Alas, I have to wait until they come out on DVD. Don’t ask.
No, I simply have to ask. Why is Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the 100th remake, in 3D, not on that list? 
I just saw Moonrise Kingdom last night. I didn’t think it was Wes Anderson’s best film to date, but the cinematography was beautiful and the story was…cute, I guess. The child actors weren’t that great imo.
Looper was a really good movie I thought.
Haven’t seen the others, but they look good.
Zero Dark Thirty was good. I’m sure it’s not the whole story, but it definitely makes you think about how things fell into place and a little of what it must have been like.
Argo was okay and fairly well done.
I wasn’t all that impressed with Looper for some reason.
I’m hoping Lincoln is good. It’s on my viewing list.
Zero Dark Thirty - 
Basically one big advert for the CIA’s torture/rendition program, wrapped in a pack of lies about a man who was dead for almost the entire period the film covers.
I was dissapointed with Moonrise. Utterly unbelievable sets, nice use of the various adult actors, but…kinda cold. His other movies have been either funnier - The Royal Tennenbaums, Rushmore, Bottle Rocket - or warmer - Darjeeling Limited (thought I only decided I really liked that movie at the end, up until the end, I was so so, then suddenly I really liked it.). This just felt like an autistic creation. Like a series of unbelievably well made dioramas.
Worth it to see Ed Norton with the cigarrette, I suppose.
Ed Norton was pretty great in it.
I agree, it was cold. It probably wasn’t even the child-actors’ faults, seems like he directed it to be like that. Monotone speech without any emotions showing in the voice or the face. That was pretty much how nearly everyone was acting, even the adults most of the time. I didn’t like that about it either.
Is it just me, or did Bruce Willis look seriously fucking old in Looper?
JGL was great, as always, but then I really like that guy, even when he’s doing sappy lovey-dovey shit like 500 Days of Summer.
I haven’t seen Moonrise Kingdom, but I <3 Wes Anderson’s style, he’s brilliant. I’m looking forward to seeing it, even if the acting is shitty.
I’m also really looking forward to seeing Django Unchained, as I’m a huge Tarantino fan.
What’s the best movies I haven’t seen yet without the worst:
Your so cool and smart and…
Is a sarcastic ad hom the best you can do?
The film enjoyed an unprecedented degree of co-operation from the CIA and DOD (I can show you the emails and memos if you like), meanwhile the only documents released from the ‘Bin Laden raid’ prove that a) they didn’t carry out any DNA testing and b) no one on the ship actually saw the body being ‘buried at sea’.
Oh, and they admitted that this picture:
Must have been staged, as there was no live video feed. Plus it’s obvious that several people in this photo have been added digitally.
Now, if you’ve actually got any evidence proving that Bin Laden was actually killed in that raid, or any evidence showing that this film didn’t enjoy huge official support in order to glorify the torture/rendition program then present it. Otherwise, fuck off.
^ is that the photo they used? I remember seeing that photo, but I don’t remember thinking, ‘Jeeze, that looks photoshopped.’ But with that photo you posted above…that definitely looks shooped. Inconsistent lighting, and various people look like, lol, they have a lower resolution than other people.
I could be wrong, but I always remember the picture being that bad. It’s one of the many, many reasons I never believed the story to begin with, a judgment that I think has now been vindicated, not least by the making of this Zero Dark Thirty film.
Because they’ve never made films about wars before or raids…
You’re avoiding the point, made in my prior email, that this film enjoyed an immense degree of official cooperation from institutions that are normally very secretive. I could throw into the mix the fact that when it comes to the event in question - the alleged killing of Bin Laden - the CIA and DOD have avoided releasing any records confirming how the body was identified and what happened to it, whereas when it came to a Hollywood film with an Oscar winning production team behind it they were only too happy to show and tell the filmmakers everything they wanted to know. The CIA even labelled this film ‘THE Bin Laden movie’ i.e. the one that everyone will see and will remember. Again, I can show you the emails if you like, because I’ve actually read them.
But instead of actually bothering to learn about something before making up your mind, you’re just seeking to trivialise and strawman what I’m saying. If I’m condescending to you, which I am, it is because of behaviour like this.
If I judged a movie on whether its premise/potential for propaganda is unsavory to me, then I would judge Lincoln into the ground. Lincoln is mostly about political maneuvering, “procuring votes” and the like, for the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Lincoln supposedly used, or allowed to be used, questionable means for the passage of the 13th Amendment (abolition of slavery) in the House. From the movie: “The greatest measure of the nineteenth century was passed by corruption, aided and abetted by the purest man in America.” Lincoln did this, and it was good. At least that’s how I saw the film. I have strong negative feelings for the buying of votes and other such techniques. The movie also bluntly characterizes the public, the common man, as stupid and backwards – as needing to be tricked into doing what’s good or what’s right. Maybe it was necessary. Who knows, but I still wouldn’t consider it good then, or glorify it in a movie like this.
But this isn’t how I judge a film. There are other aspects of experiencing art than looking to agree or disagree with a perceived central premise. Lincoln is a film and I take film as art. I mean more than that film can be art; I mean I watch every movie as art, for it’s art. That is how I prefer to engage the material. I contemplate premises and arguments, too, but the experience means more to me than just that.
A few lines from Lincoln I really liked-
[size=85]George Yeaman: “I hate it too, sir. Slavery. But we’re entirely unready for emancipation. There’s too many questions.”
Abraham Lincoln: “We’re unready for peace, too, ain’t we. Yes, when it comes it’ll present us with conundrums and dangers greater than any we faced during the war, bloody as it’s been. We’ll have to study and extemporize with what it is, when it is.”[/size]
About Zero Dark Thirty, I’m just gonna say this. I don’t doubt that there are secrets and cover-ups and that what actually happened to Bin Laden might be a lot different from the official story. I’ve heard plenty of people swear all of that to be the case. What I’ve never had on this subject is good authority. With all of this in mind, I still felt the movie was worth seeing. Worth seeing is not simply a function of how much I agree with the premise.
The CIA’s cooperation or even their tacit endorsement of Zero Dark Thirty doesn’t in itself render the movie bollocks or vindicate suspicions that the story therein is false. What would vindicate suspicions that the story of Zero Dark Thirty is false is evidence it didn’t happen, not blind distrust of everything the CIA touches.
I’m not saying don’t see it. I’m saying understand that it is Hollywood mythologising an official lie.
It’s a good thing my argument was a whole lot more subtle that the strawman you’ve just attempted to blow down. My argument is that given the near-total shroud of secrecy concerning ALL the evidence that there should be about this raid and how ‘Bin Laden’ was identified but the magnitude of the CIA and DOD efforts to help this film get made that you’d have to be a fool to believe them. If I told you an event had happened, but provided no evidence, and then spent a lot of time and money helping the production of a Hollywood film depicting that event, completely contradicting my secrecy regarding any actual evidence for my claims, you’d be justified in suspecting I was a shyster.
Now, if I was a convicted criminal with a long, long history of lies and deceits, and was pretty shameless about that fact and even boasted about it on my own website where I confessed to having faked events or lied about events of a similar type and of the same political significance in the past, and I behaved like this, would you believe me? Would you stand around asking this accusing me of lying for evidence that I was lying? Or would you be demanding evidence from me proving that I was telling the truth? I don’t have access to the evidence. The CIA does. They refuse to release it. I dunno why the burden of proof should be on me to show conclusively that this institution of pathological liars is lying about this.
I did not mean to misconstrue. I read your statement about vindication several times and that’s all I could make of it.
Completely. I don’t trust them. If I think that some of what happened in Zero Dark Thirty is probably accurate, it wouldn’t be because I trust the CIA. I also don’t trust all the people pushing their own stories of what went down, who give the feeblest of support, or none at all, and expect everyone to “wake up” and see the obvious truth of their claims.
You have no burden of proof unless you make claims like “[Osama bin Laden] was dead for almost the entire period the film covers.” For the rest of what you said, I take no issue and agree with some things. I am also deeply skeptical of what the U.S. government and CIA sell to the public.
Just saw the film Seven Psychopaths. Great great great film.
Don’t know if it’s been mentioned but the convenient deaths in that helicopter crahs of half of ‘the team that killed Bin Ladin’ should be included in on any Occam’s Razor look at the coincidences and gaps in the official story.
I’ll throw in a nod to the recent coen brother comedy
burn after reading
just loved it.
And it is a kind of conspiracy movie, just to show I am on topic with the digression even here. Or perhaps and anti-conspiracy movie. Utterly absurd and probably close to what has actually happened.