Nice to have James Cameron back making great movies.

kam77 wrote:Saw No Country for Old Men last night for the second time. On second viewing i was able to step back and appreciate the beauty of the film, the great acting, and the writing as well. The movie has no wasted scenes. Only Woody Harrelson seemed out of place. When i saw it in the theatres i was too wrapped up in trying to understand the movie and felt like the Coen brothers were trying too hard to make a serious artsy movie. Now that i watch it a second time, i absolutely loved it.

Same here. Saw it on TV for a second time. A lot of things I did not notice the first time around.

NYKBocker wrote:

kam77 wrote:Saw No Country for Old Men last night for the second time. On second viewing i was able to step back and appreciate the beauty of the film, the great acting, and the writing as well. The movie has no wasted scenes. Only Woody Harrelson seemed out of place. When i saw it in the theatres i was too wrapped up in trying to understand the movie and felt like the Coen brothers were trying too hard to make a serious artsy movie. Now that i watch it a second time, i absolutely loved it.

Same here. Saw it on TV for a second time. A lot of things I did not notice the first time around.

They stayed as true to the book as they possibly could. Cormac McCarthy is my favorite contemporary author and he writes very little dialogue in his works. That's what makes the movie seems so artsy, the lack of dialogue.

But the story is awesome--like a rock, paper, scissors among hunters. Also, they did a great job with the Texas authenticity. They did a great job of selling everything including the tidbits that don't need selling, which helped make the unbelievable believable.

***

Cormac McCarthy's "the Road" is being made into a movie and when it gets released, I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO SEE "THE ROAD." Now that director's have the blue print on how not screw up the story (The Matt Damon/Penelope Cruz "All the Pretty Horses" sucked donkey balls), this post-apocalyptic story about a father's (Viggo Mortensen) love for his son will undoubtedly be among the best movies released.

Paladin55 wrote:

Nalod wrote:
Avatar was classic good vs. evil and the Blue tails were nothing more than low tech natives not depicted in any reality. They don't get ill, they never run up and down 3,000 foot branches and never slip and fall, they don't eat, don't have houses, don't have to prep food or hunt, there were no schools, none seemed pregnant, didn't have babies, didn't have to farm, or tend to the horses who must fend for them selves as they lived in that giant tree, and all the nasty things in the jungle does not bother them, nor the blue tails if they are in the tree.

It was a fantasy story with Geo. Bush, no communist overtones, and no democracy.

All this will be covered in Avatar the Miniseries.

I also assume that they had to go to the bathroom at some point, but there was no indication of this or any preparations for dealing with that necessity...

...and here I was expecting realism in this movie.

i didn't see any of them downloading porn either... what kind of intelligent beings don't watch porn? ridiculous.

NYKBocker wrote:One movie I want to see but have not seen yet is "Road to Perdition". Is it any good? Reviews are all good from I have seen.

I love it... the cinematography is insane. Sam Mendez gives the American Beauty feel to a crime flick. And the cast is insane: Paul Newman, Tom Hanks, Jude Law, and Daniel Craig.

Not to mention: the story is A W E S O M E.

TMS wrote:finally got to see "XMen Origins Wolverine" & "Star Trek".

was disappointed by the XMen flick, it was slow developing & the Sabretooth that was depicted in the other XMen movies was obviously a different character than the one depicted in this one... Liev Schrieber was good in the supporting role but Gambit & the Blob were both weakly represented... i expected so much more from this movie & it didn't deliver.

Star Trek was entertaining enough, albeit a little campy... but then all of the Star Trek movies were a little campy at times so this was to be expected... the story was a little convoluted with the time travel stuff... felt almost like they worked that into the movie just so they could have Leonard Nimoy make a cameo... woulda been cooler if William Shatner made a cameo at the end for Trekkie fans... effects were decent but IMO The Wrath of Khan is still the best Star Trek movie ever made.

Agree with you on Star Trek. It was good for the nostalgia - seeing how it all began.
One interesting point - Zoe Soldana played Ahura in Star Trek and also the lead in Avatar - as Neytiri. I think she did a great job in Avatar. Had just a small part in Star Trek. I hope that gets expanded in the sequel.

NYKBocker wrote:I saw "The Hurt Locker" a month ago. Really good movie. A little tough to watch on some parts so beware.

that is the next movie that is coming in, i believe, from netflix. explain why is it hard to watch?