did some things which just aren't physically possible. Tossing tanks the way he did would require him to be absurdly dense and heavy, even if his muscles were made of diamond nanofibers. If he were that heavy, he couldn't bounce around the way he did at other times. Mass, inertia, and balance didn't add up.

The point is, I think people pick up on this much faster with an anthropomorphic character than with a dinosaur, or a dragon, or a CGI cat, or what-have-you. The close-up scenes of the Hulk's face worked quite well for me, actually. I think he looked much more realistic than the people in "Final Fantasy", and I don't think the effects guys need to hang their heads in shame. I believe the technology is more "there" than you do, but that there's no amount of technology that can make an utterly impossible movement look 'real'.

Aside from that, there were other real triumphs. The multi-panel scenes took some getting used to, but really worked most of the time. The bit where Talbot is walking away from Bruce as Betty looks on, and for a moment you can see all three of their faces, tells you all about their relationships in a couple seconds.

Some of the plot was, well, problematic. The dialogue could have used polishing in places. I agree that its flaws keep it from being one of the "best" movies of the year. But where it works, it works very well, and some of the problems with it have been very overblown.

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[B5_geek]

I think we might have similar opinions on this idea.

Am I the only person who doesn't watch (or care) about the extras? I only got involved in DVD's for the enhanced video/sound quality. I bought my player back in ~1995 and there were only ~5 movies available on DVD (hehe and I bought 3 of them at $40 a pop).

Now that HD-DVD might start to become popular I can consider upgrading my Marantz DVD player.

My ideal home theather setup:
3-chip DLP front Projector (1080i of course)
HTPC
7.1 A/V receiver

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[jmb-d]

I was pretty stunned at how terrible the CGI was.

I'd wanted to see this movie, until I watched the "Making of" hype on Sci-Fi.

"Look at that," I said to myself. "A big, computer-generated, green guy. It's Shrek!

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[Detcidda]

I haven't seen The Hulk, but I completely agree with your comments on DVD "extras", most of the time they are just full of boring, self-promoting crap. Being a programmer, I found this DDJ Verity Stob article entertaining: http://www.ddj.com/documents/s=7927/ddj0305m/0305m .htm. Basically, it's what you would get if programmers started putting "extras" into software applications!

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[ader]

Don't forget the commentaries! Enjoy the experience of someone talking through the whole movie, in the comfort of your own home!

The only extras I've enjoyed were:
LotR documentaries: despite showing exactly how the films were made, I came away with a new respect for the achievements of the whole crew.
Amelie director's commentary: at the start, Jeunet basically says "Don't listen to me if you want the magic preserved." I took his advice and stopped it.

Ade_
/

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[WNight]

I like commentaries. Even for movies I despise (Starship Troopers) I like knowing just what went through the director's head. Or, in the case of ST, what didn't go through the director's head. What a drooler. Paul Verhoven, a director to avoid.

But it was interesting to know that it wasn't someone honest interpretation of the movie - the director hated it and went in to mangle it, because it was easier to mock if everyone was a caricature.

Then with movies I like, LotR for example, it's interesting seeing how they made it and all the effort they put into things I didn't notice (custom props) but that I now see are tailored very well to every scene they're in, instead of using the same props scene after scene.

And it's interesting hearing Jackson explain why he made the cuts and changes that he did, some I agree with, some I don't, but he usually has a reason that goes beyond "Well, Saruman's character was somewhat fascist, so I stuck him in a Nazi uniform to make this very clear, while changing his lines to reflect the fact that he's in a Nazi uniform and thus fascist..." Jackson at least is a fan of the books he's doing and I can see that it's hard to cut - if he was king, each part would have been well over six hours and contained all the minutae.

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[CAIMLAS]

The problem with the "Extra features" on DVDs is that, more often than not, the original film wasn't good in the first place: it didn't draw you in and make you part of the world, the environment, etc.

Good examples of films that do tend to do this are the Kevin Smith films, the original Star Wars films, the LotR films. There's extra value there because the films weren't just simply thrown together hastily, and there are some interesting things about the creation of the film that viewers might be interested in (for instance, how many horses were actually used for RotK, etc.)

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[Lexic0n]

Does everyone really think the CGI was that bad? I remember being absolutely floored by the realism of it. I thought the Hulk looked incredible. Nick Nolte's "melding" effect was awesome. Some of the bigger shots, like with the Hulk running through the desert, hopping from one mesa top to another, were poorer quality. But on the whole I thought the CGI was some of the best I'd seen up to that point.

So, am I blind? Uninformed? Merely in possession of poor taste? Or are there other reasons that people WANT to dislike the CGI in this film?

(This comment could appear in a number of places, but since the parent post critiques the CGI work specifically, I posted it here.)

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[pod]

Commentaries are usually pretty good. Yeah, it's just a bunch of people talking (or sometimes just one). Imagine that. But some are obviously pretty bad. The Terminator 3 was definitely one of the worst.

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[Luigi30]

Paul Verhoven? Avoid? Ever seen Robocop?

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[WNight]

Robocop was okay, but even idiots get lucky. He was so stupid in his commentary about Starship Troopers that I can't believe he did anything right except by accident.

Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras"

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahaha. Shrek. Nobody's ever said that joke. You're comic genius!

Good year for movies

[SnapperHead]

I think this year was really good for movies. At the begining of the year, the main movies I wanted to see was Scary movie 3 and Bruce almighty. Then there was T3 which I was dying to see. All 3 of those, where really good.

I had a bad feeling about The Matrix, I was very disappointed. Matrix 2 was ... ok, and I was expecting Matrix 3 to be better. But, when I left the theature (Spelling, I know, STFU) I was so pissed about how bad it was.

Then, of course, there was LotR, which ... was possiably one of the best movies I have ever seen. I was so pleased with the over all series of movies.

I wonder how next year will be, there are some intresting things coming out next year, but nothing even close to LotR.

- Aliens vs Preditor (I hope they don't fuck this up)
- Butterfly affect (Looks pretty intresting)
- Day after tommorow (Looks intresting, but might flop ... yet another end of the world movie)
- Spiderman 2 (Looks pretty promissing)

SPOILER WARNING

[forgotmypassword]

Hey, hold on

Him getting shot the fuck up wasn't entertaining enough?

So you are saying that you wanted him to die?

I thought it had a kind of "Clockwork Orange" ending to it.

Re:SPOILER WARNING

[neurojab]

Clockwork orange? In that movie the bad boy stays bad. Not in Bad Santa. The change in his character during the final moments was too abrubt. The ending to bad santa made me remember I was watching a movie. It was just way too unrealistic.

LoTR

[Anonymous Coward]

Release Of The Kernal

Re:I can't even remember what films I saw this yea

[Kris_J]

I doubt it. Here's Moore's response.

The Last Spoiler

[Belgand]

The good guys win.

Sorry, I hope I didn't ruin almost every movie ever made for you. Tragedy, comedy, what have you, no matter what actually happens in the end the good guys manage to win... somehow. Even though Hamlet is a tragedy and ultimately... well, I don't want to give it away... but in the end wrongs are righted and although everyone doesn't quite live happily ever after, the good guys have won.

Just got back from watching it ... SWAT

[SandmanWAIX]

What a crap movie. So cheesy. The most obvious plot with extremely weak acting and directing. I am so angry at wasting my money on that movie. I paid for 3 of us to go watch it and it stunk.

Worst : Charlie's Angels II

[dasunt]

I think "Charlie's Angels, Full Throttle" was made from 30-second snippets of action movies trailers and assembled by an ADD sufferer on speed and crack. *Sigh* [I think that came out in 2003. If not, its still the worst movie.]

Best movies:

• Kill Bill - Bloody Gore Fest
• Finding Nemo - Cute Kiddy Film
• Pirates of the Carribean - I didn't expect it to be that good.
• LotR: RotK (no, I never read the books) - Mumakil rock.

Re:Worst : Charlie's Angels II

[fordboy0]

Worst: Charlies Angels Full Throttle
Well, I hadn't been to the theatre in a couple of years (I know... so sue me) and I happened to win a pair of free tickets from a local radio station (WLW). The tickets were for Charlies Angels "Full Throttle". Boy was I shocked at how bad the movie was. From the first completely unrealistic scene with the truck (wasn't it a truck? It was so hard to tell with the epileptic seizure like scene changes) plummenting over the bridge, to the last fight scene where the angels defy gravity once again; The movie reeked.

Best: Open Range
I was determined to go see at *least* one more movie this year, hoping that I could pick one that didn't suck. That movie was "Open Range" with Kevin "Kneel down and kiss my feet, scum." Costner, Robert Duval and Annette Bening. Since I am partial to westerns anyway, I had high hopes for the film, but I was concerned since I knew Kevvy was certain to be omnipresent. The sub-plot love interest between Costner and Bening could have been a little less sappy, but it kept all the women (my wife included) who were forced to see a western by their significant other(s), happy. I won't give up any more, but if you like westerns, it's one of the best (and the few) since "Unforgiven".

Disclaimer: The above was not really meant as a review, but just my take since I'm not the movie going buff... I should be able to comment on *most* of the 2003 releases after they are released on DVD...

Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[GuyMannDude]

I agree that Kill Bill was good. The fact that they didn't use any CGI made it significantly better, IMHO. Does anybody else feel like they're overdoing it with computer graphics in some movies??? Maybe I've just seen so many well done CGI scenes that the majority of computer aided action shots just seem lame to me.....

I'm a bit puzzled that you seem to be extolling the virtues of a wire-fu flick as a pinnacle of realism. It's been a damn long time since I've seen a believable martial arts film. The wire-fu stuff is getting as overused as CGI. Seriously, if you're in a fight you don't do 10 meter backflips over your opponents. Actually, I'm not sure anyone can do flips like that regardless of whether it makes good tactical sense or not. Yes, I'm aware the capoirera contains lots of flips and cartwheel-like motions but a lot of that is built into that particular martial art because it was developed by slaves who had to disguise their practice as a dance to avoid their masters cracking down on them.

When you do a flip you are basically expending a considerable amount of effort and energy to perform a complex maneuver that temporarily blinds you, leaves you vulnerable to your opponent, and doesn't really move your center of mass very far in the horizontal direction. It's just not a wise idea to go flipping around like crazy when people armed with weapons are trying to kill you. Best just to stand your ground and block or take a step back (or to the side).

Sometimes I wonder whether the reliance on wire techniques is an attempt by Hollywood to show something outside the everyday experience of the moviegoer in the abscence of any talented martial artists. In decades past, audiences could be wowed by the superior skill of someone who could actually do martial arts well. These days, it seems like directors are insisting that the actors try to do the fight scenes and then they use wire-fu to make up for the fact that these people really can't do very much. You don't see any Bruce Lee or Jet Li types who can move incredibly fast. Instead you get Keanu Reeves or Uma Thurman doing a backflip over 3 opponents in slow motion. That just doesn't really impress me and it certainly doesn't count as realistic fighting. Why can't they hire some competant martial arts to do something REAL and just use CGI or maybe even masks to make the stunt person look like the actor?

Ah well, just my two cents. I'm just getting a little annoyed by everyone gushing over these acrobatic shows as "awesome martial arts flicks".

GMD

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[jhunsake]

Such wisdom... on Slashdot... never would have imagined...

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure if you are aware of the fact that Jet Li has starred in many of the earliest succesful films using wire-fu.

This is not to say that I don't understand your point. It just seems that you might have dug yourself a logical hole.

I can't remember too many movies where martial arts or any form of eastern melee combat has been portraid extremely realistically. In a sense this is a shame, since we do have talents such as Li that are capable of doing very impressive and effective stunts, tricks, and combos (more pleasing to the eye as well as opposed to Vale Tudo and other such highly effective forms of combat).

But there is also a good reason for this. The most effective "martial arts" in real life are generally budo sports which don't (at least for me) constitute a form of beautiful combat. They are effective and enjoyable to watch in real life, but watching Li execute his moves in respect to the strictly form based Wushu arts is brilliant.

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

FWIW, a couple of the best fight scenes I've seen in movies have involved Filipino MA guys (real ones) playing with sticks. The speed they move at is awesome, you can make the sticks do the big spinny moves in a realistic context, and the body movement is surprisingly graceful and technically impressive. Sadly, I don't think we've got from Karate Kid to Kali Kid yet, although the gun kata scenes in last year's "Equilibrium" (another very good film) were on the right lines.

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[May Kasahara]

Well, if I was the original poster, my point would've been that it doesn't need to be done in CG to be entertaining! I loved Kill Bill Vol. 1, partially because it was so unreal; it was, in its purest essence, a live action cartoon-- just like the kung-fu flicks and spagetti westerns that Tarantino references. I mean, how realistic is a stump of a neck, with blood squirting out of it? The most important thing about Kill Bill is that it's pure entertainment, which is more that can be said about the CG rabble that is the two Matrix sequels.

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[AmishSlayer]

Four words to enjoy a movie by:

temporary suspension of belief

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[MrAngryForNoReason]

I mean, how realistic is a stump of a neck, with blood squirting out of it?

Quite realistic I imagine. If you were decapitated your heart wouldn't stop beating straight away as the heart beat is autonomic (not controlled by the brain). If the heart was still beating then blood would still flow. Blood is normally very much played down in movies, in the human body there is a lot of blood at quite a high pressure, if you cut through a major artery then you will get some serious spray.

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[Anonymous Coward]

The last movie I saw which didn't have Wire-fu was Rumble in the Bronx. That movie made me laugh, and I'm not sure if it was supposed to. But obviously, that wasn't this year.

Re:Wire-fu doesn't count as "realism"

[Razor Blades are Not]

Most of Jackie Chans stuff was done without wires (until recently.. now he uses them in all his movies). His stunts were nonetheless quite spectacular. Witness the drop through five floors in Dragons Forever, or the leap from the top floor of the parking structure to an adjacent building in Rumble in the Bronx.

Jet Li uses wire-fu in most of his movies. Does that make him no more skilled than Uma Thurman? I doubt it. The wires are there for a different reason. Get over it.

Dirty Pretty Things

[UWC]

I really liked the movie. Directed by Stephen Frears, it addresses a subculture of illegal immigrants in the London service class, all mutually accepting in a sort of expatriate understanding. Some take advantage of their existence at the fringe of legality and inability to act beyond their bounds for risk of deportation.

Frears is able to hold the movie together masterfully with a thriller-type plot, but the real focus is the complete other world of these people, intersecting the normal world only occasionally and briefly.

Yeah, I'm bad at explaining it. See it if you can. I don't think it's in many or any theaters now, nor is it yet on DVD.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[Belgand]

Pompous? Inventive? I merely see it as a linguistics scholar having a bit of fun working out his own imaginary languages.

Worst: Master and Commander

[xTown]

About 45 minutes into "Master and Commander", I turned to my wife and said "Is there going to be a story in here somewhere?"

We're never given any reason to care one way or another about anything that Jack Aubrey does. They've got to catch the French ship--so? Why should I, as a moviegoer, care about that for its own sake? We're never given a stake in anything that happens onscreen. I kept waiting, mostly in vain, for something to happen that would make me give a damn.

There were a few good moments--any scene involving Midshipman Blakeney, for example, whose part apparently grew as the producers realized what a good actor that guy was--but overall there was just nothing there for me.

My wife tried to argue that that was the whole point of the movie, that there IS no point to war, that the movie isn't supposed to make any sense. That we're not supposed to care, because they're not doing anything that we care about, and the movie was made that way intentionally. Me, I think she was just staring at Russell Crowe and making stuff up so that I wouldn't insist that we walk out.

(Actually, Russell Crowe was pretty good. I don't generally enjoy his movies, but in this one he was passable. In one scene, though, he reminded me so much of the guy who plays Captain Feathersword on "The Wiggles" that it took me right out of the movie for pretty much the entire time.)

Re:Worst: Master and Commander

[amcguinn]

They've got to catch the French ship--so? Why should I, as a moviegoer, care about that for its own sake?

Um, because it's French. You know, like, from France. French. Get it?

He's an (n + 1) hit wonder

[nicholasharbour]

They said he was a one-hit-wonder after Reservoir Dogs, then a two-hit-wonder with Pulp Fiction. Now people want to say he is simply a three hit wonder with Kill Bill vol.1 and I guess a four hit wonder with Kill Bill vol.2. At that point it is no longer an insult but a complement.

Some good non-nerd movies...

[Goonie]

• The Spanish Apartment - bunch of European grad students sharing a cramped apartment in Barcelona. Laugh-out-loud funny, and, as an extra bonus, extended screen time for the stunningly hot Judith Godreche
• Chicago - great tunes, mostly done justice (though Hugh Jackman would have been so much better than Richard Gere). I'm putting this is because it was released in 2003 in Australia.
• 8 Mile - for the MC battle at the end.
• 24 Hour Party People - sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll.
• Punch-drunk Love - an Adam Sandler movie that won't make you vomit, amazingly enough.
• Secretary - Take your girlfriend to see this one ;)
• 25th Hour - great ending sequence.
• Confessions of a Dangerous Mind - find out who was responsible for trash TV, and what he got up to in his spare time (allegedly). Great direction by George Clooney (and no, that's not an oxymoron)
• Kill Bill volume 1, though this only half counts as non-nerd, given the anime sequence.
• Finally, a special award for 2 Fast 2 Furious, for the funniest crypto-homosexual undertones for a homophobic audience since Ben-Hur.

LAST SAMURAI!

[Anonymous Coward]

# I'm not samurai

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[forgotmypassword]

I am going to have to disagree. This is one case where the American remake is actually significantly better than the original Japanese version. I don't want to take away from the original though, it was an extremely good movie made on a very small budget. However with that said, I could make many points in favor of "The Ring".

First of all "Ringu", the Japanese version, doesn't have the double meaning that "The Ring" has. In "The Ring" , the 'ring' is both the the telephone ring and also the halo of light that the girl saw as the lid was covered over the well. This is not the case in "Ringu".

As another poster has already pointed out, "Ringu" was a bit more fantasy oriented with the girl, as well as others, being psychic. However, in "The Ring", the girl had demonic origins - her parents weren't supposed to be able to have children, but they went overseas and came back with one.

Secondly, "Ringu" was indeed a lower budget film. When the people died from the psychic girl, they were left with a grimace on their face. Where as when the demonic girl from "Ringu" killed someone, their body was left as if they had died and rotted in the well. This is a big step in not only special effects but the motivation of the killers. "The Ring" just tries to be more horrific than "Ringu" in every way that it can. But it doesn't give you an overdose of special effects - I don't think there has been such clever editing in a horror movie since the first big Dracula movie.

There are many other small details, but the difference that stuck out the most in my mind was this: At the end of the movie when the boy says "You FREED her? You weren't supposed to free her." It is such an incredible twist and it leaves you with a terrible feeling in your belly. Nothing like that happens in "Ringu".

In conclusion, it is very apparent that the American filmakers took great effort in making "The Ring" as much of an improvement as they could. But I still say that "Ringu" is worth watching, there are many details in the story that you can only get from the Japanese version - though the story lines aren't exactly the same.

Winged Migration

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the nicest naturalist films which really open your eyes to a whole world that most of us have been cut off from. I will probably buy it on DVD for X-mas.

Prolly no one's heard of it... Info on imdb

City of God

[Xuul]

[Even though City of God is technically a 2002 release, I don't think it made it to the U.S. (and the rest of the world?) until 2003]

City of God (Cidade de Deus) is the frantic tale of growing up poor, surrounded by violence in a Brazillian slum during the 70s. The visually stunning story jumps through time and between characters to weave a narrative that is provactive and thought-provoking. Be warned, it IS violent; not in the "Holy shit did you see her cut off all those people's limbs???" way, but in the "*sniff* I wish I was dead because the world is a cruel, miserable, place" way.

Anyway, enough of the movie reviewer crap, I wouldn't list the movie here unless I thought it was good. It's hard to be like, "DOODE, you have to see it!" since there are certain scenes in the movie that are just painful to watch they're so sad. But, you don't have to take my word:

IMDB

Filthy Critic

Onion AVClub

Re:City of god

[Anonymous Coward]

Great movie, but (a) non-english, which is never gonna get anything into any top 10 lists, and (b) not terribly geeky. Great movie, though.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[mblumber]

We are such dorks. I was just about to nit-pick, and you beat me to it.

The Last Samurai

[panoplos]

This is by far one of the best movies released this year.
Good plot, and great acting from both Cruise and Ken Watanabe!

Why?

[CashCarSTAR]

I'm just wondering. Why is there such a..well..harsh retribution on the movie equilivient of a hard sci-fi movie?

Why was everybody turned off by the philosophy and world building in Reloaded/Revolutions? I thought that was the best thing about the movies. Forget the fight sequences, I want more thought, more detail, more technology.

The ONLY thing that disappointed me (on an intellectual basis. On an emotional basis it made me giddy) about Revolutions, is that now after seeing the ending, and looking back on it, the story was actually written as a homage to the Final Fantasy series.

Nothing-hero is the chosen one to take command and lead the battle against multiple enemies, only to join forces with one, to fight against an even greater threat to them both.

Then take the music during the battle between Smith/Neo, and the music during the final credits (the underbeat is the same as the Boss music from FF9).

Too easy.

But still a great movie.

Why don't people get giddy about detail like I do?

Re:Why?

[startled]

"Why was everybody turned off by the philosophy and world building in Reloaded/Revolutions?"

I was turned off by the two because I loved the fun philosophy in Reloaded, and the action in Revolutions. But Reloaded was a bore, and Revolutions had no intellectual content. Move some of the action into Reloaded, put more universe development into Revolutions (and ditch the crappy dialog-- "I'm scared, Trin"-- and the overused Christ symbols), and you've got a pair of well balanced movies. As it is, I've got Cola syrup in one cup, and soda water in another. What am I supposed to do, mix them?

Hmm, that could work. :) Phantom edit, cut the two decent films (they clearly weren't terrible, just disappointing after the amazing first one) into two good films.

Re:Why?

[dancingmad]

If that was hard science fiction, than I, sir, am Spike Lee.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just hated the dock scene.. the mech/squiddy fight was boring me to death. The squiddy chasing the ship (Nebuchadnezzar ?) was dull as well because I'd practically watched the same thing in the Animatrix !

RELOAD! ARRRRR!!

RELOAD! ARRRRR!!

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it's not anything close to a hard science fiction story. If you want to see an excellent hard science fiction story, rent Gattaca.

I get so tired of self important Matrix fanboys acting as if all of us who don't like the movies are just too dumb to get them. No, we get them. We get them a lot better than you do. That's why we hate them.

Re:Why?

[Dinny]

Interesting. I had not seen it as a final fantasy reference before. Personally I saw it as an homage to comics. My favorite part of The second movie was Neo putting his one fist forward in a classic superman pose as he flies out of the exploding building.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the W. Bros. lost sight of where they were going with the plot, and mistook deep philosophical meaning for ambiguity.

Seriously, it really feels like the first was a stand-alone film, and the two sequels were written to cash in. I think the philosophical implications of the first were maybe almost accidental, and when they realized that there was such a gold mine of material, they tried to delve into it, and weren't up to the task.

I understand that the first movie gave us many novel things, and that the sequels would be hard pressed to live up to such a grand opening. But even keeping that in mind, the second didn't close the door completely; it could have used the twist with Neo stoping the Sentinels in the real world as a springboard, instead of a deus ex machina type of explanation. Still, by the third all we've got is fizzled intellectuality and recycled action.

Re:Why?

[FurryFeet]

Hmm, that could work. :) Phantom edit, cut the two decent films (they clearly weren't terrible, just disappointing after the amazing first one) into two good films.

Better yet, phantom edit all three films into one good one... actually, that would be easy. Just keep the first one.

Re:Why?

[tr0p]

My problem with Matrix was the 3rd movie. They did such a good job of building a philosophical ground to stand on in "Reloaded" with the French speaking guy and so many programming references (even "the architect"'s lines were good if you were capable of following them).

But "Revolutions" just recycled a bunch of the not-so-great lines from the 2nd movie like "some things do change" and "how many times do I have to tell you, Trinity/Morpheus/Neo". The music at Trinities deathbed sounded like one of Tarranski's film scenes in Simone, and all the good programming references were rendered useless by "plot twists" such as the indian family and neo being able to "see the machines without seeing" in "the real world".

Maybe they felt like they had to "do the un-expected" again or something, but what they really did was ruin all of the nice logic and philosophy they had set up. Pile that on top of the totally crude way they decided to show the sentinel battle (flying around the room like a big snake while the mech gunners shoot it in the HEAD) and you get the biggest dissapointment in years.

Re:Why?

[CAIMLAS]

Quite possibly because the second films had no directable story. They were just a sequence of loosely held together scenes with the same characters, within the same world. The chain of events could have plausably been in a different order; not so with The Matrix.

There were a lot less subtle things in the second two films than there was in the first; that, and the third film completely ignored some of the things that happened in the second: namely, the part in the end where he fried the sentinels. The second film fell short by simply seeming like a sequel to a popular teen flick (aka, American Pie or such): you had all the familiar faces, you had the romantic interests that were hinted at, and then you've got shallow character development to make it seem like there's actually a point to it, when it has no significant bearing on the story at all.

City of God

[n3m6]

My favourite movie released this year was "City of God". Though it was made outside hollywood, it does pack a better punch.

My other favourites

Donnie Darko
Kill Bill

Terminator 3?!?!?

[mcrbids]

Geez.

Terminator was the "Matrix" of movies when I was in High School. Terminator and Terminator II virtually created their own genre, and were incredible hits.

Everybody talked about "T2" when it came out. I mean *EVERYONE*.

So, when I saw T3 coming out, I knew I had to see it!

Just now, I switched down to +1 and still didn't see a single comment on Terminator 3.

And, the movie was just kinda... boring. Lots of smashing stuff, and not much feeling or pashion. T2, with its 80's hairstyles, ancient special effects and almost believable love scenes was much, much better.

Big disappointment!

It didn't stay true at the end

[Anonymous Coward]

He gets shot dead and then isn't dead and all ends happily? Doesn't really fit the movie in my book.

Mine. Mine. Mine. Mine. Mine. Mine. Mine.

[blair1q]

Best: Finding Nemo

Worst, by miles: either ep of the Matrix frantschise.

The Station Agent... more

[Saeger]

I'm no film critic, but I've seen a LOT of movies this year, so here's my picks.

Best of 2003:

• The Station Agent - A dwarf makes unlikely friends.
• Whale Rider - Overcoming macho BS.
• Better Luck Tomorrow - Amoral rich kids.
• Owning Mahowny - Banker gambles away millions
• Lost in Translation - Funny, deep.
• LOTR: Return of the King
• Oseam - sad Korean anime
• Animatrix - All style

Worst of '03:

• Matrix Revolutions
• Bulletproof Monk
• Teknolust - One of those movies that tries really hard to look tech-clever, but falls on its face.
• Firefight (I could only stand to watch the first 10 minutes of this Balwin B-movie)

--

Seabiscuit

[Ridgelift]

Seabiscuit is just plain fantastic. I saw an interview on the author Laura Hillenbrand, and was fascinated by the story she researched about . To quote the website about the story: "In 1938, a year of monumental turmoil, the number one newsmaker wasn't Franklin Roosevelt, or Adolf Hitler. It wasn't even a person. It was an undersized, crooked-legged racehorse owned by a bicyle repairman-turned-automobile magnate, trained by a virtual mute mustang breaker, ridden by a half-blind failed prizefighter"

The movie is great. Rent it, you'll love it.

A list for 2003

[disconnectedsmile]

The Best: 1. The Last Samuri - The acting was amazing, the script was good, and it was one of the few three hour flicks that didn't have down time. It kept you interested. 2. Return of the King - It could tie for number one but the complete lack of Saruman disappointed me. The movie also seemed a little drawn out at times but it was an awesome movie and a great way to end the series. Steve Jackson deserves an oscar for best director. 3. Kill Bill Vol. 1 - It was great. Enough said. The Worst: Kngeroo Jack - I didn't watch it but even the trailers made me cringe. Mtrix Reloaded and Revolution - They should have never made sequals. I can't think of another terrible movie...

Re:A list for 2003

[Holi]

umm peter jackson not steve. sorry to nitpick.
now good night.

Lame premise

[SuperKendall]

Yes, you and everyone else (including myself) had the exact same idea - I think almost everyone I knew was thinking along the same lines and there were a lot of posts supposing the same thing after the second movie.

That's one of the things I liked about the last movie, that it did not follow down the obvious path and just give us a Matrix in a Matrix. After some thought I don't think the Matrix in a Matrix would have turned out as well as what they ended up with.

Re:Lame premise

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it was a lame premise because everyone thought of it. But it can't be any lamer than the premise they actually gave us.

Me, my friends, and everyone else in the theatre:
"You mean we've been speculating on interesting developments and ideas on how Neo did that to the sentinel and the final explanation is summed up in one sentence by the Oracle, accepted, and then ignored quickly? Did she basically say he has magic powers in the real world? Deus Ex Machina...obviously.
So there are magic powers in the real world now? How the hell was anyone supposed to know that? The writers just made that shit up. What the hell! Now he's using his magic powers that they just made up to get to the Machine City and save the world."

That honestly ruined the movie for a lot of people. Some geek could have made a better solution in a fan fiction...

Re:Lame premise

[Dastardly]

Plus, the alternate reality within an alternate reality has been done before. Why keep doing it?

money island.

[Grendel Drago]

Also some Barbershop Pirates, a terrible production of "Speare!" (the compressed works of Shakespeare)... a supercilious desk clerk ("I'm not the pirate you're looking for"), the arms-dealing former lemonade salesman and the donning of a large augered tofu block as headwear.

Oh! And the use of baggy pirate pants to store everything.

Oh! And musical numbers. Many musical numbers.

--grendel drago

Re:money island.

[lee7guy]

Doesn't sound like any Monkey Island(TM) game I ever played.

Ah, wait, are you by any chance referring to the worthless follow ups to Ron Gilbert's classic games?

Re:money island.

[Anonymous Cow herd]

That's all from MI3, which was actually pretty decent. MI4 was pretty bad, though.

Re:money island.

[bar-agent]

Hey, when did Missions Impossible 3 and 4 come out? Were they worse than MI2?

Adaptation

[esaloch]

Adapation was by far the best movie. I have never seen Nicholas Cage do this good of an acting job. The story was brilliant. I don't see how I haven't seen this mentioned.

Re:Adaptation

[m1chael]

I was wondering whether Adaption was in anyway related to the movie Identity. As soon as I had seen the trailer for Identity I instantly thought of the movie the one Cage was writing in Adaption for some reason and guessed the main plot twist in the movie (although not the person who it revolved around).

Re:Adaptation

[Al Scagnetti]

I can't believe this post received so little traffic. Chris Cooper's performance alone makes this an honorable mention. And Nick Cage hasn't made me want to watch him like this since Raising Arizona.

Re:Adaptation

[MuParadigm]

It's cerainly a great film. Problem is, it cam out in 2002.

Re:Adaptation

[esaloch]

Did it really? Because I saw it in the theater the same day I saw Matrix Reloaded. That was this year wasn't it?

LXG Exactly.

[Grendel Drago]

You took the words right out...

See, even if it made a decent movie, it was a pale imitation of the comics, which are actual literature, a brilliantly-researched synthesis. Bah. Who wants to see Mina turn into bats when we can see that wonderfully tense moment when Quatermain first sees her scar; who cares how good the Jekyll/Hyde CG is if Hyde doesn't eventually bugger the Invisible Man to death for his betrayal?

Mmm. Going to go read the original two series again. Mmm.

Re:LXG Exactly.

[spectecjr]

who cares how good the Jekyll/Hyde CG is

No-one. Mainly because that wasn't CG.

Wish the guys who did The Hulk had tried the same thing.

Worst Movie Ever...

[rthille]

For me and my wife at least, was the remake of "The Thin Red Line."

All the star cameos kept giving me hope that there'd be a single character I might grow to care about. I kept hoping that it would somehow redeem itself in the end.

But I was denied and it's still my worst movie ever!

(But I haven't seen Gigli)

Re:Worst Movie Ever...

[Cackmobile]

are you talking about the one that came out a few years ago with jim cazviel and nick nolte & sean penn etc. that was a wicked movie.

Re:Worst Movie Ever...

[rthille]

Yeah, that one. Do you mean wicked good or wicked bad? :-)

Re:Worst Movie Ever...

[Cackmobile]

wicked good!

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[88NoSoup4U88]

Allthough i can agree on some of your points, i think the points in favour of Ringu would be that it contains alot Eastern-type story telling ,whereas the emphasis on symbols is much more important to convery certain feelings, then the actual footage is :
and 'we' westerners just miss alot of that stuff.

And for the , very good ending , of The Ring :
I still doubt if this was done purely 'for the script' or to not totally rule out a sequel (would the movie be succesfull) : It still IS Hollywood, where they think that making good money is more important than making good movies.

Here are 8 great movies from 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

Not necessarily in order (when your list covers a range of genres, it's hard to rank them):

Whale Rider
Bend It Like Beckham
Pirates of the Caribbean
The Italian Job
The Return of the King
Lost in Translation
Master and Commander
School of Rock

House of the Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

House of the Dead is quite possibly the worst movie I've EVER seen. Sure it had some nudity in it, but so? It was SO bad I walked out about half-way into it and asked for my money back. Then I was reminded that I was an employee and didn't pay for it. Darn the bad luck!

'Matrix: Revolutions would have been fine...

[KC7GR]

...except for one tiny little detail.

You DON'T kill off your two main heroes! ARRRRGGHHHH!

Re:'Matrix: Revolutions would have been fine...

[m1chael]

I hope you aren't serious. Least if they do another sequel we don't have to agonise through Neo and Trinity's sweet nothings.

Re:'Matrix: Revolutions would have been fine...

[TiggsPanther]

You DON'T kill off your two main heroes! ARRRRGGHHHH!

Errrrrm, why not?

Some films are irritating because they seem to put their main heroes into life-threatening situations, but you know full well that they'll survive.

But not only did Revolutions turn that around, they did it when you've seen them conform to the cliche before.

In The Matrix, Neo dies, and comes back. And you're pretty certain that he won't die (and that neither will Morpheus).

In Reloaded you see Trinity saved by last-minute save cliche #132.5b. And, again, even as she's falling you just know that Neo'd gonna save her just in time.

They almost seem to be the cliche "unkillable heroes". But for one they're not. Trinity's dead. And Neo, if not confirmed permanently-dead, isn't exactly walking around returning unscathed (and with fixed eyes) before the credits roll either.

Tiggs

Re:I 2nd the nomination: Gayniggers from Outer Spa

[plorqk]

Due to lack of modifiers I can only assume you are nominating this for best picture?

The Worst? Gigli

[Ralph Spoilsport]

A movie designed to make people regurgitate their popcorn as their own intestines burst through their chests and crawl up the aisle to strangle the projectionist.

Without out a doubt one of the single worst films ever made - ever.

A great steaming tourd of a film, not worth the money spent making the prints. Everything was terrible, rivalled only perhaps by Glitter and Showgirls.

RS

Re:The Worst? Gigli

[m1chael]

Thank God for non-worldwide simultaneous releases. God bless America.

Undead

[m1chael]

The best movie of all time? Maybe...

I don't want to spoil it for you so I won't say much about it. The plot is amazing, the actors should be in Hollywood by now and the guns are only useful if you shot the bastards in the head!

The Ring

[KnickFanRA]

Personally, I thought the Ring was a pretty decent movie, but definitely not as excellent and scary as some made it out to be. I am not really sure what exactly makes a movie "scary." I mean, we all know that it's a movie and I am not sure at what point we're actually really scared or engrossed in the movie. I think some may define scary movies by how much they make you jump. In that aspect, I would probably agree, the Ring was pretty good at that, but it used cheap tricks, such as the instant cut to the dead girls face in the middle of a conversation... Just my 2 cents.

In the words of Morpheus himself ...

[Tensor]

"There is a difference between KNOWING the path, and WALKING the path."

totally agree

[naph]

i thought it was going to be another run of the mill teen slasher flick, but DAMN was it good!!!

i was in a room with a load of mates and it still scared the shit out of us all.

are they going to be making a western version of the second film aswell?? anyone know??

manos hands of fate

[anthony_philipp]

mod parent up. if you dont think so, i urge you to watch it, but it was not made in 2003. so it doesnt apply exactly, but it is absolutely horrible.

Re:manos hands of fate

[Markzilla]

The master would not approve of this posting -Torgo

Good Lord

[LochNess]

a bunch of /. Anonymous Cowards trying to advise people which movies they should see.

What's next, reviews of washing machines or vacuum cleaners?

return of the king

[Anonymous Coward]

not just best movie this year, but best movie I've ever seen.

Kill Bill

[bolind]

Easily the best movie I have seen in theatres this year. Can wait for the sequel.

Would like to see Bubba Ho-Tep, but since it's an indy film, I'm going to have a hard time finding it here in my shitty country.

Bo

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[InadequateCamel]

>Sorry, I know EVERYONE was thinking this too... exponentially, not logaritmically

Sorry, i know EVERYONE is thinking that they're essencially the same thing. Have you ever heard of a BODE plot?

Sure. Google and Altavista are essentially the same thing. Have you ever heard of a search engine?

:-)

all these sequels

[ghettoreb]

it's true, this *has* been a good year for movies

Unfortunately, very few of the movies mentioned in this thread are truly original. Looking through, I see a lot of sequels (although very impressive sequels, no doubt) and a lot of big-budget films.

these things put a lot of pressure on the directors to "carry on the box office success" (e.g. Jonathan Mostow freedom was no doubt constrained by how his movie [T3] had to meet T2's revenue). The result is that movies are no longer as dynamic a genre as other ways of artistic expression.

Most of the population is probably not as concerned about this as I am. However, the unexpected successes of several of Fox Searchlight's productions (low-budget, mostly foreign movies spotted by Fox's scouts that get imported & marketed for the US audience) shows that a rising part of the consumer base is interested in movies that look 'fresh'. Let's hope that this trend continues.

28 Days Later

[Danse]

I think it was a pretty damn good movie. A lot of people got kinda lost and didn't really understand what was going on, or at least didn't until the very end. It made sense though if you paid attention.

Worst: Jester Till, Best: Finding Nemo

[QS6dot2]

Nemo rules them all, closely followed by Tokyo Godfathers, ROTK and Pirates of the Caribbean.

The League of Extraordinary Suckiness

[Anonymous Coward]

Nuff said.

Matrix: The Musical - Dance, Mr Anderson!

[Channard]

Or maybe not.. but I liked the third. The mech battle sequences were a bit too long, but it had a suitable apocalyptic feel. For me, the real stinker was Reloaded - not just because of it's aimless wonky plot but because of the dire CGI. The Burly Brawl, for example, looked like a bunch of plastic dolls beating each other up. I wish Hollywood would learn that CGI is good for dinosaurs and monsters, but not to render humans.

Re:Matrix: The Musical - Dance, Mr Anderson!

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

I wish Hollywood would learn that CGI is good for dinosaurs and monsters, but not to render humans

Yes and no. There are many scenes in Hollywood movies that use CG humans that most viewers haven't noticed. The problem is that these scenes were far too complex to do as CG. There are some great shots in Spiderman that have a CG Spiderman that are 100% convincing. Unfortunately most of the CG Spidermen suck. Basically there's only a handful of people in the world who can animate humans realistically and there's not enough of them to go around. Some of the Matrix CG humans were good too - you probably didn't notice them.

Never liked Mr. Tarantino's work...

[stealth.c]

I watched Reservoir Dogs and felt a certain dis-ease. It felt like a very blatant attempt to manipulate my emotions and little else. It shocked and depressed, but ultimately said nothing. That, I'm afraid, is *not* art.

I watched Pulp Fiction. Samuel L. Jackson was excellent but there was little of him. At the end of it all, I felt as though I had wandered the streets of some wasting-away city, watching a dozen vaguely-related people interconnectedly f*ck up their lives. The story architecture had potential, but I failed to gain interest in any of the characters.

Then I heard about Kill Bill. Hours of gore without the slightest bit of exposition, characterization, or plot development. I made it a point to stay away.

The one work of Quentin Tarantino's that I didn't wholly dislike was in Desperado, where his character got shot in the head. It's hard to screw up that sort of thing. ;)

What concerns me is that there is no shortage of people gushing about his "genius" who fail to quantify "genius" aside from what a wonderful thing it is to have well-choreographed kung-fu, or how spectacular it is to have a gangster torture to death a police officer with a family. These people disturb me. They worship at the Tarantino altar and I see little reason why his films should be held in any regard higher than "Oh, well that was interesting. Could've used some substance."

Re:Never liked Mr. Tarantino's work...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should just stick to watching re-runs of bamby if you get so upset by graphic cinema.

You assume that good cinema is the one in which only happy feelings are portrayed. Happy cinema is boring deal with it, life is tough... and Tarantino takes it to an extreme.

Re:Never liked Mr. Tarantino's work...

[Anonymous Coward]

re-runs of bamby

Mmmm, bambi. James gets all the best girls.

Best - Step Into Liquid

[Anonymous Coward]

People surfing oil tanker wakes in the Houston shipping channel and 60+ foot waves on the Cortez Banks with no special effects or stunt doubles shouldn't be missed.

As seen this year

[mirko]

the best :

• Adaptation
• the 25th hour
• Hero (Ying Xiong)
• Kill Bill 1
• Mystic river
• Catch me if you can

the worst:

• Charlie's angels 2
• daredevil
• hulk
• terminatrix
• matrix[23]

Remain to be seen :

• Les triplettes de Bellleville
• ROTK

Re:As seen this year

[Anonymous Coward]

I forgot two good ones I actually loved : "Chicago" and "Pirates"

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[jrumney]

First of all "Ringu", the Japanese version, doesn't have the double meaning that "The Ring" has. In "The Ring" , the 'ring' is both the the telephone ring and also the halo of light that the girl saw as the lid was covered over the well. This is not the case in "Ringu".

Why not? Both the telephone and halo are present in the Japanese version IIRC, and the significance of the halo is emphasised in the name of the 3rd film - Ring 0.

Personally I felt that the American version was dumbed down and made into a more conventional teen horror film. It is still something new compared with Friday the 13th 17 (aka Scream 4), but not as different as the Japanese original.

Tarantino and Pixar

[black mariah]

Kill Bill vol 1 was awesome. I had no clue what to expect from it. I actually hadn't read much about it before going to see it opening day, but since it was Tarantino I was willing to wager my friend's free passes that it would be good. ;-) I loved it. I didn't think I'd see what amounted to two hours worth of KUNG FU EVIL DEAD! The first half of the movie seemed very WRONG. The dialogue, especially after the Bride fights Vernita Green, was BAD. But when you put it into the context of the second half of the movie, with the almost cartoonish tone, it makes a lot more sense and upon a second viewing, it fits in perfectly with everything else in the movie. I can't wait for vol 2. Finding Nemo! I don't think it has displaced Monsters Inc. as my favorite Pixar movie, but it definitely is Pixar's best work visually. I mean, they managed to make Ellen DeGeneres NOT annoy the living piss out of me. :D

Irreversible

[jthiesen98]

Irreversible was definitely the biggest surprise this year, and an excellent movie, too. Not for everyone, though.

Kill Bill is also worthy of mention. Looking forward to volume 2.

Next idea....

[jotaeleemeese]

Lets ask the Hollywood Film Academy or the Jury of the Cannes film festival what was the best software of the year.

I did not bother to read this thread, but I can almost see it: bands of nerds blabering about Lord of The RIngs and the Matrix, two overhyped projects that are only passable thanks to the lavish effects, without them they would be bare and identified by the lack of plot and general bad acting.

Re:Next idea....

[captainkibble]

Yeah because only professional critics have the right to say what is a good film. Cinema should all be about technical excellence and artistic merit. Entertainment should never come into it. In fact if a film is enjoyable it is actually a very bad film. You didn't read the thread but felt the need to be both a psychic and a pretentious arsehole all the same.

Re:Next idea....

[interstellar_donkey]

Shhhhh!!!!

A community might have an opinion about movies. Heavens!

Let's leave it up to the critics, they know what's best. It's better that way.

The next thing you know, they will be asking the man on the street what movie he or she liked. What horror!

Re:Next idea....

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why I love Slashdot.

"You didn't read the thread but felt the need to be both a psychic and a pretentious arsehole all the same"

What a great line. I hope the wanker in the original post is suitably humbled. Heh! If I wasn't in the office I would have burst out laughing.

And next we have...

(mod parent up)

[cypherwise]

Thank you for finally making the point that the "movie extras" on DVD are for the most part complete bullshit. Please mod parent up.

Re:(mod parent up)

[FinestLittleSpace]

Agreed whole heartedly, although the Se7en extras were stunningly done, as a piece of art at least...

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[blackwings]

>> in "The Ring", the girl had demonic origins - her parents weren't supposed to be able to have children, but they went overseas and came back with one.

The girl in Ringu probably had demonic origins too, it just wasn't in your face, just slightly hinted at.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0178868/board/thread/3 701869

Covers this interpretation pretty well.

Re:Surprises - Groundhog day

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget "Groundhog day" - Bill Murray - caught in a time warp -was as excellent as the movie - funny, romantic, with a sense of wonder.

Re:w00000000t

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU FAIL IT SHITBAG! GO BACK TO THE FAGGOT BRIGADE!!!!111 MARRY XMAS ALL YOU LUNIX SHITDOT SPOOGELOADS!!!!!111

A bad year except for....

[Quizo69]

Kill Bill Volume 1 - Beautiful art cinema
Lilja 4-Ever - Harrowing and one of the few movies to make me cry
28 Days Later - Brilliant low budget horror
Terminator 3 - A sequel that lived up to its predecessors
The Return Of The King - The entire trilogy is a masterpiece of modern cinema

As for the rest.... well I was severely disappointed by the Matrix sequels more than anything else. Those who respond that I "just don't get it" are missing the fact that while the IDEAS were sound, the EXECUTION left everything to be desired. A movie needs STORY, PLOT and AUDIENCE EMPATHY to be successful, not just eye candy, which while great doesn't keep you coming back over and over again.

Let's hope there's better fare in 2004.

Re:A bad year except for....

[nagora]

The Return Of The King - The entire trilogy is a masterpiece of modern cinema

I'd hate to see what you think is a bad movie then. Jackson couldn't direct traffic in a ghosttown. These were bad, bad, bad movies. So much for your idea that a movie needs more than eye-candy.

TWW

Re:A bad year except for....

[kryptkpr]

This must be a new kind of TROLL! The "I-didn't-like-LOTR-and-offer-no-explanatation-but -it-really-sucked-ass!" Troll... Did you watch it at the movie theater, or did you watch the CAM in front of your PC?

Re:A bad year except for....

[nagora]

Did you watch it at the movie theater

Paid to watch it in the movie theatre and didn't get a discount because half the continuity was left on the editing room floor until the DVD came out.

You want a reason: the direction was awful. Everyone that worked on these films deserves an Oscar for their field except Jackson who should be taken out and shot through the lungs. There's not a single well directed scene in the first movie and the second is only slightly better. What I've heard of the third indicates that it's the worst of the three.

TWW

Re:A bad year except for....

[crashnbur]

Audience empathy?! If an artist panders to his interpretation of what the audience wants, then the artist only bastardizes his own creation by altering it based on qualitative judgments that can not be wholly understood. You can not truly know what an audience wants or expects until the criticisms come rolling in. In my best estimation, no artist's work should pander to anyone except those directly involved in its development.

Regardless of the mass media's and general public's reaction to the Matrix sequels, I found them to be cinematically and artistically incredible. The Lord of the Rings sequels certainly defeat the Matrix based on cinematic quality, but as far as pure entertainment value, the Matrix wins for me. And as for educational purposes, the Matrix wins by a long shot, because no other movie (or trilogy) has ever encouraged the amount of deep thought that the Matrix has. Brilliant to the end, even if people don't like it... that's my opinion.

Re:A bad year except for....

[real_smiff]

You say: Film-makers need not try to make films that audiences enjoy.

Then I say: Fine, but don't complain when we say the film sucks!

Can't have it both ways :)

For me its Touching the Void

[Anonymous Coward]

Incredible story and fantastic reconstruction of events.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[cozziewozzie]

First of all "Ringu", the Japanese version, doesn't have the double meaning that "The Ring" has. In "The Ring" , the 'ring' is both the the telephone ring and also the halo of light that the girl saw as the lid was covered over the well. This is not the case in "Ringu".

I certainly thought it was, as did everyone else I know who saw the movie :)

The problem I have with the American version is that it's so.... American. You can simply see that the Hollywood producers took the original, added all sort of American goodness that would make it a successful movie, and through that the movie lost most of the point.

An example is the old addage that the audiences must have a real live villain in a movie if the movie is to be successful. A good example is Sauron, who appears out of nowhere in 'Return of the King'. Another example is when a girl who never spoke, and never appeared in the original Japanese version, suddenly shows up, face and all, and starts speaking, singing, dancing and riding a fucking magical broom :). The scary thing in the original is that you never knew what the people heard on the phone. When I saw the American version and the "You are all going to suffer", I wanted to puke. Cheap thrills.

Furthermore, the Japanese version is brilliant in the way it touches on the society. The Japanese society is a high-tech society. Gadgets, VCRs, phones and such are a part of everyday life more than anywhere else in the world (they even have electric toilet seats, for crying out loud!) Ringu took the most common appliances in a Japanese home (VCR, TV, phone) and turned them in instruments of terror. That is why the original had such a shocking effect, and why people were destroying their TVs after seeing the movie. I don't know of anyone who smashed their TV after watching the American version.

Furthermore, Ringu outlines the relationships between people in modern Japan. A woman seeks help from her estranged husband, who has a newer, younger girlfriend. They have a child. The interaction between these three is very interesting, and adds more tension to the plot. By watching their reactions, you can better comprehend the terror they must be feeling and adds to the impact of the movie. This concept is completely missing in the American version, which is a reason why it is so bland.

The Japanese version is also much more detailed. For exampe, in almost every frame, you can notice a clock. We are constantly reminded that the time is running out. The development of the characters is observable throughout the movie, thanks to excellent acting. And I don't think you understood at all the ending of Ringu, if you don't think that there is a twist there. Dude, there is a huge moral dilemma left in your stomach after the movie. But maybe you think that freeing a roaming demon (no connection to reality whatsoever) is more horrible than brutally murdering your own grandfather.

Best movies in 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

Return of the King
Kill Bill
Equilibrium
Underworld

Matrix = horseshit

Re:Best movies in 2003

[comet69]

yes.. i agree with you very much... the first 2 movies of the Matrix were pretty good... but they both developed so many sub-plots, that were NOT concluded whatsoever in the 3rd movie... damn bastards..

Azumi

[Vincman]

This has got to be one of the more flawless and better choreographed films, which had my attention all the way. It feels like a manga. If violence, blood and a beautiful asian heroine is your thing, then I highly recommend this movie. A review can be found here and another (more ltd. review) here.

Very few films comming out of Hollywood caught my imagination this year. Pirates of the Caribean and the Matrix were the biggest ones I guess, not neccessarily the best though. Some other good ones include Kill Bill Vol. 1, the Hulk, American Splendor, and of course, Sea Biscuit.

And I have very high expectations of Return of the King.

Hundreds of movies...

[Anonymous Coward]

...but only two-three mentioned by the crowd. Matrix, RotK, Kill Bill.
This is not for nerds - this is for the mainstream masses! Get a grip people. A true nerd community would have (probably) voted:

* Lilya 4-ever - contoversial, great picture, good actors.
* Identity - Nothing special movie-wise but the filmatisation was really good. Dark and sinister.
* The Hulk - Noone liked it but me. And I am a big fan of the 80's series. Very non-spiderman(=hollywood).
* Punch drunk love - Actually released 2002 but I was happily surprised by this one.

BTW, I really hated these movies:
*Jungle Book 2 - WTF!?!?!?!?! WTF!?!??!?!?!
*S.W.A.T. - Top Gun remake. Crappy acting. Farrel is a zombie. The intro scene is a total flopp (keyboard electric-guitarr sounds, soooo 80's), then it continues with a promise and ends in catastrophe.

Jeepers. I've only even SEEN five films all year.

[Fantastic Lad]

In no particular order. . .

Pirates of the Carribean. Dumb and light-weight. An all-round inconsequential film. But Johnny Depp was brilliant, lots of fun to watch. This film reminded me of all the light-weight Disney features which I loved when I was a kid. "Apple Dumpling Gang" and "The Cat From Outer Space". Stuff like that.

Two Towers - DVD extended version What a downer. I liked the theatrical release FAR more. Buffy-style humor, ("That's because I've got my axe planted in his nervous system!"), has NO place in Middle Earth. And watching Strider do the 'Horse Whisperer' in under 30 seconds was just barf-o-licious. Some cut scenes should STAY cut.

Matrix 2-3 I didn't mind either of these two. They weren't genius, but honestly. . , after that first one, where the heck do you go? The first film was a great metaphor for our current state of reality. The followups were speculations about where we go from here; it's hard to do that because we haven't done it yet while the first was based on experiences we've had and are currently having. Still, 2 and 3 did raise a lot of good grist which I'm sure the casual viewer completely missed. Not great cinema by any stretch, but food for thought. And of course, the mind-programming was thick in parts. The whole "Dying for Man's Sins" bit was a destructive message the first time around!

Terminator 3 This was the most incredibly stupid piece of shit I've seen in a long time. Though the mind-programming throughout was pretty obvious and had me glued with fascination through the whole film. (Hint to the Masters of the Universe: If you want your mind programming to stick, try putting it in a good script.) Favorite scene: "The destruction of the earth by comets (er, nukes), is inevitable. You will submit to the 'machines' in the new reality."

So basically, I don't watch a lot of films.

Oh, but I did just read A Wrinkle In Time. Holy smokes. That author was tuned the hell in! "IT" is an evil computer/brain which enslaves the world through the total control of all data and human activity? Tell me that's not channeled material! (Information Technologies, anyone?) This book was written in the sixties but it is completely loaded with stunning metaphor for how things really work today. This is a kid's book which talks about 5th dimensional reality, government tinkering in alien dominated secret sciences, higher awareness, and it has one of the most accurate understandings of the nature of the Dark Side I've seen in a long time. (The desire simply to submit to the authorities, give up free choice and sleepwalk into oblivion rather than to live, carefully observe objective reality and grow mentally/spiritually.) Amazing. I'd normally be shocked that such a book would make it into the education curriculum, (which it did), but for the cop-out ending where 'Love' will save us all. (It will, but not in the way the New Age buffoons think.) Those slight corruptions are all it takes to ruin an otherwise powerful message. (In much the same way the "Dying for Man's Sins" thing is a cop out). But other than that, this was easily the coolest 'film' I saw all year.

-FL

City of god

[Anonymous Coward]

How come no one mentionned it?
Easily the most living movie of this year.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[Deternal]

I see them both as good movies. But generally I like the Japaneese trilogy better then the American remake of them.

The japaneese movie is slow compared to the US version, but I like that.

Basically the differences is the thinking in the japaneese version, and the action in the us version.

Re:Best: LOTR/Matrix. Worst: LOTR/Matrix

[simonpage]

Bloody Hell, You must have a strong arm!

Touching The Void

[wilton]

Touching the Void is an amazing docu-drama film that will be opening in the States in January. It has been on in the UK for a few weeks and received fantastic reviews in the press and TV. I have never read a single bad comment on this film.

It is a true story, that will change you.

City of God

[Anonymous Coward]

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0317248/

Nothing else even comes close.

Charlie Angel 2

[GundamFreedom]

I hate charlie angel 2, scary movie 3 in this year... they are the worst movie I ever saw. I love Matrix 2 and 3, Finding Nemo and may be Lord of The Ring 3 (havent see it)

Re:Hulk, CGI

[adrianbaugh]

A whole CGI character seems pretty ambitious, but hey - WETA Digital got it right with Gollum three years ago, which is an eternity in the digital FX business. There's no excuse for shoddy CGI now.

Worst movie I saw

[szmccauley]

Chicago. Hands down. Okay, it came out in 2002, but I didn't see it until 2003. I can't believe that this piece of crap won oscars. Renee Zellweger was an embarrassment. Zeta-Jones should stick to making babies. No surprise that Richard Gere didn't fit into the genre. The only one who delivered an inspired musical rendition was John C Reily, for whom my opinion has been raised greatly.

Freddy VS Jason

[arock99]

It wasnt as good as i wanted it to be after having waited for it for so long but it was still a fun "popcorn" movie and I cant wait to see it again on DVD January 13th. Hulk was dissapointing and would have to be in the worst category while Timeline was pretty good and so was T3

The Matrix and its sequels

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Jackson did it right and the Wachowskis did not.

The interesting question, to me, is whether they did it at all. It was perhaps inevitable that conspiracy theories would arise over the origins of the script for a film like The Matrix, but some of those theories seem to have credibility this time.

I have to say that The Matrix was one of my favourite films of all time: original premise, original and not pointless special effects (and well done, too), a good cast. Did anyone else fail to spot that Elrond is Agent Smith until the closing credits of RotK, BTW? <sheepish look> That's testament to his acting ability, the make-up people on the films, how engrossed I was in both films, and my remarkably poor eyesight for you. :-)

The sequels to The Matrix would have been OK as free-standing sci-fi action flicks, but they weren't a patch on the original in terms of story or script. The ending was one of those you'll love or hate, but personally I'm in the latter camp. It was a bit like making Aliens, where the whole point is who survives at the end, and them making Alien3, where the first thing they do is... well, mess that up, frankly. I don't go for pseudo-religious tie-ins, particularly such unsubtle ones as that in the Matrix series. They had the overtones right in the first film, shoved too many random references in during the second, and then blew it in the latter half of the third.

That being the case, I have no difficult in believing that the storyline for the first film was indeed based on someone else's work, and the storyline for the second and third was based on what someone could produce for $$$s, long after the first was a done deal. I'd love to know what really happened, though I doubt we ever will; even if the first one wasn't the brothers, somebody will make enough money to support them forever in an out-of-court settlement that also includes a non-disclosure clause.

Re:The Matrix and its sequels

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anyone else fail to spot that Elrond is Agent Smith until the closing credits of RotK, BTW?

You're kidding, right? It was so obvious it was painful to watch Agent Elrond. One of the very few problems I have with LotR is some of the casting. For the most part, the casting was excellent, but I really didn't like their choices for some of the elves. I can't stand Liv Tyler at all, and I didn't really care for Hugo Weaving, either. While his portrayal of Elrond was pretty close to the mark, it still had some strange element of Agent Smith that crept into it.

Re:The Matrix and its sequels

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

While his portrayal of Elrond was pretty close to the mark, it still had some strange element of Agent Smith that crept into it.

OK, OK. I should have imagined him saying "As you can see, we've had our eye on you for some time now, Mister Baggins" in a very menacing voice, from behind cool elven shades. ;-)

Re:The Matrix and its sequels

[Anonymous Coward]

That's testament to his acting ability, the make-up people on the films, how engrossed I was in both films, and my remarkably poor eyesight for you. :-)

Umm, no. It's testament only to the poor eyesight part (or perhaps poor pattern recognition).

If Superman were real, you would be the guy who was fooled by Clark Kent wearing glasses.

Worst movie of 2003

[slavemowgli]

The return of the king. Seriously, all the movies sucked royally when compared to the books.

Re: Nightcrawler

[No Such Agency]

I know (IIRC) that he's only supposed to be able to *bamf* to places he can see, or places he's very familiar with (?) but I thought they used his power with remarkable restraint considering how FREAKING USEFUL he is :) I mean, he shouldn't have been able to rescue Rogue when the plane depressurized either, but it made for a great dramatic scene (I also really liked Jean Grey's "less is more" approach to dealing with the missiles).

Gigli is at the top of the charts...!

[bergeron76]

I'm glad I'm not the only person that thought that Gigli was interesting.

It's a chart topper!

6th place isn't _that_ bad.

Anger Management: worst I saw

[ScottSpeaks!]

There were plenty of crappy movies I didn't see, but my pal Nathan talked me into seeing Anger Management, and it turned out to be the most tediously un-funny thing I've seen in ages. Even Nathan, who usually likes adolescent and deliberately obnoxious comedy like Sandler's, hated it. I've never been so relieved to see the closing credits of a movie.

One exception

[ConceptJunkie]

The DVD extras on "The Fellowship of the Ring" were awesome. All that stuff about the design and creation of the weapons, armor, wardrobe, etc. were fascination. The pieces showing the camera trickery, props and forced perspective used to the make the actors change sizes was extremely interesting.

One thing I get tired of is featurettes describing the graphics, which invariably show some pasty-faced geek (like me) sitting in front of a computer all day making digital jellyfish or something. Once you've seen one, you've seen 'em all, but FotR didn't dwell on that topic. They gave you the really interesting background of making the movie and you come away appreciating was an incredible amount of work went into the making of it.

I haven't dug into the extras on TTT, but I expect they'll be of the same caliber.

Another DVD with good extras was "Heartbreakers" because it had the entire performance by Sigourney Weaver singing "Back in the U.S.S.R." in a fake Russian accent, which was worth the price of the movie by itself. Actually, I found some of the cut scenes in that movie to be quite good. Often you will notice little continuity errors, or apparent callbacks to something that doesn't exist which make a lot more sense when you see the extra scenes.

Having said that though, I agree with the poster that most DVD extras aren't worth the price. I often purchase used movies from the video store, and when given the choice between VHS for $5 and DVD for $12, I invariably go for the VHS, since the DVD extras are seldom compelling. Of course, the better picture quality, etc, of DVD's is worth something too, but if I'm that interested, I've probably already bought it new.

I have found that the novelty DVD extras is wearing off and that many of these extras aren't worth the effort. However, one thing I do really enjoy is the audio commentary. For instance, the audio commentary for "Evolution" was particularly entertaining because in addition to David Duchovney and Orlando Bloom busting on each other on screen, they were also doing it in the commentary and it was quite amusing. It's obvious they were having a lot of fun and it was enjoyable to hear. The audio commentary for the Simpsons DVD's is also really excellent because you learn a lot of background behind the show. Unfortunately, for Futurama, by season 2 it became painfully obvious that they'd run out of stuff to talk about, although the presence of the actors was a great addition.

Re:One exception

[kbielefe]

Orlando Bloom in Evolution!?! I think you mean Orlando Jones;)

The only thing about the LotR DVD extras that I didn't like is when I watched RotK on Wednesday my brain switched to a picture of that short lady double whenever you see only the back of a hobbit/dwarf with the front of a man/wizard and to a picture of that tall man double in the opposite situation. It ruined a lot of the illusion for me. Oh, well, at least I know there are no doubles in the book.

Re:One exception

[ConceptJunkie]

Oops! My bad.

Anyhow, you are right... whenever I watch FotR now I can clearly see that Ian McKellan is pulling a dummy in through the window and onto the desk.

However, it doesn't really ruin the illusion for me since so much of that movie was visualized exactly how I would have visualized it. It seems to me there is more than just good cinematography to that. Peter Jackson really grokked the story well enough that he could visualize it in a way that I would find meeting my expectations every time.

Re:One exception

[WNight]

The commentary on Clancy's latest - the one with Aflek and the nuke in the USA - was hilarious. He says essentially "Not bad for a movie based only loosely on my book". Then, at a few points "What were you thinking?!" to the director who was with him. You realize that Clancy was barely consulted and had never actually talked to the director.

Listening to Clancy run down all the dumb artistic crap, "well, we gave the bad guys this equipment because it looked better, and did this for the composition", that changes critical bits of story.

Very funny.

You didn't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

enough said.

Re:You didn't get it

[Bryan Ischo]

No, I didn't get it. If someone made a movie out of a series of gory car accidents I wouldn't get it either. And certainly a bunch of losers would call it the greatest movie of all time. But it would still suck.

Re:You didn't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

And everyone has a right to an opinion. Just because YOU didn't like the movie, doesn't mean it wasn't a good movie to others. YOUR opinion is no greater then anyone elses opinion.

I'm sure you'd lavish praise on movies that others would feel are total filth and not worth the media they're printed on. But it's vain and a sign of bloated self worth to think that anyone who likes a movie is a loser just because you didn't like it and can't see any worth in it. That, or you're a movie critic, who are about the most worthless people on the planet. =)

Go back to your temple in the sky, atop your pedestal of self importance.

I saw "Triplets" this past weekend

[May Kasahara]

The Triplets of Belleville was amazing-- one of the most imaginative animated features I've seen in years. If anyone here has the chance to see it, please do-- you won't be disappointed. I kind of wish this one was put in wider release...

Ryuhei Kitamura's Alive?

[WormholeFiend]

I guess noone's seen it...

Pomo pastiche piece

[Sunnan]

I really liked this movie.

Not mentioned yet....

[ncrantz]

Personally, I thought 2003 was a bad year for movies, Hulk, Xmen, and League of Extraodinary Gentlemen all missed the mark; badly. Pirates and Lord and Commander were slightly above the average Hollywood fare. The final Matrix installment was a silicon etched John Wayne hit the beach movie with delusions of grandeur.

Having not seen RTOK yet --
"A Mighty Wind" would be my hands down choice as best movie of 2003. Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara are absolutely charming as Mitch and Mickey. While it does not have the edge of "Spinal Tap", and it's dry spells, it also has some gags that are truly lol funny.

For "Spinal Tap" fans seeing Guest, McKean and Shearer in full mock folk mode as "The Folksmen" is worth the price of admission alone.

Now Lets get this thread to really degenerate:
My Top Ten All Time:

1. Casablanca
2. Metropolis 1928 Fritz Lang
3. Paths of Glory Kubrick 1957
4. Wings 1927
5. A Clockwork Orange
6. Dr. Strangelove
7. The African Queen
8. Treasure of the Sierra Madre
9. Too Kill a Mockingbird
10. Fargo

Humm... lots of Kubrick....

Best: City of God Worst: A.I. (always)

[Anonymous Coward]

This is an amazing Brazilian film that no one saw. I surprised to find out that most of the actors actually came from the drug infested slum outside of Rio. Great chase scene with a chicken.

as for the worst I still vote for A.I.

X-Men 2: X-Men United

[atheken]

I would say X2 was not "over-hyped" and had a great plot. They actually created a movie which was as good as the original, and I have to respect that.

Now, I haven't seen ROTK, which I will be at 9PM tonight, so everything could change...

X2 has my vote, for now.

Re:X-Men 2: X-Men United

[wolverine1999]

My vote is for X-Men 2, too.

It's a great movie and I bought the DVD.
X3 should be about Phoenix (but they should make
it about the two of them..)

Best and Worst

[superdan2k]

Best: Return of the King, Bubba Ho-Tep, Big Fish, Bruce Almighty

Worst: Matrix Reloaded, The Hulk, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

Andrew's Best & Worst

[thelizman]

There are a lot of really bad movies out there, but I'm adept at not going to really bad movies. I can only say that I was on a group outing with my buddy, who had the hots for some girl who was part of this Christian bible study group, so we all had no choice but to see Daddy Day Care - it was the only g-rated thing out there. This is why I don't hang out with other christians whenever I can help it.

What I can tell you about are the really good movies that just weren't great. Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions were good movies in and of themselves, but they failed to live up to the Matrix itself. The Wachowski brothers set to many precedents for style, action, story-line, and plot resolution in the first Matrix movie, that it was naturally expected that there'd be even more impressive camera tricks, FX, and martial arts moves. In the end, it came across as "Matrix::Rehashed". However, I'm convinced that for people who had never seen the Matrix, if they watched all three films back to back they'd love the whole series, because Reloaded and Revolutions are merely extensions of the first, not sequels in the sense we as Americans have come to expect.

The LotR series, by contrast, has not been a disappointment at all. Aside from the fact that it is an ass-numbing movie experience (3 hour movies, yikes), the LotR was a known quantity for Tolkein fans and neophytes alike. We knew the story line because the film outlines it in the beginning. That leaves the viewer to sit back and simple watch passively as events unfold. Therein, they are treated to simply incredible special effects, superb acting by all involved (especially Andy/Gollum), and a story line which allows good to triumph over evil (which is what everyone wants).

One movie I think was overlooked was Pirates of the Carribean. Johnny Depp (liberal anti-American punk though he is) did a wonderful job for Captain Jack Sparrow (departing fully from the cagy timid character roles of Ichibod Crane or Edward Scissorhands). The storyline had few holes in it, but was an otherwise rousing adventure that kept one on the edge of their seat.

Let's not forget Kill Bill,which was overhyped to hell, but had value as an icon of pop culture expression. I enjoyed some of the twists and turns of the movie, but overall it sucked.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines turned into the big "blah". I mean, the action was great, the acting was good, the FX was REALLY good, but we lacked the development of the SheTerminator. I would have liked more full frontal nudity on that one to be sure, but I digress: the lack of continuity of characters (except for the T1000 model) made this movie feel like a disconnected franchise piece. I hope to see more Terminator movies, simply because I find the story line compelling (it's the same premise as Matrix and Battlestar Galactica).

Battlestar Galactica: I thoroughly expected Sci Fi to fuck this up, but they've done something worse. They made a really good movie with action, special effects, complex characters, rich story lines, but then nixed the resolution and settled for denoumont. I mean, we're stuck at what should otherwise be the turning point of the story - where the humans get away and regroup. Okay, okay, we all know that this was a segway to a television series, but that's not assured. This could have gotten better treatment, but I'm still quite happy with what I did get, and if it turns into a series with this level of quality, I may ease up on my damnation of Sci Fi as the scourge of the Genre (but not until they bring back Farscape, Invisible Man, and buy up Firefly and put that back into production).

There was more than sci-fi/fantasy on the movie reels this year, so without further adeiu

Finding Nemo: Cute, funny, inventive, and without the patently typical Disney movie aftertaste we're so used to.

Hulk: Good movie, but not great. Erik Banna was too much the wimp in this movie. I liked him better when he was the Somali-hacking Delta operator in Blackhawk Down. Director Ang Lee de

Re:Andrew's Best & Worst

[Anonymous Coward]

The LotR series, by contrast, has not been a disappointment at all. Aside from the fact that it is an ass-numbing movie experience (3 hour movies, yikes),

Plus previews. Has anyone else seen that preview for the (B&W?! Am I drunk (yes), or was that whole preview in greyscale?) movie with the invaders from outer space in WWII-era America? Call me lame (on second thought, I'll just assume you have, you can save your posts, and we'll call it even), but that looks like a good movie.

the LotR was a known quantity for Tolkein fans and neophytes alike.

Cosplayers at today's show.

We knew the story line [...] superb acting by all involved (especially Andy/Gollum),

Yes!

and a story line which allows good to triumph over evil (which is what everyone wants).

NO! The only movie I've ever seen where I wanted the hero to live and good to triumph over evil was the Matrix.

With no evil, what do we rebel against? There must be perpetual evil for there to be any good in the world.

Also: Tears of the Sun was good, the Animatrix costs money (except for the four free episodes which give you the backstory, EXCEPT FOR FLIGHT OF THE OSIRIS, which was free for a while but now costs money (check your favourite illegal media site)), and Bruce Almighty was alright because I have a wannabe-god complex. (Wouldn't it be cool?) Also saw Charlie's Angels II. Save your money; I saw it for free and damned near mailed anthrax to someone. (Kidding. Thou shalt not mail anthrax.)

As an aside, I thought it was damned cool how all this Matrix shit is canonical. The Animatrix ties into the video game(s -- MMORPG due out soon) ties into the movies ties into whatever else they come out with. Anyone know why the Matrix still exists after a peace has been made?

20 self-lashes on me for excessive use of parentheses -- this is fucking Slashdot, not vi foo.c -- and 50 for posting drunk. Beg pardon.

All three = thumbs down

[illumina us]

Maybe I'm just a grouch but I was dissapointed with all three films. The Matrix: Reloaded was acceptable due to the fact that eveyone thought all loose endings would be tied in Matrix: Revolutions. However, Matrix: Revolutions was a horrible piece of crap. X-Men 2, is almost as good as Spiderman, which I neither enjoyed or condoned. Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, wow hollywood really screwed the pooch. They had a work of art to start with and work with, and the turned it into a normal hollywood flick. So many important scenes were skewed or cut, also so many things which were not in the book were added. This made me enjoy the movie much less than I thought I would going into the theater.

THERE WERE NO ELVES AT HELMS DEEP.
PIPPING DID NOT LIGHT THE BEACONS OF GONDOR.
ELROND DID NOT BRING THE SWORD TO ARAGORN.
MERRY WAS NOT IN THE FINAL BATTLE HE WAS IN THE HOUSE OF HEALING.
WHY WERE THE RANGERS NOT MENTIONED AT ALL?

That, in addition to many other flaws mad me quite angry during the film.

What about "Charlie Angels: Full Throttle"

[Agent 1994]

When i saw it i realized that it didnt worth a $0,30 CD or a Kazaa download. I expected it to be a kind of Mission Impossible clone but... it was unspeakable. You can take the first ten minutes as a warning of what's comming.

Re:The Matrix (it was ok, but needs some fixes)

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the stories as they stand were OK, but could have worked a lot better if they'd made just a couple changes. Things started going downhill as soon as they tried to explain Neo's abilities with 'magic' rather than some unparalleled ability to interface with machines.

SO:
At the end of Reloaded, before Morpheus' ship is blown, Neo - while still jacked in -- wakes up because of the commotion in the ship, and how they're all about to be blown up in the 'real' world. This is definitely unusual - most people can't be aware in both the Matrix and the real world at the same time. But The One can! Since he is still connected to the machine world, he can see both the 'real' and the electronic or 'matrix' versions of the sentinals. Using his matrix hacking skills, like at the end of movie 1, he mucks up the machines' processes. But, the shock of handling sensory input from both worlds sends him into a coma.

So then, in revolutions, things can work pretty much as they do now. When Neo wakes up, he realizes he can stay jacked in all the time. Almost none (if any -- it's been a while since I saw it) of the scenes in the movie where he sees the 'red' matrix are outside of a ship where he'd have access to a rig. Personally, I'd change the dock battle, because however cool it looked, all those sentinals would have swarmed over the humans in an open space like that. Why did they stay in formation?

A few other changes, not so much plot revision:
In reloaded, the first multi-Smith fight. At that point, Smith had learned how to replicate himself, but hadn't absorbed any 'major' characters we know of. The most powerful were probably agents. So why could he fight any more effectively than in Matrix 1? That scene could have been way cooler if Neo was ripping the Smiths apart, but there were so many that he makes no progress, and eventually has to leave. As it was, the scene was almost boring. If there are hundreds of Smiths, and all of them are invulnerable, why did he stick around so long? Later, when Smith starts absorbing more A-list matrix players, he becomes as tough (or tougher) than Neo. Then, the overwhelming force of the legion Smiths is much more apparent.

I also wanted to see what happened to the french guy (I'm not going to try to spell his name...I'll call him M). Did Smith get him? It's implied, since Smith gets everyone in the Matrix...unless M uses his train man to escape the Matrix. It would have been cool to see a bit of the machine world as M escapes, to see the impact the Smith revolt is having there, and hint at some of the turmoil in the machine world that leads to them being willing to deal with a human later.

Anyway, the stories could remain almost untouched but not rely on 'magic' to explain the events.

The Barbarian Invasions ..

[Anonymous Coward]

Best film this year

Just a story about an old university teacher who is looking back in its life.

He keeps talking about sex, politics (with cynism towards its old leftist days and towards today quasi-neocolonialism) and sex again.

Great film !!

Master and Commander

[Phoenix666]

Great movie, and very faithful to the Patrick O'Brien books. Anyone who loves the techno babble of Trek would love the nautical techno babble and minutiae in this one. Also great character development without any cloying romantic sidestory.

reality

[ForsakenRegex]

You may not be bothered by bad dialogue and
lack of continuity, but both issues remain
aspects of a poor film. The first Matrix movie
committed the fewest sins in this regard. The
dialogue was many times poorly written, but you
could follow the movie from start to finish,
and the action scenes at least had a purpose.
In the second movie, nearly every action scene
served only to show off special effects, and
the dialogue was terrible. The third movie had
a little more purpsoe to it's scenes, but it
still had major issues with common sense and
horrible dialogue.

The Matrix movies pale in comparison to any truly
good movies. They certianly aren't masterpieces.
The Seven Samurai is a masterpiece. The Usual
Suspects is a masterpiece. The Matrix movies are
wads of special effects run through an obfuscated
Perl generator of inanely cryptic dialogue.

... another exception

[Theaetetus]

Call me silly, but the Shreck 'deleted scenes' were great.
They've got three in there, none of which were actually rendered, just storyboarded. The first was just a different intro, didn't add much, but the other two were incredibly funny. They were put in as pitch sessions, with the writer showing the storyboards to the rest of the department, filling in all the voices himself, a really creative way to do the extras on the DVD.

Both were deleted, incidentally, because they had jokes that the kids wouldn't have gotten, but the adults would have laughed their asses off at.

-T

My top movies of the year

[RobFrontier]

LOTR:ROTK would be #1 (probably in my top 3 all time as well) Lost in Translation was a brilliant film. Daredevil The Missing (the only other actors who do westerns better are Duval, and Eastwood) Open Range was really underrated (see above) Also, Whalerider even though it was really a 2002 movie, it didn't come to my town till 2003.

Oh dear...

[theTerribleRobbo]

The gobstyk who modded this 'Insightful' deserves a frontal lobotomy.

'Funny', people, 'Funny'!

*Cheesy grin*

Here is your answer

[gosand]

I'm a bit puzzled that you seem to be extolling the virtues of a wire-fu flick as a pinnacle of realism. It's been a damn long time since I've seen a believable martial arts film.

I agree. Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon was awesome, but not realistic. But that was not meant to be realistic. Same with Kill Bill, which I really liked. That animation sequence in the middle was cool, and the way he went to black and white took some of the "blood" out of the shots.

Oh, back to my point. You want a real martial arts movie? The Last Samurai. Fan-fucking-tastic movie. I was a little disappointed at the last few scenes, and the way they couldn't leave well enough alone. They always have to Hollywood the fucking ending, just like in Cast Away. But The Last Samurai was really good, and very realistic. Kill Bill had a lot of good techniques, but Uma Thurman just wasn't believable with the sword. Many times she held it incorrectly (like a baseball bat). But in TLS, they covered everything pretty well. There were a few technicalities I caught (with the ninjas), but I can give them a little leeway because they did such a good job with the rest of it.

I know it is Tom Cruise, but go see it. It gets my vote for one of the year's best.

cat in the hat

[Anonymous Coward]

mike myers made it so bad i didn't want to pop in disc 2 of the 2 disc SVCD set. i didn't know it was mike myers until after the movie. i thought with the dense hair, stale jokes, and bad voices that it was robin williams.

i'm so glad i didn't pay $7.50 to go see it in the movie theatre like i did to go see elf, where the movie played 15 minutes late, and ran 20 minutes of commercials on top of playing late.

Re:cat in the hat

[Anonymous Coward]

don't rate a movie you've only seen on an illegal svcd

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[SablKnight]

I would have to agree with this. I love horror movies and I decorate on Halloween to excess, but as a result, very few horror movies actually scare me. The last one in a long time to do so was The Ring.

I saw Ringu afterwards, and I was not impressed. The American version did not significantly detract from the Japanese version; the only major deviations seemed to be cultural ones, aiming more at ideas that Americans would understand. Also, the camera work seemed far better, the editing and general flow made it far easier to suspend disbelief, and the effects were far more impactful than the lower-budget Japanese film. Hollywood may tend to dumb down stories, but they have pretty much perfected the packaging.

Most people who have told me that Ringu was far better are the types who believe that anything Japanese is inherently better than anything American, who will watch (and buy) any crap anime that is released. Eventually these people either go bankrupt from the horrendous import markup, or come to their senses and realize that the Japanese are just as capable of producing worthless crap as we are and acquire a little taste.

Disclaimer: I do appreciate many aspects of Japanese culture. I own a number of Anime titles and have attended Anime conventions. I have seen enough to realize that while there are many good series, OAVs, and movies, there are far more examples of things that are not worth the price of a CD-R to burn the fansub on.

-SablKnight

MST3K

[mcon1]

that website is very interesting. Manos Hands of Fate gets 2nd? ok it was a dumb movie, but it made for a helarious Mystery Science Theatre 3000.

Re:MST3K

[geoffspear]

Yes, but can you honestly say that you could sit through the actual, non-MST version of that movie without suffering immensely?

After seeing that episode, I just couldn't understand how they could refuse to do Plan 9 From Outer Space because it's just too horrible, but they had no problem with doing Manos.

the movie so bad everyone forgot it?

[m33p]

With over 700 messages in this thread, only *two* mentions of Gigli so far!

$ lynx -dump 'http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=89873&cid =0&pid=0&startat=&threshold=-1&mode=flat&commentso rt=0&op=Change' | grep -ic gigli

2

Re:the movie so bad everyone forgot it?

[Anonymous Coward]

is it fair to vote for a worst movie if
you have not actually seen it ?
i'm sure Gigli is that bad but i'm not
voting for it, even though it may deserve the
title of worst. Let's leave the WORST TITLE
poll to the professional movie critics who have
ACTUALLY seen it.

with this in mind, the worst movie i have
ACTUALLY seen, is The Hulk.

GPK

[Mongoose Disciple]

Honestly, as bad as From Justin To Kelly could ever be (and probably is), if you believe it's the worst movie of all time you clearly haven't seen Garbage Pail Kids: The Movie.

I'm too slothy to look it up on imdb at the moment, but trust me. Soooo bad.

The Matrix sequels "chose the blue pill..."

[Anonymous Coward]

see subject line...

Bad Santa good - Matrix sequels WTF?!

[bushda]

I came into 2003 waiting anxiously like many people for the Matrix sequels. Matrix Reloaded was okay, but it should've set off a big warning sign in my head. I came out of Matrix 1 wanting more and excited for anything else they could give me. OTOH I came out of Matrix Reloaded without any excitement at all for any more, yet on our honeymoon my wife and I found ourselves at the Downtown Disney theater watching Matrix Revolutions. When it was done we both walked out shaking our heads wondering what the hell we'd just seen. We hated it and both felt that if Matrix 3 was the first movie instead of the 3rd - there never would've been a second Matrix. Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad!

Elf was extremely good, and is bound to topple Scrooged! as the most played Christmas movie on broadcast TV in probably 2005. (I'm guessing that HBO / Cinemax / Showtime will play it to death for 2004.)

Cat In The Hat... When did the Cat become a Jewish woman? Mike Myers seemed confused as to what voice he was trying to use. It would've been better as "Austin Powers 4 - The Hairball Myers Coughed Up." My wife liked it, my step-son liked it, I sat there praying for it to be over soon.

September, aka Bad Slasher Movie Month, brought a movie my wife wanted to see, but I didn't - The Order. I reluctantly went to see it with her, and when it was over she didn't really like it, and I loved it. Very interesting, bizarre film. I can probably blame my Catholic up-bringing on liking this one.

I also saw League Of Extrordinary Gentlemen, Tomb Raider 2, Scary Movie 3, American Wedding, Haunted Mansion, Legally Blonde 2, Pirates Of The Caribbean, Dumb And Dumberer, Daddy Day Care, Bruce Almighty, Finding Nemo, Anger Management, Holes, Identity, Charlie Angels Full Throttle, View From The Top, Blue Collar Comedy Tour - The Movie, The Core, Old School, and Kangaroo Jack. Some like The Core blew me away. Other's like Kangaroo Jack seemed to be movies where I felt like I was doing time as a parent.

In the end though - the movie that sticks in my mind the most as one that I really enjoyed (probably because it was the last one I saw) was Bad Santa. It's not trying to win an academy award - it's just trying to make you laugh, and it truly succeeded with me.

Did I really see 26 movies in theaters this year?! (Can't imagine how many I saw on video too)

That'll be 27 before the end of the year - have to see Return Of The King!

Best of 2003

[Anonymous Coward]

The Last Samurai
I didn't see anyone else mention this one? Am I the only one that was seriously touched by this movie?

LotR: Return of the King

Lost in Translation
Truly exceptional! But can someone tell me what the opening shot was all about?

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
A very fun watch.

X2
I didn't like the first one. Maybe because too much time introducting the characters, leaving no for a decent story. X2, on the other hand, was a good action movie.

Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Very entertaining.

The Italian Job
Good action movie. If you like this, I'd recommend the even better Ocean 11. (The new one, I haven't seen the old Ocean 11.)

Love Actually
If you're yearning for comedy, I found this one hilareous

Deadly Surprise - Lost in Translation

[mykepredko]

I'm of two minds regarding Lost in Translation - having found myself in a very similar situation to Bill Murray's character, stuck in the Tokyo Dome Hotel unable to sleep at night, during the day being dragged around to incomprehensible meetings during the day and expected to party into the wee hours, I could totally relate.

Murray's acting was perfect and Coppola's direction really gave me a feeling of being back there.

The problem is, the movie's boring - cut out 75% of the shots staring at the Tokyo skyline and Murray looking angst (the viewer gets it already) and it would probably be hands down, the best film of the year.

I saw it with my wife and never being in this situation she just couldn't relate to what was being portrayed and how it was done. She ended up just being bored by the movie and I think that's reason why people either are amazed by it or hate it.

myke

Poor Netflix people...

[pen]

Am I the only one who is picturing Netflix staff scratching their heads over sudden spikes in demand for some movies?

Re:Ice Age

[octalgirl]

I'm a big Pixar/Toy Story fan, and I really liked Nemo too. But I happened to rent both DVDs a week apart and think that Ice Age (2002)really won out. It's made by Fox Home Entertainment, and not Pixar, but they really nailed it on the animation, the sweet story, the subtle adult humor, etc. It has more of a Monsters flair, which was also great. The second DVD, for those into animation, includes multimode cuts of the movie - showing how the animation is framed in before the finished product. I was really impressed and don't think the movie got a fair shake competing with Pixar.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[RealProgrammer]

But it doesn't give you an overdose of special effects - I don't think there has been such clever editing in a horror movie since the first big Dracula movie.

I actually almost mentioned both of those points - the careful restraint of special effects and the (first?) b&w Dracula. I decided I didn't know who played the Count in the movie I remember. That one gave me a fright enema, too. I was 9, but I literally checked under the bed that night after watching it in mid-afternoon.

this aint. tech stuff , this aint people magazine

[Anonymous Coward]

this aint. tech stuff , this aint people magazine

Re:The Matrix (it was ok, but needs some fixes)

[Anonymous Coward]

You make some excellent points. I think you should work up a patch and submit it to the Matrix kernel mailing list to see if Morpheus will upload your ideas into the development tree.

On a personal note, the only trouble I have with the whole Matrix thing is that -- well, like, I hate to break it to a bunch of you but -- IT'S NOT REAL! There, I went and said it. I feel like I just told Virginia that there's no Santa Claus...

Worst Movie: The Battle of Baghdad

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially the CNN release, haven't seen the Fox News release though

On UK national TV on Christmas Day...

[rklrkl]

Just a note for folks who haven't checked their UK Christmas TV mags - Belleville Rendez-Vous is on BBC 2 on Christmas Day.

Dreamcatcher

[obidonn]

Of all the bad movies I've seen this year Dreamcatcher had to be the worst. If you haven't seen it yet, get some cynical friends together and give it a view. It's hilariously bad. Ooby ooby doo, we gah some work to dooooo!

Re:Dreamcatcher

[CrackHappy]

You obviously haven't read the book, but I also agree with you. I cannot imagine that anyone would like this movie without having read the book first, simply because it is a pretty damned literal translation, and as you know, books do NOT translate well to film.

My picks

[supabeast!]

Whale Rider: Low budget yet high quality, with endearing characters and a powerful, touching storyline.

Master and Commander: Finally, Hollywood stops bowing down to minority interests and makes a cool war movie about a bunch of guys on ships kicking ass. No romance, no attempts to be redeeming or have a moral, just a bunch of men at sea doing their job.

The rest seemed pretty lame. "Terminator 3" was not the huge let down that I expected, but I cannot say that it was good. "Finding Nemo" would have been good if it hadn't had the same plot Pixar used in both "Toy Story" movies and "Monsters Inc." I would love to see Pixar do something other than cute character gets lost, hijinks ensue.

Really ought to set responsible expectations...

[iasenko]

I'm risking burning off all my karma in one glorious flash, but this has been nagging at me for a very long time.

I've heard many peers whose opinions I typically respect, as well as many ignorant trolls claim the Matrix trilogy was shit the instant it became a trilogy. Really, I think people should step off their holy soap-boxes and consider for just one moment what makes the first movie better than the second or third.

Looking back on the first movie, very little happens. Very little is revealed. The movie was written with vague exchange after vague exchange, with the bulk of the movie taken up by a communal admiration of visuals. What were the brilliant performances from the Matrix? Lawrence Fishburn as an educated black man who gets Neo to take drugs, get scared by lightning, jump off a building (all the cool kids are doing it...), and get his ass handed to him? Is that air you're breathing? Well, presumably yes. Unless I'm not breathing at all in which case this isn't happening. Next question?

Of the cast of the Matrix, how many survive? Perhaps that's the best part of the movie, that the actors each have no more than a few lines (perhaps as profound as "It's my way or the highway" or even "Shut up". Then again, there's Cipher, who gives us "Ignorance is bliss"). Do Epoch and Switch believe in anything? If programs can go against their programming, why does Smith even bother chasing people? Why not just decompile himself?

The Matrix was a great sci-fi movie. I'm not disputing that--I own it and adore it. However, I don't watch The Matrix to find Jesus. It's not a Platonic dialogue, and it's not a chapter of the Tao Te Ching. I watch The Matrix because I enjoy science fiction. As a science fiction movie it is far more than adequate; it has action, suspense, stunning visuals, and not enough character development to make you question anything.

Why do I then think Reloaded and Revolutions are adequate as well? Reloaded is the substance that was missing from the Matrix...the characters we have are developed and we see that they are flawed. Revolutions lets these characters follow their own paths and do what they need to do. Reeves did a great job as the patchwork messiah of a terribly...human civilization. Bad actor jokes notwithstanding, he is confused, unsure, and underneath it all human. He doesn't always have a witty comeback, and sometimes he has to play superhero--if I were in that position I might not stay sane at all considering that I have a foot-long spike in my head that's letting me fight with an invincible program who sneers like no other, and the fate of humanity rests on my ability to think the crap out of a RAM chip somewhere. He never claims he's brilliant--he's a programmer for some huge corporation (maybe he's on the team that codes rpc for Windows), and he never claims he's wise--look how he just follows a squad of goth pirates just because his computer told him.

The Matrix wasn't a perfect movie. I don't understand how one can compare the sequels to the original and come out with an unfavorable opinion. The trolls who endlessly rail against the sequels don't have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to the superiority of the original. They're movies, not religion. If they are canon to you, perhaps you should invest your faith in a religion less lacking in...substance.

Just another RE clone

[Rudy Rodarte]

I saw this and Cabin Fever pretty close to one another. All I could think about was Resident Evil. In fact, I have a JE saying the exact same thing after watching it. Yes, it was good fun, but still. I have seen this one before, first on my brother's PS1, then on my gamecube, and then on the movies.

Re:Just another RE clone

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, but you forget this obvious rip off of the resident evil video game.

Cat in the Hat - Worst

[sdcharle]

I haven't even seen it, but somehow even the sight of Mike Myers as the Cat in the Hat strikes terror and loathing into my very soul. I read recently that dragons were actually a composite of the things that terrified early humans the most: predatory cats like lions and tigers, venomous serpents, with the wings thrown in for extra terror, and I think Mike Meyers as the Cat in The Hat is some similar nightmare anti-ideal.

I think the Cat in The Hat would have worked better as a horror film, with the cat being a Pennywise-type character. The horrible things Hollywood inflicts on the little kids...

Re:Cat in the Hat - Worst

[objekt]

You haven't seen it? Then STFU!

Re:Cat in the Hat - Worst

[sdcharle]

STFU? See the freaking...what did you intend 'U' to stand for there, Mike?

Re:Cat in the Hat - Worst

[objekt]

Universal movie ;-)

Re:Hulk, CGI

[grgyle]

I disagree a bit. WETA and Gollum was a direct result of skill, care, and craftmanship. These will always transcend the run-of-the-mill crowd working with the same technology. You might as well say, Jack Nicholson got it right with acting...there is just no excuse for poor acting performances now.

***SPOILERS IN PARENT***

[SlightlyMadman]

Wow, good thing I've already read the books, although I still would have liked to wait to find out about the script changes until I see the movie.

If you're going to post spoilers, please don't bold them!

Re:***SPOILERS IN PARENT***

[MellowTigger]

The movie has been out for a whole 48 hours already. Why is it MillionthMonkey's fault that you haven't seen it yet? ;)

my review of kill bill

[ProfBooty]

Disclaimer: I am not a Quentin Tarantino fan in the least, but I did not want to hold that against this film. Plus when I saw the open shaw brothers credits, and preconcieved ideas I had disapeared. Since I teach/do martial arts I wasn't going to hold any the movie to any those standards, as it is ovbious that Tarantino is a fan of these films but hasn't done any martial arts himself. However, I do believe seeing the matrix trailer before the movie soured me on it (i think it gave way too much away) more than anything else.

I am a huge kung fu and chanbara films(samurai sword play movies) , usually the characters in these movies are simple and are motivated by revenge and thus character development takes a back seat to excellent action sequences. I really wanted to like this movie, in fact it had a number of my favourite old school stars in it, Gordon Liu (from my all time favorite kung fu movie, Shaolin Master Killer, aka the 36th Chamber) in a kato mask and Sonny Chiba.

This movie is not at all about plot, but instead about style as to be expected. The scenery, atmosphere, and camera work were excellent and gave it a great "feel".

Arguably, the biggest draw to this movie of course are the action sequences, and there in lies the problem.

I really couldnt figure out of this movie was a homage to, or a parody off these movies from the 60's and 70's, and I think that is the main reason that I really did not enjoy it. There were definatly elements of other films easily recognizable to a fan, but I really couldnt tell if Tarantino was paying homage, or just trying to make a cheap copy (not that these films are high art). The gore didn't bother me, many of the 60's/70's films had plenty of it, and were are spared many of the shots that would have had the worst of it. Heck with , Yuen Woo-Ping doing the choreography, I should have loved it, but I thought the sequences were horrible.

I know Tarantino has seen may of the japanese Chanbara films, and was mimicing many of them, but they just didnt feel the same because of the style of sword play. I don't think Yuen-Woo-Ping had seen enough of them, to give it the right feel. Again this probably would only be noticeable to someone who has seen a lot of them. If you want to see a movie with much much better swordplay in it, watch any of the Zatoichi films, or my favorite "The Sword of Doom", both of which have 1 person taking on 30 opponents at once.

I thought the anime like sequence was very effective, and the pedophilia scene spared the audience from what would have been a very awkward situtation if real actors had been used. Too much time was spent in Okinawa, which oddly enough isn't a place known for swordmaking.

I do like female action hero's, Sigourny Weaver in Aliens, Linda Hamilton in Terminator 1/2 pulled it off well. I don't think Uma Thurman had the screen presence to do it right, and I wonder if she hadn't been dating Tarantino, if she would have been in the film at all.

Minor things that annoyed me and don't effect this review, but 99.9% of the viewers wouldnt notice, were the horrible american accents for the japanese dialouge, so bad in fact I couldnt understand it. Japanese swords don't make metalic noises when you draw them, the clicking noises you hear when they flip the sword around are a sign of a loose blade (many japanese films do this) which is bad, and Uma held the sword wrong in every sequence.

The good:

The unsubtitled japanese dialoge was quite amusing. Great atmosphere, scenery.

3/10

Cold Mountain - go see it!

[a_monkey]

I was lucky enough to catch Cold Mountain in a sneak preview in Richmond a week ago, and it was, by far, the best movie I've seen all year. A lot of /.ers want to say Matrix or LOTR simply for goal of justifying the construction of those movies. Personally, only LOTR looks to be decent this year. Matrix blew major ass, was a total disappointment. The second one was decent, but failed in comparison to the first one. Kill Bill was decent, but was also overly simplistic. It's only redeeming quality was Uma Thurman and the direction- other than that the story was stupid, the gore was ridiculous and the dialogue was the same as every other Tarantino movie.

After a certain point, I would surmise for most people it's when they hit about 22 or 23 - they start to realize all the hollywood B.S. is mainly recycled crap from two decades ago. Rarely does a real gem come across, and Cold Mountain is that gem. Taken from Charles Frazier's brilliant book, and wonderfully acted, the dialogue, shots and characters really remind one what the silver screen can be like when it's done well.

Lord of the Rings will undoubtedly be great, don't get me wrong. But fantasy always takes second fiddler to a really great story set in the 'real world.' It's disappointing to see so many on here focusing on fantasy and comic books, losing the really good stories that are based in reality.

Best (so far), worst, and most disappointing

[Anonymous Meoward]

My best so far:

• American Splendor - very pleasant surprise
• The Station Agent - ditto
• Thirteen - one every teenager and parent should see
• Lost in Translation - Bill Murray rocks, and Scarlett Johannsen has finally come into her own

Worst so far:

• Singing Detective - not even a strong cast could get this piece of crap off the ground

Biggest Disappointment:

• 28 Days Later - a great idea, but Danny Boyle misdirects the whole thing. I wish George Romero was at the helm of this one instead.

  And the American ending is awful. (It's almost as much of a let-down as that last, weepy scene in Schindler's List.)

  *sigh* Ah, what might have been...

Not seen yet:

• RotK, natch. (Too busy, but that's changing)
• Matrix sequels (Too much bad press, avoiding)
• Bad Santa (I love Terry Zwigoff's work, so this one is on my list)

Precisely.

[2names]

In the first movie, Morpheus says that Neo feels that there is something wrong with the world and that he (Neo) has known this all his life. He (again, Neo) has always been semi-aware of the two worlds.

Best movies !

[Zanek]

You guys must be onc crack rock:
Matrix 2 was an awesome movie; Matrix 3 sucked ass
Lost in Translation was good movie
Timeline was underrated but ok movie
Pirates of Carribean was a great movie, totally made by Johnny Depp

Bubba Ho-Tep

[Snowdog668]

Rats, you got to it before I did. Bubba Ho-Tep was the first movie that came to mind when I read the subject. Not only the best movie that I've seen this year but the best I've seen in a long, long time. C'mon, Bruce Campbell playing an elderly Elvis, and making the role thought-provoking? How can you beat that? My only regret is that I didn't get into the theater in Chicago where Bruce made an appearance (all shows sold out before I could get there). I'm waiting (im)patiently for it to come out on DVD. Definately a must-have.

And now, A moment of silence for Filthy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone else miss the Filthy Critic?

Hamburger: The Motion Picture

[BigBlockMopar]

How soon they forget Battlefield Earth.

A very funny comedy could be made about the fast food industry, but Hamburger: The Motion Picture isn't it.

Attack of the clones extras

[bjdevil]

Yes, a lot of the extras from that DVD were garbage. However, the extra deleted scenes between Padme and Anakin on Naboo were interesting and important, IMO. They may have helped with that awful sequence in the theater, where Padme came off like a psycho lip slut. They fleshed out the relationship between them much better and made Padme seem much more like a real person, with a family with real problems, etc.

It wasn't Oscar-winning material, but it would've really helped that section out.

HULK SMASH! LOTR ... yawn

[seven of five]

One test of movie risk taking is how it polarizes opinion. Some say Hulk was good, some say it was awful (I liked it a lot). Matrix I was great eye candy but the scifi schlock philosophical babble was highschool cliche crap, so I passed on II & III. Daredevil was poop on a stick. Xmen II was so-so, good beginning, but after the first 45 minutes I just didn't care about whether any characters snuffed it or not. LOTR??? What a joke. Saw the first one on DVD. 90% of the muttery dialog was overwhelmed by the music. Was the sound engineer dead? Couldn't hear a word. Just my $.02, lost in the pile.....

Gladiator?!?!?!?

[McSpew]

I would place the opening of "Saving Private Ryan", the first Coliseum scene in "Gladiator", or the massacre in "Last of the Mohicans" well above this.

I haven't seen RotK yet, but Gladiator?

Don't get me wrong. I'm a huge fan of Ridley Scott, and I even liked GI Jane, but Gladiator was dreck, and the opening battle especially was lame. All throughout that battle, all I kept thinking was, "This was done sooo much better in Braveheart."

And it's not like Ridley Scott doesn't know how to make combat compelling. Blackhawk Down was riveting. Just gimme a break on that piece of claptrap Gladiator. Yech.

Re:Gladiator?!?!?!?

[the gnat]

You seem to be in the minority among people I've talked to. Anyway, I was referring to the phony re-enactment of the Roman vs. Carthaginian battle, where the gladiators beat the shit out of the guys coming after them on chariots. I could watch that scene by itself over and over again.

My list

[filmsmith]

The Last Samurai

Big Fish

28 Days Later (American Release)

American Splendor

Kill Bill

Seabiscuit

Bend it like Beckham (American Release)

School of Rock (surprisingly)

and Thirteen

I'm sure I've forgotten a few with as many as I've seen.

fs

Punch Drunk Love

[fred655321]

This is the best movie of 2003. If you saw it only once, you need to see it again. Adam Sandler is subtle and edgy, and Emily Watson is voluptuous and impossibly peculiar. The score is very fresh. I believe its theme is rooted in Existentialism -- perhaps too endearingly absurd to rank up there with the film adaptation of 'Nausea'.

debbie does canada

[dbizzle]

wow, what a release!

Performance is what counts

[cparisi]

Upon repeated viewings of Two Towers, I do not think the CGI was anything special. In some spots I think it actually looks bad. What made Gollum great was the performance of Andy Serkis, and of the performance of those interacting with him.

The performances outshine the CGI so much that you almost forget that CGI is there.

It also helps that the Gollum CGI character is not obviously non-human (unlike the giant comic-book looking Hulk)

Re:Performance is what counts

[Razor Blades are Not]

Hmm. I think you're smoking something if you think a twelve foot green monstrosity is obviously more "human" than a sallow skinned half-starved former hobbit-like creature.

They're both pretty inhuman to most of the rest of us.

Re:Performance is what counts

[cparisi]

You misunderstand. I am saying that the Hulk is more non-human (in other words: less human) than Gollum. Gollum could have easily been played by a person. A short, skinny, freaky-looking person, but still a person. The Hulk is obviously not somebody in green makeup.

Lost

[garymm]

Anybody vote for Lost In Translation? I really liked that movie. Also, L'Auberge Espagnole (a french movie, forgive me if I've mispelled it) was excellent. I'm hoping to see "elephant" this weekend. I've heard that's quite good. If you've never heard of any of these, check out an independent movie theater.

The worst of all expected movie

[X-Rayden]

Tomb Raider 2... its seam Police Academie was good ;)

Transcendentalism

[Anonymous Coward]

The badness of gigli transcends space and time, and thus, is the worst movie of 2003.

The Matrix Box Office

[Rostasan]

Numbers don't lie:

"The Matrix Revolutions" was a bad movie and the public quickly figured that out. On day 43 the OVER HYPED "Revolutions" dropped off the box office radar at 137 million.

That's half of "Reloaded's" box office draw and eventually even the UNDER HYPED "The Matrix" made 170 million. If it wasn't for the simultaneous release world wide "Revolutions" would never have made its money back. Look at the numbers and its obvious lots of people went to see it early on then reality hit and moviegoers stopped going.

Truth be told the sequels were over hyped and cashed in on a marketing concept instead of taking the chance and making a great film. This seems eerily familiar to another sci-fi franchise, but me cannot remember name.

Best Ever: Army of Darkness

[Ferox]

C-Mon! Any movie slashing zombies has to top any list (i.e. romance, drama, the stupid growing-up movies...)

The best line is where Bruce Campbell says "Hey! Whats that you go on your face?" right before he shovels dirt on the decapitated head of his enemy.

Awesome!

Legally Blonde 2! WOO HOO!

[Anonymous Coward]

Now THATS the kind-o-crap *I'm* talkin about!

"Kill Bill" or "What Would I Do Instead"

[Thub]

Several people have said Kill Bill was a very artistic movie, and Quinton made some very brave moves in this movie to do something different. As far as artistic goes, I would say he missed the mark he was shooting for. Maybe it was the acting; maybe it was the directing. Nope...I am pretty sure it was because it looked like the movie was cut together by an 8 year old on shrooms.

The action just got to be tedious for me. Ok so she cut of 20 or 30 arms and legs, decapitates 3 or 4 people, and flat out kills countless (I know one of you has counted how many, and that's cool, but I don't need to know the exact number) others. You know what? After about 5 or 6 Arms and legs, I got the point, and personally, from an "artistic" perspective, you save the beheadings for the final fight. I guess I am saying, I get it. She is good at killing people. Okay already.

I thought the script was weak. As much as it twisted and turned trying to be crafty and surprising, I was only surprised once. Coincidentally it was the one bright shining moment of the movie. When she spanked the boy and sent him home crying, I was surprised she didn't cut his sword arm off first. That was funny.

For me, the bottom line is this. I took 2 friends of mine to see this movie. Thank God I paid or I would still be hearing about it. Lisa said it sucked...bad...like Toxic Avenger bad, but without being so campie it was good. She gave it a -2 out of 5. Joe said "I would rather lick my dogs butt than watch that piece of" $#17 "movie again." I said that was pretty bad, and that I wouldn't be willing to do that, but I would lick his dogs paw...once...if it was dry out rather than see that movie again. So for me the question is "What would you be willing to lick rather than pay to see that movie again?"

my take

[CAIMLAS]

Best: (in my personal order)
Pirates of the Carribbian - wonderful, wonderful film. They need to get this script writer together with this director again, they do wonderful work: a stellar epic. This is, IMO, a good film all around, not just for this year.
LotR: RotK - despite the *spoiler alert* fact that they removed the Hobbiton battle and all Sauruman scenes and the seemingly endless emotional orations between Sam and Frodo (which reminded me a lot of "Anne of Green Gables" - hell on earth!), it's still one of the best of the year.
X-Men 2 - what can I say, I'm a comic geek. I still pretend in my mind that I'm Wolverine, and I'm 21. The fact that it was well done was fantastic.
Bruce Almighty - One of the better films Carrey has done, IMO. I laughed so hard it hurt during this film, and I usually do not laugh during movies - I don't tend to find most of them terribly funny or witty. This was both, and it managed to pull it off without resorting to too much trash humor. I'm a Carrey fan again, now that he's doing less shite like Me, Myself, and Irene.
A Guy Thing - Also a very funny movie. Jason Lee and Julia Stiles - two of my favorite actors. And Stiles is bloody hot to beat. The fact that I was getting married at roughly the same time as it came out increased its hilarity (and making it fairly intimidating at the same time).

Most of the above films will eventually end up on my shelves.

Worst: (in order of suckitude to not-so-suckitude)
Gigli - Ben Affleck and J-Lo. Both trying to act - and Affleck like a calm and cool italian. It can't get worse. I was groaning about 3 seconds into the previews, it was so bad (and I didn't even see the film) (no, I didn't watch it, but there's no way it could have been good, and IMDB reports it as the 6th WORST FILM EVER at 1.8/10 - only .1 better than greats such as Troll 2 and Space Mutiny - all said, I'm ashamed that two of the lowest 10 were this year.)
Daredevil - It had potential, it really did. The previews weren't too bad, it had the Alias chick in it... and Ben Affleck. What the fuck? I swear, everything that fool touches turns to swine filth. In my mind, he is no better typified than by his role in Mallrats - that, IMO, is the pinacle of his acting ability, being as that is quite probably his true colors. The fact that he seems to have been "given" roles that Harrison Ford would have done in his younger years (The Sum Of All Fears, Changing Lanes)
Hulk - They screwed up. It sucked.
Matrix: Revolutions - a horrible disappointment, and thus it finds itself on my Shit List. I thought they couldn't screw it up any worse than they did Reloaded, so I saw it. Boy was I wrong. What a dull, dull film. I almost got up and left half way through.
Matrix: Reloaded - Quite disappointing, overall. The encounters in Zion were anti-climatic, and the special effects and Neo fight scenes were way over done (and somewhat cheesy/noticeably rendered). After the original, this paled: though the highway scene was pretty intense, it didn't come close to the coolness of the Lobby Scene, which will go down through history as a turning point in how action movies are filmed.

Most of the "bad" films likely won't be watched again (if even for the first time, in a certain case), and if then, only because someone else rents/owns it and we've got nothing else for the evening.

Razors edge

[Dante]

Razor's Edge was the first attempt at non-comedy Murry ever did, it was a pet project of his and favorite novel of both his and mine. It has mixed results, but it's still one of my favorites.

Loved Matrix Revolutions

[Darth23]

I though Return of the King was over-rated. I liked it, just not as much as FOTR and TTT.

If I had a choice between seeign Matrix Revolutions again on the big screen and sitting through Return of the King, I'd go for the Matrix.

2003 faves:
X-men 2 - 9.5/10 I loved X-1 and I think X-2 was a great expansion of the movie incarnation of the franchise.

Finding Nemo - 9/10 Saw it opening weekend in a digital theater in Orlando. It looked AMAZING. I also loved Ellen DeGeneres' surprisingly touching performance. I'm getting all verplempkt now. :sniff:

Matix Reloaded - 8/10 The Architect scene KILLED the movie. I suppose he was necessary, but I never expected the Big Showdown in Reloaded to give me SAT flashbacks. Ergo, the dialogue was as interminable as it was pontifical, and should have been assiduously avoided.

Matrix Revolutions - 9/10!! OMG, I loved this movie. I don't understand why so many people blew it off. The battle for Zion was much better that anything I expected, and the inevitavle conlcusion (imo) [mostly] worked really well.

Lord of the Rings: Return of the Shakey-Cam - 8/10 :-( Everything in the movie looks great, until the swordfights start. "Quick cuts between scenes with lots of camera shaking is no basis for an onscreen sword fight."

I blame the 2nd or 3rd Unit Director who was probably in charge of that aspect of the production. Also, I knew about the 6 or 7 endings, but I didn't knw that I'd be waiting for about 50 minutes for the film to really kick in to gear.

Elf - 8.5/10 Cuter and less annoying than I expected. it gave me some Chirstmas Spirit.

Bad Santa - 7/10
He was a REALLY bad santa. I mostly like the movie, but some parts were just too crude and gross for me.

Bend it Like Beckham - 9/10

Whale Rider - 8.5/10

Timeline - 7.7/8
(Belive it or not. The production had a LOT of problems and the plot is a bit confused, but for some reason I really enjoyed it)

Least Favorite:
Pirates of the Caribbean - 6.8/10
I didn't HATE it, but it didn't really impress me. I was right there with the flick up until the pirates invaded the port town.

Underworld - 6.5/10.
The trailer looked SO amazing (for a Goth-ey Matrix rip off) The movie was pretty impressive for the budget, but it wasn't really as polished as it should have been.

Kill Bill vol. 1 - 4/10
All the Cool Kids love Tarantino. I just think he was sadisticly tortured too many times in school and is now fixated on that. If you thought the Stormtroopers in Star Wars had bad aim, take a look and the crowd of swordsmen throwing their limbs at Uma Thurman.

My favorites of the year:

[crashnbur]

I did not originally intend to mention all the 2003 movies I had seen, but after naming about ten of them, I kept wanting to mention another one. So, for the sake of completion, I checked a box office chart and started listing them all... sort of in order of best to worst, but not exactly. Maybe this will earn me a +1 Informative or something. In any case, I hope you find this useful, because I took about 15 minutes typing it up. :-)

---

The Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions -- As a 4.5-hour whole, one of the few greatest sequels of all time, and probably my favorite film of all time. I think separating the two parts by 5.5 months was a good business move, but ultimately it cost the finale quite a bit in that many fans have decided not to like it so much. I think that would have been very different had all 4.5 hours been told at once, even if they were still released as separate films (which, in the long run, I think would have made them more money at the box office... oh well).

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King -- I sat it at 12:01am on Wednesday and 1:30pm on Thursday. Another of the greatest sequels of all time. Except I'd stop the movie after the first time the screen fades and put the rest of the footage after the credits as an epilogue, for various reasons. I'll be quiet on that just because so many of you haven't seen it yet.

Identity was my favorite non-sequel movie of the year. Simply an amazingly well done psycho-thriller. If you haven't seen it and don't mind a little blood, I highly recommend it.

Basic was one of the best movies I had seen in a long time when I saw it, just because it left me asking what the hell just happened, yet I knew what had just happened. I thought it was a well put-together film, and I still haven't decided whether I should buy it or not.

The Rundown was much better than I expected it to be. I don't know why I liked it as much as I did, but it was immensely entertaining. The Rock surprised me, and Sean William Scott actually played his part well.

Phone Booth was very good. Simply an incredible performance by Colin Farrell to carry the movie. Another psycho-thriller (I guess I like those) that got my attention when I heard Kiefer Sutherland's voice.

Finding Nemo, of course, is one of the best animated films of all time. Disney is getting better and better with those.

X2: X-Men United was surprisingly good, enough so to get me into X-Men (again for the first time) and by the special edition 4-DVD set. (Another sequel, Legally Blonde 2, was even cheesier and therefore less entertaining than the first. Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, however, was surprisingly entertaining. I'm glad I went along for that ride. Terminator 3 was good for me. It fit along with the story, and the action was on par with what I expected. Good, not great.)

Dickie Roberts was surprisingly good. I highly recommend it to anyone who was addicted to TV at any time between the 1970s and 1990s. The plot is what can be expected from a David Spade comedy, but the end credits alone justify sitting through the film for any TV junkie. Daddy Day Care was also surpringly good, enough so to warrant my pondering of an Eddie Murphy comeback. Just Married was also a good comedy. I enjoyed it, anyway. Bringing Down the House, on the other hand, was somewhat disappointing but not altogether horrible.

Old School was also very funny, but not nearly as good a movie as I had hoped for. Will Ferrell makes us laugh, but that's all. I thought the same of ELF, except that it does rank pretty highly for me on the Christmas movie charts, so it gets a bonus point or two for being a holiday film.

The Italian Job makes my list just because I like that kind of movie. Heist movies are generally fun for me. For the same reason, I also liked Matchstick Men quite a bit.

Bruce Almight

Haunted Mansion

[Dante]

"Terrence Stamp and Wallace Shawn gave spot-on performances." having been dragged to Haunted Mansion by my son and daughter, I was aghast at how trully terrible it was, but you are right Stamp and Shawn saved it from being the worst.

I haven't noticed anyone giving props to...

[crashnbur]

...that cinematic masterpiece Gigli!

The League sucked

[Kphrak]

I'll tell you what's not to like:

Everything exploded -- in the world of LXG, hitting the sidewalk with a hammer would probably blow up the entire town!

The title shorthand, "LXG" -- a lame attempt to make it sound "Xtreme".

Long, stilted dialog passages that sounded a hell of a lot like the Twilight Zone play I did in back in 7th grade. Captain Nemo's dialog, especially -- he sounded like he'd taken timing lessons from William Shatner ("I--WILL--KILL--YOU!").

Heroes that were badasses in the books (I never read the comic), most of whom were ordinary men, turned into uncoordinated superheroes who never have to work together. By this I mean that a problem occurs, so one superhero is like "this looks like a job...for _____!" He beats mindlessly at it for a while, then the enemy or problem changes, and another hero says, "Stand back, watch what I can do!" Then she beats at it for a while.

A plot that made no sense. They go to Venice, where their aircraft-carrier-sized submarine slips through canals, and under the Bridge of Sighs. Venice erupts into a giant mushroom cloud, everything explodes, and then they yell out "Venice still stands!" Then they go to Mongolia, or Siberia, somewhere with snow because the producer still had some CGI budget left.

This is possibly one of the worst duds this year -- probably even worse than Matrix: Reloaded. It sounds like you enjoyed seeing the Steampunk world that the artists produced (which was pretty nifty-looking), but art alone does not a movie make. The fact is, this only made it to the big screen because Sean Connery supported it...and even he looked lost and confused in this bomb.

the length of films

[CAIMLAS]

Does anyone else think it's interesting how films seem to be getting much, much longer? There have been numerous 2+ hour films in the last year or two, and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Kill Bill (vol 1), the second two Matrix films, all three LotR films, and seemably a couple others. Are people's attention spans getting longer again (due to the internet vs. TV, maybe?), or is this just a trend of a series of 3 3-hour 'compilation' stories?

At any rate, I'm not sure if I like it or dislike it. Part of me enjoys being able to have 3 hours of film to properly tell a story; another part of me thinks that they intentionally pad the films to make them longer (as with LotR and the overly-emotional and excessive dialog at times); yet a third part of me wonders, "Where's the goddamn intermission, I've got to piss!" - they did have intermissions back in the day for really long films. Why not now? It's painful to sit there with a full bladder, but more often than not, it's preferable to missing 5+ minutes of a film you paid $7+ to see (more if you're on a date).

Re:the length of films

[Eil]

At any rate, I'm not sure if I like it or dislike it. Part of me enjoys being able to have 3 hours of film to properly tell a story; another part of me thinks that they intentionally pad the films to make them longer (as with LotR and the overly-emotional and excessive dialog at times);

Have you read the LoTR trilogy? If so, you should instead be amazed that they actually managed to fit 95% of the story into a mere 9 hours of dialogue and action and it was one of the best film-making achievements of all time.

That said, I believe that the director, Peter Jackson, never intended for the shorter theatrical cuts to be the "official versions" of the movies, contrary to standard Hollywood practice. (I have evidence to support this theory, but not the time to present it.) I'm actually going to see The Return of the King this weekend with my Wife, against my will. Why? Because, like you, I don't want to sit in the theatre for three hours just to see a downsized version. I'm a pretty patient person and I'd rather wait a year to see the "real" version on the extended DVD set so that I can watch the first 2-hour disc and then watch the other 2 hours the next night.

Re:the length of films

[Anonymous Coward]

It's well known that theatres make almost all of their profits from concessions and not from admission prices. So it does seem like the cinemas have a financial incentive to throw in an intermission, at least in 3hour+ films. But the studios and distribution companies make their money based on ticket sales. Often, in order to get the top draw films on the opening weekend, theatres agree to a minimum number of showings. Intermissions would prevent the theatres from showing the film as often as they are required to. If they can't show the films enough, they can't get the top draw films, and then there's no one at the theatre to purchase popcorn.

thank you, AC

[Mr.Mustard]

for posting my thoughts for me.

indeed

[Mr.Mustard]

Both the movie and the theater deserve your support.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[Moofie]

I liked them both, for different reasons. I really enjoyed comparing and contrasting the two approaches to the story.

I just about wet myself on both, when the little girl came to talk to the ex-husband, right there towards the end.

Y'all know what I'm talking about.

Skeeved. Me. Out.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[Moofie]

Er, I've seen RotK twice.

Sauron never appeared.

What are you talking about?

Slashdot tastes

[ccp]

At the beginning of the year there was excitement about parts 2 and 3 of The Matrix triology, X-Men 2, and of course, LOTR: Return of the King.

For any near normal human being, these would be strong candidates for the worst film sight unseen.
Was there any doubt?
Or are we just talking about childish nonsense movies?

Cheers,

what am I missing?

[Ender Ryan]

Legolas grabbed onto a moving horse... And... Someone please explain the cool/orgytastic nature of said grabbing onto moving horse.

Re: Nightcrawler

[Anonymous Coward]

(after tying a towel around my neck and pulling on the "Fan Boy" T-Shirt)

Actually, Nightcrawler has little or no physical limitations about teleporting somewhere he can't see: It's entirely mental, psychological, and a safety issue.

According to Marvel Lore, Nightcrawler does not use the "visualize where I want to teleport" method, but instead uses the "I want to go 3.45 meters to my left" method.

As teleporting into a wall would be very fatal, and definitely messy, then it's very risky for him to teleport where he can't see. He has done it a few times, though (Love those Power Stunts!)

Of course, I didn't see the side effect that teleporting with Nightcrawler is supposed to make you very barfy. It's still a kick ass special effect.

(takes off cape)

lol, man are you offbase

[Ender Ryan]

Yeesh, you are so off-base it lost its humour and found it again!

28 Days Later is not inspired by RE, not even in the slightest. In fact, 28 Days Later and RE are both in part inspired by a book written in 1954 by Richard Matheson, called I Am Legend.

Read it. It's fantastic.

I should have expected such a response.

[stealth.c]

Tarantino-pushers, I've observed, tend to assume--no matter WHAT argument is presented in dislike of his work--that the arguments are ACTUALLY in disfavor of gore or tough stories. It's taking all the self control I can muster to not fall into a tirade about the utter stupidity of that.

Mr. Anonymous Coward, did you READ MY POST AT ALL?

As I recall, I said that the reasons I didn't like his movies were the following: #1) Reservoir Dogs ultimately said nothing. #2) Pulp Fiction also said nothing, and was too disonnected to pull off meaningful characterization. #3) Kill Bill lacked ANYTHING (aside from well-crafted action sequences) that could ever be considered good cinema.

Saving Private Ryan was a moving film--one of my favorites--and I did NOT feel "happy" at the end of it. I was glad I watched it but was not "happy" about it. On the other hand, with every Tarantino movie I've seen, the only feeling I had at the end was: "I have stared at a screen for two hours and have accomplished nothing." My beef with his work is that most of it strikes me as empty.

You are wrong about what I "assume." I "assume" that good cinema--nay, good storytelling--is character-driven. The closest thing to that was Reservoir Dogs. Unfortunately, Quentin came up with a few interesting characters, and all he really did with them was "haha, all dead, have a nice day!" If that actually expresses something about how Quentin views the universe then fine--good job. But it's empty and false.

I'll agree that Tarantino takes what he does to an extreme, but when does that alone ever make a film any good?

No way. Watch first, read later.

[FireballFreddy]

Ack! Wrong, wrong, wrong! I am a firm believer that, if at all possible, you should see the movie first and read the book second. In my opinion watching the movie is like reading an abstract or cliff notes... it hits the main points and gives you a good idea of what happens without a major time investment (granted the investment for LotR is a bit higher than the norm!). Then if you like the ideas and plot you can progress to the book and find out what *really* happens.

I love the LotR book trilogy, but when watching RotK I honestly wished for a few seconds that I hadn't read the books... that all the explanations, twists and developments could have been new and surprising. Instead while I enjoyed it greatly I also caught myself thinking "Sam never put on the ring!" and "Why aren't Merry and Pippin taller from the Ent-draughts?" and "What about replanting the Shire?"

My experience with Harry Potter solidified my watch-first belief... I watched the first movie and loved it, so much so that I went out and bought the first four books (which I had been avoiding for that absurdly stupid geek reasoning "They're popular and thus must be evil."). Then I watched the second move (after reading the book) and had that same nitpicking experience. "Why is Harry falling out of the car? He never fell out of the car! That's gratuitous nonsense!"

The Hulk and How Much It Sucked

[ripcrd]

I took my son to see the Hulk because he begged me and I had heard the CGI was great, they had spent a lot of time in post production getting it right and I had heard Ang Lee was this great filmaker (I had not seen Crouching Tiger), etc.

It was HORRID. I have never seen such a piece of crap. The only thing that was good was the part where he changes into the Hulk. Not only did I want to throw something at the screen, I felt like I had 2 hours of my time stolen from me. I thought the director should be put in jail for letting such a total piece of crap loose on the world.

The dialog sucked, sucked, sucked. Jennifer Connelly was completely wasted in this movie. She had bad hair, bad clothes, worse lines.
The guy playing David Banner was wooden, worse lines, looked like he would trip over himself just walking around.
Nick Nolte was OK, but his character was over the top. When he turned into that water creature, that didn't make any sense. He should have turned into Magneto.
The general's character probably had the worst lines, and he was not believeable, nor was the defense contractor that wanted to kill the Hulk.
I couldn't buy Jennifer Connelly's character EVER having a relationship with Banner. I couldn't buy the whole act of Banner not having any feelings. Maybe the old comics went into this, but I was used to the Bill Bixby character more and thought it was more believable. At least Lou Farigno wasn't super duper sized Hulk. The movie Hulk was too much over the top.
I didn't like the way they jumped around in the timeline. The movie would have been better told from beginning to end and with out the POOR flashbacks.
The dog fight scene sucked and made little sense. If Banner's dad wanted to kill him because he was afraid of what he had become, why not get up close and kill him and then kill himself. That would make more sense. Also, why would he then try to turn himself into a super being?
Hulk was able to jump WAAAY too far. Physics defied.

There was so much wrong here I can't go into it all. The only redeeming value the movie had was the closing scene.

Re:Ice Age

[daeley]

Urf, really? Have to disagree with you there -- Ice Age couldn't hold a candle to Bug's Life, much less Monsters or Nemo. The only good parts of that movie were Scrat's. :)

Worst movie ever.

[elemental23]

My first thought when seeing the trailer for The Ring was much like everyone else: "Great, another teen slasher flick". But then I heard some good reviews so I thought I'd give it a chance and rented it. I learned a valuable lesson from this: Never second-guess myself this way.

The plot was completely non-sensical, the acting was sub-par, and it was totally predictable up to the obligatory "twist" ending that every teen movie these days seems to require. Maybe "worst movie ever" is a bit harsh, but it was pretty bad.

Re:Worst movie ever.

[alanmusician]

I'd sort of have to agree... I really wanted to like it, and I really wanted it to scare me. I watched alone, in the dark, but it didn't get to me at all for some reason. The way I felt after this movie was very much "Eh..." Heck, Mothman Prophecies scared me more than this, and I thought that movie was the dullest fright flick I'd seen.

I'd rented feardotcom also, and watched it next and found it not only more creepy, but more entertaining. I think normally I'd have been alot harder on certain plot devices in feardotcom if I hadn't just seen the The Ring, which for me was an utter sleeper. By the way, anyone else think it's weird how similar the plots were to these two films?

Maybe The Ring is better if everyone you know hasn't gone on to you about how scary it is.

Belleville Rendez-Vous

[singleantler]

And all UK'ers should watch it! It's very bizarre, extremely little dialogue (makes The Driver seem over-wordy), but you know exactly what's going on. Everything's caricature, beautifully drawn, and surreal.

My best film of the year so far. (LOTR III might knock it off the top spot tomorrow.)

Why not?

[jotaeleemeese]

It is the grand finale of many famous Operas.

Aida comes to mind.

Well handled is dramatically very powerful.

Oh, sorry, this is Hollywood we are talking about, silly me.

Realism.

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't seen the movie. But I think you may have it backwards. If people are being chopped up with swords and the like, realistically blood should be spraying all over the place. I'm sure you've heard descriptions of just how long your blood vessels would be if layed end to end. It takes a lot of pressure to push the blood around all those vessels and, when you slice open a major one, blood does spray everywhere. Unless you work in an Emergency Room, I'm guessing that you get most of your ideas of the "realism" of such a situation from other movies. By the descriptions I've heard so far, it sounds like that aspect of the movie may be very realistic (despite the fact that all the wire fighting surely is not). I wonder if they got the color of the blood right? Most movies tend to show blood, especially blood from deep wounds as very dark red. As I understand it, arterial blood from a deep wound -- that is, blood which is intended to go to your internal organs and is heavily oxygenated -- is a very bright red. Apparantly the color would be very surprising to those who have seen movie blood or even real blood from shallow wounds.

Re:Realism.

[Capt_Troy]

Well, to me, it looked something like what might happen if you filled a firetruck with cherry coolaid and turned on the hose.

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

[dbIII]

If I hadn't read the comic or seen the cast in other things I just would have thought it was a bad movie. With the story behind it and the acting talent (and I'm not talking about Sean Connery here) it had huge amounts of potential - but someone really stuffed up. It was certainly a pretty film, with lots of colourful CGI, costumes etc. - but that alone doesn't make it good movie. In the comic all of the characters had serious moral flaws that made them villians, and removing that to make the movie "nice" made a lot of the movie pointless and confusing - turning Hyde (as in Jekyl-Hyde) into a nicer Bruce Banner Hulk just didn't work.

It has the look of a plot worked out by a comittee over a liquid lunch aand written up by someone's cousin.

My biggest disappointments were the Matrix sequals.

On the other hand, the Animatrix was fantastic. Perhaps the politics of Hollywood feature films ruined the two sequels, while the Animatrix slipped under the radar. I really thought I was in Sunday school watching Matrix three - whence Neo slays his enemies with the jawbone of an Ass.

Cult classic - has a referece to "Zion" or "Naboo" or some other name from a religeon designed to get it's founder frequently laid.

Finding Nemo

[ethank]

This was the most surprisingly moving film of the year for me, and a lot of people I know as well. Even on repeat viewings I still notice things, and it still is moving. Evidence!

Dory: No. No, you can't. ... STOP! Please don't go away. Please? No one's ever stuck with me for so long before. And if you leave... if you leave... I just, I remember things better with you! I do, look! P. Sherman, forty-two... forty-two... I remember it, I do. It's there, I know it is, because when I look at you, I can feel it. And-and I look at you, and I... and I'm home! Please... I don't want that to go away. I don't want to forget.
Marlin: I'm sorry, Dory. But I... do.

Perhaps the most beautiful declaration of love in any movie of the year.

Oh, and Return of the King rocked.

Re:Hulk, CGI

[adrianbaugh]

There isn't an excuse for poor acting, really - leastways not when studios can spend millions to ensure they get the most talented actors in the world and thousands on film to shoot many takes. I think the problem is (a) studios would often hire someone well known rather than a good actor - Hulk Hogan movies, anyone? and (b) there's no real penalty for genuinely talented actors who get lazy and turn in a shoddy performance.

There still isn't an excuse for poor CGI - WETA may well have got it right through skill and craftsmanship but they still got it right - there's nothing to prevent movie companies getting their CGI from WETA.
Unlike actors where, to some extent, one particular actor's face may fit what the director has in mind, with CGI firms the images can be whatever they want so there really is no excuse for not using the best, especially in a movie that relies on CGI so heavily.

Yep, me too

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

If I weren't posting here I'd mod you Insightful. :-)

I tried, and failed, to read LotR twice before. I never got beyond Chapter 19,534: The Never-Ending Party.

After the first film came out, I knew that it actually was the kind of story I enjoy, and started reading the books again, getting past the party this time. I have no regrets at all about doing it in that order, I don't compare the books to the films (or vice versa), and personally, I actually found the films more entertaining, though it was interesting to see the real background and omitted details that are present in the book.

Lost in Translation: An American "mood movie"

[goofrider]

Here's what I wrote on IMDB today:

In my opinion, this movie is comparable to Kar-Wai Wong's movies -- mood movies. There's not much of a plot, the story doesn't advance much, there are many little insignificant (or even boring) little slices of life in the movie, all for a purpose of capturing a mood or a feeling.

Here in "Lost in Translation", that feeling it tried to capture is the feeling of being isolated and disconnected, particularly from the person you love most (their spouses). Obviously, being lost in the Japanese culture served only as a symbolism to that feeling.

There were quite a few ppl found it offensive how the movie poked fun @ the Japanese and how stereotypical those jokes were. Well, as stereotypical as the jokes were, they felt real (if you've ever been to Japan you'd know, e.g. it's really common and acceptable for Japanese men to go to strip clubs to socialize on a weekend). The fact that you might be offended clearly shows how different YOU are from THEM. Which is the purpose of those scenes (at least in the first half). They weren't meant to be condescending. And it's critical the the story and how those aforementioned feelings parallel each other.

In the beginning our main characters only see the differences between themselves and this foreign land around them, and it was amplified multifold by the utter loneliness they already felt before they got there, which they brought with them to this land. When Bob was at the photo shoot, and poke fun of the director's English, it was clear that he's not trying to be rude, but simply trying to make himself comfortable to survive the experience. ****** It was a parallel of his relationship with his wife. ****** You can immediately see that that's pretty much what his home life is like -- his wife babbling about things that he couldn't understand (like the tiles thing), while he cracks jokes just to show that he's at least listening and wonder how he ended up in this situation in the first place.

The young Charlotte wander around Tokyo alone in many little scenes. Many viewers found those scenes boring. I believe that they serve the purpose to show that maybe she was lonely and lost, but she's still ***searching****. Looking for a purpose, looking for a outlet. She hasn't given up on life and the possibilities like Bob Harris had.

It's rather important that you understand how she felt when she was talking to her friend (her mom??) on the phone and suddenly bursted into tears spontaneously. That's the kind of loneliness she brought with her to Tokyo, and just then and there did she fully realized it.

If you don't understand nor identify with that feeling, you probably won't enjoy the movie. I do believe the movie could've better explained their situations back at home so the audience can better understand the kind of loneliness they came from. But I understand that was what Sofia Coppola trying to do here: This is a movie that captures a feeling, and often times we don't know where our feeling came from and where it's going. This is a picture with no real beginning or a real ending, it's just a mood, a small snapshot of life. It's meant to be incomplete.

As much as Charlotte is still searching, Bob is still ***hoping***. He still loves his wife. The scene where he's in the bathtub and told her "I love you" after she hung up, the fact that his wife calls her at the most inconvinient time and he still picks up, etc. She's not just a responsibility to him, he still cares about her, he just doesn't know how to anymore.

And this is what the movie ultimately is about. It's not just about 2 strangers becoming friends for a few days in a foreign country and how they touched each other. It's about them discovering life and its possibilities once again. The real hope doesn't lie between them, but in each of them with their respective partner at home.

The romance felt very convincing. It's nice to see an American movie treat this May-October romance with self-awareness and realism. They bo

Worse.

[DAldredge]

DM Evil...

Rolls fist full of d20's...

Re:FF Connection

[DeadScreenSky]

Eh, interesting theory, but FF isn't exactly the originator of that kind of storyline. Hell, freaking Return of the Jedi was basically the same thing (farmboy Luke becoming a commander in the Rebel Alliance, then joining forces with his enemy Darth Vader to kill the bigger threat of the Emperor). You can say many things about the FF games, but plot/setting originality is not one of them. :D

And music similarities are nothing new, either. Only so many notes and beats out there in the world, especially if you are going for an epic yet videogamey score!

So maybe you can stay happy on an intellectual level, at the loss of a little emotion. :)

Hulk physics

[Eiki]

No, the real question is not how the Hulk manages to be heavy and light at the same time, but how he gains that mass in the first place - if Banner just 'inflates', the Hulk would weigh no more than he does! So where does the extra mass come from? And what about energy to move all of that mass around?

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[Anonymous Coward]

he appears in the Japanese version ;)

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[cozziewozzie]

Err, the rumours had it that Sauron would appear. Haven't seen the movie yet, I'll be really glad if I was wrong :)

Re:No way. Watch first, read later.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I love the LotR book trilogy, but when watching RotK I honestly wished for a few seconds that I hadn't read the books... that all the explanations, twists and developments could have been new and ..."

I have only read the Hobbit. I thought the movies were very well made, but they were made for those who read the books. I usually like a little surprise while watching a movie, but I felt the movies (except for the 1st one) had too much foreshadowing. I was always 15 minutes ahead of the movie.

CGI wasn't the problem.

[John Harrison]

The CGI in The Hulk didn't bother me at all. Oddly, the CGI in Spider-Man bothered me a lot. What bothered me about Hulk was the way the plot derailed and went into goofy-land for the last 30 minutes of the movie. What was going on with his father was never explained and didn't have much to do with the main plot of the movie. They should have saved the daddy stuff for a second movie and let this one stand on its own. I was enjoying it until his dad got super-powers.

re: no way. watch first, read later

[ed.han]

guys, nobody's gonna convince anybody of which sequence works best. for some people who are very good at visualizing while reading, the book first method works just fine. for those who have difficulty keeping the rather large number of characters straight, movies first makes more sense. i think that this really depends upon one's reading habits.

and FF: they were taller. there's a sequence b/n merry & pippin where that becomes clear.

while i'm of the movie first camp myself, i think it's a mistake to assume that process is best for everyone.

best movie of the year? i think that honor really ought to go to the extended edition of the two towers, actually.

ed

Russian Ark? Re:Slashdot tastes

[Sebastopol]

#2.

Did you expect anything less than a discussion that reads as: "I liked the matrix more than you did... no, i liked the matrix more than YOU did..."

This is a discussion mostly about hollywood blockbusters. Not a single indie film mentioned.

here are some great movies from the past few months, completely ignored due to lack of orcs or swords:

Lost in Translation: Scarlett is such a hottie and bill murray really CAN act.

American Splendor: any movie with R. Crumb is a winner.

The Russian Ark: longest single shot in history, which is far FAR more greater achievement than spending $300 million on CGI orcs.

Spider: Cronenberg never fails.

re: ug...

[ed.han]

in the fellowship of the ring extended edition ancillary materials, jackson explains that he and the co-writers had to determine what the basic story is, and that story was the destruction of the ring. the materials that did not support that were dropped. tom bombadil, done properly, would have added another 5-10 minutes of film time and ultimately, does not meet the criteria.

the absent shire scene in ROTK would be at least 10, possibly 15 minutes, done properly and honestly, it's already a pretty long movie w/ enough endings. for my part, it didn't really need yet another. but YMMV.

ed

Note

[Obiwan Kenobi]

Finding Nemo, of course, is one of the best animated films of all time. Disney is getting better and better with those.

Just for clarity, that's Pixar's baby. Disney just distributes and merchandises their films.

Disney hasn't had a good animated film out since Lilo and Stich, and let's not get into the muddled mess of Brother Bear. Treasure Planet anyone?

hey, ho, bombadil-o

[Doktor Memory]

The cutting out of Tom Bombadil, for one example, was a perfect example of mass-marketing(it would helped to understand the world of Tolkien better, the mythology, and the role the Ring had with regards to the powers that be). It didn't include a fight scene, and the potential for special effects was minimal, so it was cut.

It didn't hurt that it was also the most deadly boring part of the first book: a complete narrative non-sequitor that served only to drag out the story's opening act by about a hundred pages too many.

There are plenty of edits that Jackson(s) and Boyens made that are in questionable judgement, but I really can't fault them for this one. A Fellowship with the Bombadil scenes intact would have been a full 30 minutes longer to no visual or narrative benefit.

I imagine that Saruman's invasion of The Shire(my term for it) was cut because it was hard getting that many male hobbits in uniform as to compose two opposing army units.

No, the Scouring got cut because Jackson felt it added little to the story, and didn't think the movie could support an additional 60-minute (or more) conflict after the destruction of the Ring. This is certainly arguable, but Jackson has been saying it repeatedly since the movies entered production.

Re:hey, ho, bombadil-o

[perlchild]

We can agree to disagree on that one, I think. I felt the value of the scourging of the shire was EXACTLY to prove that the destruction of one source of evil(the ring) did not fix "the whole world" and that the forces of good(the fellowship) had to keep working at it.

I guess it's also a tribute to Jackson's talent that I could enjoy a Movie focused on casual viewers at all, since what interested me in the three movies required reading the book and the Silmarillion...

say what?!

[Doktor Memory]

Okay, "Ride with the Devil" was not exactly a rousing success, but "The Ice Storm" was a critical success, and as much of a commercial success as a tiny-budget film about 1970s suburban ennui could ever be. :)

Props for Bubba Ho-Tep!!!

[JimmytheGeek]

I actually wrote a fan letter to the Mighty Bruce and got a response.

Bubba played in Seattle longer than TIII. Of course, TIII sold more tickets while it was out, but still...

I have no use for self-satisfied camp. This movie was a goof, and almost by definition anything with an Elvis theme is camp. But the folks who made it gave it their best. They didn't mail it in, they didn't fail to care because it was just camp. There's no "just" to it at all. They put into it all they had, and I honor them for it. It was as magnificent as a tawdry low budget movie can be. I will be getting the DVD as well.

Two words

[Anonymous Coward]

Lou Ferrigno.

Re:Two words

[cparisi]

Lou is big, but not *quite* as big as the Hulk in the movie.

Re:Hulk, CGI

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no excuse for shoddy CGI now.

There sure as hell is an excuse.

"WETA was busy on LOTR"

"ILM was busy on (whatever the hell movie ILM are doing)"

"Pixar was busy on something interesting"

The people who can do good CGI don't have time to do every movie. Sometimes you have to switch to "Plan B".

Re:Ug.. (LOTR scene selection)

[TurboStar]

The cutting out of Tom Bombadil, for one example, was a perfect example of mass-marketing...
Tom Bombadil was cut because it wasn't about the ring. Galadriel's scene you refer to was her resisting the power of the ring. These scene selections had nothing to do with mass-marketing.

My Sunday Night Movie Club

[switchbaby]

For last two years, my girlfriends and I catch the flicks at a movie house that has lots of screens and a bar (how perfect is that?). I polled them and these are the movies that stuck most in our memories.

1) Man of La Mancha - we love Terry Gilliam and what red-blooded girl could pass up Johnny Depp? It was an interesting record of a beautifully failed experiment. The little footage that was shown, along with the animatics, made for informative viewing.

2) The Italian Job - fun genre movie with cute, cute, cute cars. We thought it was great to see an action/caper movie that didn't have the practically mandatory mostly unclothed female and/or ridiculous sex scene. Yes, I know I am on Slashdot, but as a geek (I do software/VFX) and a girl, it just gets a bit tiresome....but if we could get more semi-clad totally buff boys, objections might be retracted!

3) Whale Rider - what a pleasure it was to see magical realism used outside of Spanish fiction. There wasn't all that much CG (in fact, it was a low budget film) but the idea of evolving mythos of the Maori (New Zealand) (the symbiotic relationship of whales and the tribal head) was moving.

4) Cowboy Bebop - yeah, it was like a really long episode but we like Spike. Bad boy. Unpredictable. Good kung-fu. Purrrrrr.

5) The Friedmans - brilliantly executed documentary leaving you uncomfortably stranded on the island of ambivalence. We wanted to pick sides, if only to be able to say, hah! we disapprove and get in some righteous finger-pointing, but we couldn't. The disintegration of the Friedman family due to its past and present was disconcerting to witness.

6) Triplets of Belleville - We know it hasn't come out, but the trailer is so brilliant. As much as I love 3D, I still find pleasure in iconoclastic traditional animation (take that Disney!).

Best movies of 2003

[Senor_Albondigas]

I'd have to agree with the people who say LOTR:ROTK is probably the best movie of the year. Peter Jackson did a wonderful job with it, and leaving out the second half of the book from the movie was wonderful. Good job Peter Jackson! No need to have the audience bored halfway through the movie. But one movie I think a lot of people are forgetting about is Finding Nemo. In my opinion, this is truly a work of art. Finding Nemo is a story that anybody can enjoy. And it's not overly lengthy too. Sure, you see 6 and 7 year olds at LOTR, but personally, why bring a child to such a violent movie. It's not grotesque, but the imagery is still there. And it's long. Kids don't have that kind of attention span. Finding Nemo is a way to keep the kids amused, and even keep the guardians amused at the same time. Personally, I think Finding Nemo is another Pixar masterpiece, and it gets my vote as top film of the year. I don't exactly have a vote for the worst movie of the year, but I can say I have a "most disappointing movie of the year" vote, and it would go to the two Matrix sequels. They shall forever lie in the shadow of the first movie. The best part of the movies was Hugo Weaving's portrayal of Agent Smith. He realized he was in a B movie, and he made the most of it, giving the audience some entertainment. Although the movies weren't terrible, they were much below my expectations, and hence receives my declaration as most disappointing movies of 2003.

The Animatrix: The best comes in 9

[Kittichai]

These 9 short films are the best in every category. It does what we expected for the Matrix sequels. It complete the missing feeling that the film cannot fulfill, although it's easier to direct 10 minutes film than 2 hours. The directing, cinematography, soundtrack, the story, etc. Everything is so right where it should, it leads our emotion and experience to what we expect from "movie". Unlike the full-length film, every seconds of The Animatrix is so thrill that we cannot miss a frame. Deserves 9 ranks out of Top Ten movies of 2003

Re:The Matrix (it was ok, but needs some fixes)

[Hast]

The reason agent Smith became more powerful is because he is part of an equation. Agent Smith is there to balance Neo, so as Neo becomes more powerful so does agent Smith.

This is also why Smith dies after assimilating Neo. When Neo is dead Smith has outlives his usefulness and also dies.

Re:The Ring - japanese version is better

[plluke]

*spoilers, sort of*
Good points. But you should check out the entire Ring Trilogy (Japanese) if you haven't yet. They address some of the things that you say. The girl in the well is, in the Japanese version, also a demon of sorts. She's a creature of the sea, they imply. Also, she killed people by hatred, rather than rotting them in a well. Hence the frozen faces of horro. The reason for killing people by fright/hatred is both her hatred at the world/her dad for having killed her as well as general hatred for people who don't tolerate people who are different (her mom was psychic and people mocked her). Also at the end of the first part of the ring triology (and the beginning of the second), there's quite a bit of suspense that's related to freeing the girl. Gives you the same twist in your stomach.

Snooze fest

[simetra]

I thought POTC would never end. Yawn. Master and Commander was a much better movie.