FilmWise Forums
It is currently 19 Sep 2018, 05:19

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8849 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 350, 351, 352, 353, 354
Author Message
PostPosted: 26 Dec 2015, 21:23 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 08:37
Posts: 5851
Location: a furry little Don Quixote
Boo. If it helps at all, the two critics who I mostly trust, and who do like Tarantino, both hated it. YMMV, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2015, 01:27 
Offline
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2004, 07:54
Posts: 29156
Location: Gotham's seedier side
A² wrote:
There are 8 multiplex theaters within 10 miles of me and there is a grand total of 4 showings of Hateful 8 today between all of them.

That's about four more than I'll be seeing in the next two weeks.

_________________
Robin: "Gosh, Batman, is there anything you don't know?"
Batman: "Oh yes, Robin. Several things, in fact."


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2015, 14:47 
Offline
Captain of the Starship FilmWise
Captain of the Starship FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2002, 05:58
Posts: 34326
Location: parts unknown
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

_________________
The :) means it's all ok.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2015, 22:35 
Offline
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2004, 07:54
Posts: 29156
Location: Gotham's seedier side
A² wrote:
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

I understand it has a 3+ hour run-time. I think my bladder is going to love that intermission.

_________________
Robin: "Gosh, Batman, is there anything you don't know?"
Batman: "Oh yes, Robin. Several things, in fact."


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Dec 2015, 06:32 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2003, 07:22
Posts: 8384
Location: Around
Batman wrote:
A² wrote:
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

I understand it has a 3+ hour run-time. I think my bladder is going to love that intermission.

The Eye film museum and theater in Amsterdam is apparently showing the original 70mm version, which I will try to check out in January.

_________________
Come play with us, Danny. Forever and ever and ever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2015, 14:06 
Offline
Captain of the Starship FilmWise
Captain of the Starship FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2002, 05:58
Posts: 34326
Location: parts unknown
Middle wrote:
Batman wrote:
A² wrote:
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

I understand it has a 3+ hour run-time. I think my bladder is going to love that intermission.

The Eye film museum and theater in Amsterdam is apparently showing the original 70mm version, which I will try to check out in January.

From what I understand, that 70mm version is the only one you can see.

_________________
The :) means it's all ok.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Dec 2015, 21:33 
Offline
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-FilmWise!
User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2004, 07:54
Posts: 29156
Location: Gotham's seedier side
A² wrote:
Middle wrote:
Batman wrote:
A² wrote:
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

I understand it has a 3+ hour run-time. I think my bladder is going to love that intermission.

The Eye film museum and theater in Amsterdam is apparently showing the original 70mm version, which I will try to check out in January.

From what I understand, that 70mm version is the only one you can see.

I think there are digital versions as well. There were some stories on Twitter about problems projecting the actual film version.

_________________
Robin: "Gosh, Batman, is there anything you don't know?"
Batman: "Oh yes, Robin. Several things, in fact."


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jan 2016, 10:00 
Offline
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2006, 00:27
Posts: 11389
Location: Goon Docks
Batman wrote:
A² wrote:
Middle wrote:
Batman wrote:
A² wrote:
I hadn't read much about the movie (didn't want to spoil anything) so I didn't realize the extremely specific demands Tarintino had regarding the showings of his film. I read that its only playing in 98 theaters nationwide. In respect to that, I should be grateful I had an opportunity to see it at all.

The one theater near me that was showing it had it in one of their smallest rooms. Tickets were sold out all day. We got into the 7pm showing and the crowd was great because everyone there had to have a certain level of dedication to even get in.

It definitely felt like more of an experience than anything else I could have seen. There were no previews, only a ten minute overture of score over a still screen. There was also an intermission midway through the movie. It gave it the feel of something more special than just another movie.

I understand it has a 3+ hour run-time. I think my bladder is going to love that intermission.

The Eye film museum and theater in Amsterdam is apparently showing the original 70mm version, which I will try to check out in January.

From what I understand, that 70mm version is the only one you can see.

I think there are digital versions as well. There were some stories on Twitter about problems projecting the actual film version.


Got tickets to see it at the weekend. Not overly excited but we'll see lol

_________________
I'd be happy to kill her, she called me a fish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2016, 07:33 
Offline
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2006, 00:27
Posts: 11389
Location: Goon Docks
Will Smith won't be going to the Oscars because he wasn't nominated... I mean diversity. Obviously.

Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors. Creed was ok but no Oscar film. Ditto with straight outta Compton. Will Smith not showing up just spits in the face of those who were nominated. Just becoming silly.

_________________
I'd be happy to kill her, she called me a fish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 11:30 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2005, 16:16
Posts: 8012
Location: Over your shoulder
Dawson wrote:
Will Smith won't be going to the Oscars because he wasn't nominated... I mean diversity. Obviously.

Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors. Creed was ok but no Oscar film. Ditto with straight outta Compton. Will Smith not showing up just spits in the face of those who were nominated. Just becoming silly.

It could also be that not enough minority actors did a good enough job in the roles they had to be nominated. No matter the case, it's ridiculous to keep on like this. So if they cater to this nonsense next year and going on, when a black person is nominated will it be because they want the Smith's to attend or because they did an Oscar worthy job? I think we should just give everyone an Oscar with a participation label so that we don't offend anyone. :roll: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 12:49 
Offline
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2006, 00:27
Posts: 11389
Location: Goon Docks
spymeg wrote:
Dawson wrote:
Will Smith won't be going to the Oscars because he wasn't nominated... I mean diversity. Obviously.

Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors. Creed was ok but no Oscar film. Ditto with straight outta Compton. Will Smith not showing up just spits in the face of those who were nominated. Just becoming silly.

It could also be that not enough minority actors did a good enough job in the roles they had to be nominated. No matter the case, it's ridiculous to keep on like this. So if they cater to this nonsense next year and going on, when a black person is nominated will it be because they want the Smith's to attend or because they did an Oscar worthy job? I think we should just give everyone an Oscar with a participation label so that we don't offend anyone. :roll: :lol:


Marlon Wayans was on the daily show and even he was laughing at Jada.
Will Smith not being there isn't the biggest loss and Spike Lee spent enough time destroying one of the greatest Korean films of all time and selling off his neighbourhood to big spending businessmen he can't talk

_________________
I'd be happy to kill her, she called me a fish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 15:16 
Offline
FilmWise's Unshod Avenger
FilmWise's Unshod Avenger
User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 19:41
Posts: 17179
Dawson wrote:
spymeg wrote:
Dawson wrote:
Will Smith won't be going to the Oscars because he wasn't nominated... I mean diversity. Obviously.

Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors. Creed was ok but no Oscar film. Ditto with straight outta Compton. Will Smith not showing up just spits in the face of those who were nominated. Just becoming silly.

It could also be that not enough minority actors did a good enough job in the roles they had to be nominated. No matter the case, it's ridiculous to keep on like this. So if they cater to this nonsense next year and going on, when a black person is nominated will it be because they want the Smith's to attend or because they did an Oscar worthy job? I think we should just give everyone an Oscar with a participation label so that we don't offend anyone. :roll: :lol:


Marlon Wayans was on the daily show and even he was laughing at Jada.
Will Smith not being there isn't the biggest loss and Spike Lee spent enough time destroying one of the greatest Korean films of all time and selling off his neighbourhood to big spending businessmen he can't talk

I'll never forget the first (and only) time I walked into Spike's Fort Green clothing store (sometime in the 90's), saw the prices and choked. So much for giving back to the neighborhood.

On the bright side, we can soon see a long over due Tyler Perry nomination :lol:

PS: what would happen if Jada Pinkett (Spike Lee, Al Sharpton) spoke, and no one listened?

_________________
I so miss The Far Side


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 16:41 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2005, 16:16
Posts: 8012
Location: Over your shoulder
NoShoes wrote:
Dawson wrote:
spymeg wrote:
Dawson wrote:
Will Smith won't be going to the Oscars because he wasn't nominated... I mean diversity. Obviously.

Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors. Creed was ok but no Oscar film. Ditto with straight outta Compton. Will Smith not showing up just spits in the face of those who were nominated. Just becoming silly.

It could also be that not enough minority actors did a good enough job in the roles they had to be nominated. No matter the case, it's ridiculous to keep on like this. So if they cater to this nonsense next year and going on, when a black person is nominated will it be because they want the Smith's to attend or because they did an Oscar worthy job? I think we should just give everyone an Oscar with a participation label so that we don't offend anyone. :roll: :lol:


Marlon Wayans was on the daily show and even he was laughing at Jada.
Will Smith not being there isn't the biggest loss and Spike Lee spent enough time destroying one of the greatest Korean films of all time and selling off his neighbourhood to big spending businessmen he can't talk

I'll never forget the first (and only) time I walked into Spike's Fort Green clothing store (sometime in the 90's), saw the prices and choked. So much for giving back to the neighborhood.

On the bright side, we can soon see a long over due Tyler Perry nomination :lol:

PS: what would happen if Jada Pinkett (Spike Lee, Al Sharpton) spoke, and no one listened?

They'd still make a sound. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 17:21 
Offline
FilmWise Sugar Daddy
FilmWise Sugar Daddy
User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2002, 16:00
Posts: 48731
Location: Rocket City
Dawson wrote:
Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors.

I agree, but I also saw some statistics about the Academy I didn't know before: 94% white, with a median age of 62*.

Since they select the nominees, there's definitely the potential for bias to have an impact. At the very least it can effect the movies they decide to watch/possibly nominate.



* also 77% male, but that's another issue.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2016, 22:01 
Offline
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
FilmWise's Moral Imperative
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2006, 00:27
Posts: 11389
Location: Goon Docks
knarf wrote:
Dawson wrote:
Don't people realise the oscars aren't at fault, it's the fact that there weren't enough decent roles for minority actors.

I agree, but I also saw some statistics about the Academy I didn't know before: 94% white, with a median age of 62*.

Since they select the nominees, there's definitely the potential for bias to have an impact. At the very least it can effect the movies they decide to watch/possibly nominate.



* also 77% male, but that's another issue.


It's FAR from perfect and I would have liked to see straight outta Compton picked for a nom for best picture but I think people picked the wrong year to complain too much. Creed wasn't the Oscar smash people are making it out to be.

I dunno. I'm just pissed that Leo will probably finally win one and it kinda won't count in some people's eyes. Yes it's not perfect but boycotting is also spitting in the face of those that were nommed, as if they are only there on merit of skin colour

_________________
I'd be happy to kill her, she called me a fish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2016, 04:27 
Online
FilmWise's Best Friend
FilmWise's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2006, 17:57
Posts: 33925
Location: Sheila's Dungeon...oh no! Shhh, she's coming.
knarf wrote:
I agree, but I also saw some statistics about the Academy I didn't know before: 94% white, with a median age of 62*.



* also 77% male, but that's another issue.

Wow, when you beat out Congress on demographics like that, there is a problem.

Congress: 80% White, 80% Male, Average Age In the House 57, Average Age in the Senate 63.

_________________
I'm not insane, my mother had me tested!
Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2016, 04:38 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2005, 16:16
Posts: 8012
Location: Over your shoulder
sldawgs wrote:
knarf wrote:
I agree, but I also saw some statistics about the Academy I didn't know before: 94% white, with a median age of 62*.



* also 77% male, but that's another issue.

Wow, when you beat out Congress on demographics like that, there is a problem.

Congress: 80% White, 80% Male, Average Age In the House 57, Average Age in the Senate 63.

But the Academy doesn't nominate, right? Most categories are nominated by the members of the corresponding branch–actors nominate actors, film editors nominate film editors, etc. Then the members vote on those noms? And the Academy members are all people in the business..actors, writers, etc. ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2016, 06:30 
Online
FilmWise's Best Friend
FilmWise's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2006, 17:57
Posts: 33925
Location: Sheila's Dungeon...oh no! Shhh, she's coming.
[I moved this post to the Oscar thread because it really fits there better]

By the way, the Academy is apparently working on getting more diverse.

_________________
I'm not insane, my mother had me tested!
Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Feb 2016, 10:07 
Offline
TV's Kryptonite
TV's Kryptonite
User avatar

Joined: 03 Dec 2007, 23:39
Posts: 14145
Location: Mudville, Tuleberg, Brick City, Fat City, Gas City, Port City


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2016, 16:05 
Offline
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2003, 14:22
Posts: 38409
Location: San Francisco
Dawson wrote:
Steel Frog wrote:
A² wrote:
A² wrote:
Me and all the other nerds are trying to buy opening night star wars tickets. Every ticket site I am trying is slow at best and most are outright not working at all.

It took 2 hours but I finally managed some for Friday night at a nice place with reserved seating. I'm in my 40s now. I don't have 2 hours to be standing in line like some 20 year old.

I didn't even like it in my 20s. As a sophomore in college, I spent all night out for Celtics tickets (obstructed view only available). I did indeed get two to Celts-Lakers that year (Magic hit a three at the buzzer to beat 'em), but vowed I'd never do that again. Never. Never. Never.


I actually loved waiting in line. The queue for Bastman back in '89 was awesome, round the block, people laughing, just waiting to see a film that hadn't been spoiled by 1000 internet trailers.
Of course now I won't queue, what am I, a farmer?

:D

_________________
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2016, 14:58 
Offline
FilmWise's Unshod Avenger
FilmWise's Unshod Avenger
User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 19:41
Posts: 17179
I hate the future......

Yet another pastime is about to be ruined to accommodate Millennials

_________________
I so miss The Far Side


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 08:50 
Offline
TV's Kryptonite
TV's Kryptonite
User avatar

Joined: 03 Dec 2007, 23:39
Posts: 14145
Location: Mudville, Tuleberg, Brick City, Fat City, Gas City, Port City
Uncle Buck gets the Mike Epps treatment. What did John Candy ever do to whoever is developing this steaming pile of excrement?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2016, 12:43 
Offline
TV's Kryptonite
TV's Kryptonite
User avatar

Joined: 03 Dec 2007, 23:39
Posts: 14145
Location: Mudville, Tuleberg, Brick City, Fat City, Gas City, Port City
I've spent the last 8 months troubleshooting a vision problem w/ my eye doctor.

We've reached a conclusion that makes a lot of sense, and she referred me to someone in-network to discuss the next step.
I went to this consult appointment today, only to end up going through a general eye appointment as if I went to this doctor's office first.

Now I have a second appointment for the same doctor's office - different doctor - to discuss what I was expecting to discuss today.
fwiw, the dr. today blames the mix up on the wording of the referral from my primary eye doctor, which was reviewed and scheduled by a nurse, not a specialist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Nov 2016, 14:13 
Offline
TV's Kryptonite
TV's Kryptonite
User avatar

Joined: 03 Dec 2007, 23:39
Posts: 14145
Location: Mudville, Tuleberg, Brick City, Fat City, Gas City, Port City
http://imgur.com/gallery/DOrkn

Most of this is fairly tame, and or reasonably explained away, but there's a lot in this list of images that really screw with my OCD.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8849 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 350, 351, 352, 353, 354

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group