[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majid Update: I checked Rea's bio on IMDB, and wow! The guy is Irish and Protestant, yet also a Republican, and was actually married to a convicted IRA bomber, Dolours Price, who planted a bomb in the Old Bailey (among others) with her sister Marian in 1973. The marriage was after she was released from prison in early eighties. The intensity of both performances ("V" and "Michael Collins") makes much more sense now.

maybe they should have let rea write the script - i'm sure it would have turned out better, and alan moore wouldn't have had to remove his name from what he apparently perceived as even worse an adaption than 'script from hell' and 'league of extraordinarily stupid additional characters'.

you can call me churlish

, but i agree with moore - "imbecilic script"
those who don't know the graphic novel can still enjoy an action flic with some hint of its genius left intact, but moore fans beware, lower your expectations or it'll ruin your day like it did mine: i hated this movie, from start to end, stephen rea excepted. (and the beth orton song on the jukebox...)

ah yes, v is for verbose.

 

[JahJahBinks]

inside man is a pretty interesting movie.

 

[mr_baseball_08]

Yeah, I liked inside man alright. The previews once again made the movie look a lot more action packed than it really is. Aside from the part where the robbers actually seize control of the bank, the action is nil. I was slightly disappointed, however, because I was hoping it was one of those movies where as the movie progresses you feel like you're in the movie and you try to guess what's gonna happen next or how the whole thing will unfold in the end. Sort of like Ocean's 11 or 12. But to me it didn't move that way. It sort of just took you along for the ride and tells you what happened opposed to making you feel like you're part of what's going on.

JD

 

[philodox]

I just got back from seeing V on IMAX and am surprised at the amount of people here that think it is just 'OK'. Now I've never read the literature/comics around it, but I thought it was one of the best movies I've seen in years. First time being to an IMAX too though, so maybe that had something to do with it.

PS. My Wife calls the movie 'B is for Bald Natalie Portman'.

 

[virometal]

I was bored so check out V today - the first time in a theater since Munich, and once again realised why I don't go often.

This could of been an interesting movie. IF it decided to go with action or cool knives OR the social story was explored more. Instead everything was not enough. There should of been more knife fights. There should of been explanation of how England came to now. There should of been more totalitarian commentary...

Instead as a previous poster referred to, we got a catch all flick for mom, dad, and little jr. Hugo Weaving was cool as always, but there should of been more of him too.

Save the bucks and wait for DVD.

 

[EscaBoi]

I seen the movie over the weekend without knowing anything about it. I personally thought it was a great movie, loved the storyline involved and give it a 4.5/5

 

[zowie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula Natalie Portman's accent was bad at times, but her acting was fine. I don't think she was bad in the last Star Wars movie, she was doing what she could with the script. She's a very capable actress.

I thought Garden State was incredible. Except for the last 10 or so minutes. Great soundtrack helped.

 

[jpelg]

Can a screen be too big? I didn't think so until last night, when I watched "V" in an IMAX theatre. Too much going on across the screen requiring too much head scanning to take it all in. Also, the depth of field was relatively shallow, so edges were much softer than the center. It was my first time in such a venue, and I can only hope that movies specifically shot for such portrayal would fare better than "V f V".

The movie was great, though. I thought that both Weaving and Rea gave stellar performances. Portman was average in an above-average role, but her beauty helps carry off any scene. Great fight sequences. Much better & clearer than Daredevil or Batman(Begins), which relied on darkness & choppy editing to gloss over details. I thought V was anything but stiff or wooden - he rocks! The few funny parts were great juxtapositions against the predominantly serious aspect of the storyline.

Yeah, I agree the love story thing was kinda stupid. I felt it compromised the concept of "V" a bit ("for twenty years I thought of nothing but this day...until I met you" - puleez!), and was even a bit creepy in an older-man, leacherous kind of way. Still, they managed to steer clear of that in the end.

Bottom line: One of the best comic/graphic novel movies I've ever seen.

 

[shesmylovernow]

Thought it was a pretty crap movie. I could not have cared less about the main characters and watching their, um, on-screen "chemistry" was absolutely torturous.

I think I'll wait for Snakes on a Mother****ing Plane before I hit the theatre again.

 

[chadbang]

Now that it's on DVD, I finally caught it. Pretty silly script -- fairly obvious. The Wachoski brothers really got lucky -- once. A friend I trust recommended it to me, too. His mind must have been elsewhere, unless he fell for the Wachoski's style of vacant portent.

 

[F1GTR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbang /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now that it's on DVD, I finally caught it. Pretty silly script -- fairly obvious. The Wachoski brothers really got lucky -- once. A friend I trust recommended it to me, too. His mind must have been elsewhere, unless he fell for the Wachoski's style of vacant portent.

What's fairly obvious is the instigative nature of your reply, considering you dug this up from eight months ago.

Your friend didn't "fall" for anything. Some people just aren't awake enough at the moment to understand.

It's funny how perception works.

 

[gtp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbang /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now that it's on DVD, I finally caught it. Pretty silly script -- fairly obvious. The Wachoski brothers really got lucky -- once. A friend I trust recommended it to me, too. His mind must have been elsewhere, unless he fell for the Wachoski's style of vacant portent.

Hey there,

I follow the theory that expectations are nearly everything when it comes to art. Your trusted friend said it was good, so you expected it to be good. My trusted friend hated it, so I expected to hate it. After watching, you thought it wasn't as good as what you expected, so it must not have been very good. After watching, I thought it was better than I expected, so it must have been pretty good.

I found this to be true over and over again, although of course there are outlier cases. Now I try my best to avoid conversations about movies that I have yet to see. Obviously it really helps with objectivity regarding the relative worth of works.

 

[redshifter]

"p" for panties

watch the scene where portman is in a schoolgirl outfit. if you watch carefully you will see the best thing about this movie.

 

[chadbang]

THAT, i liked,

 

[incognitoedleon]

Pretentious and overbearing beyond belief - especially the ending (not that the beginning or middle was any better). I guess I should've expected that from the Wachowski boys. There were some actors I liked in this and with all the reviews I thought it was going to get better and it only got worse. I guess some people would be impressed by the overly wordy dialogue which "seemed" smart. It was one of the worst movies I've seen for 2006, and this has been a very, very weak year for movies overall.