The Last Movie You Watched (no spoilers)

[chf]

Ah, one of those annoying "read the books and then you'll understand" douchebags.

Sorry, nope. The film is judged on its own merit. 2/5 stars.

When you've got nothing go ad hominem? Speaking of douchebaggery...

Look, I never said you had to understand the book. But maybe being somewhat AWARE of what the source material is would help????

What you're doing is like me criticizing a Micheal Bay movie because it doesn't have enough soliloquy. Maybe I should actually WATCH a Micheal Bay movie? Have you watched other adaptations of E. Leonard? Seen any with any 'Heat' like shootouts?

 

[Omar 382]

When you've got nothing go ad hominem? Speaking of douchebaggery...

Look, I never said you had to understand the book. But maybe being somewhat AWARE of what the source material is would help????

What you're doing is like me criticizing a Micheal Bay movie because it doesn't have enough soliloquy. Maybe I should actually WATCH a Micheal Bay movie? Have you watched other adaptations of E. Leonard? Seen any with any 'Heat' like shootouts?

So I don't have to read the source material, just be aware of it??? Just stop, man. I don't give a fuck about some asshole named E. Leonard and/or any novels he wrote.

 

[chf]

Columbus committed genocide, but nowhere to the tune of 11 million people, or whatever the fuck Hitler did. And it means there's no universal moral standard. But let's agree to disagree. Are you a fan of Apocalypse Now?

Words mean stuff. C'mon, again, don't bs a bs'er. Having no 'universal' moral standard (one can always find an outlier to anything), doesn't mean there aren't moral standards.

Can you find a cannibal that thinks fava beans with human liver and a nice chianti is A-OK?

Sure.

Does that mean that there isn't a near universal moral standard on cannibalism?

Nope.

 

[Mondo Jay]

Kubrick in his sleep, still makes technically amazing films. He's STILL taking chances, and pushing the envelope.

Isn't he currently taking a dirt nap?

 

[chf]

So I don't have to read the source material, just be aware of it??? Just stop, man. I don't give a fuck about some asshole named E. Leonard and/or any novels he wrote.

Than you're an idiot, and just a troll. Or you don't love movies near as much as you pretend to.

 

[Omar 382]

Words mean stuff. C'mon, again, don't bs a bs'er. Having no 'universal' moral standard (one can always find an outlier to anything), doesn't mean there aren't moral standards.

Can you find a cannibal that thinks fava beans with human liver and a nice chianti is A-OK?

Sure.

Does that mean that there isn't a near universal moral standard on cannibalism?

Nope.

I'm fine with near-universal morals (though I disagree that there are just a couple sociopaths in the world).

But it's not objective. That's all I mean. Donald Trump is the current POTUS. That's an objective fact. "Murder is bad" is not, for better or worse.

 

[chf]

Isn't he currently taking a dirt nap?

I'd have foot-noted. but that shit gets old.

 

[Mondo Jay]

I'd have foot-noted. but that shit gets old.

Yeah, no more envelope pushing for him.

 

[chf]

(though I disagree that there are just a couple sociopaths in the world).

Stop assigning me strawmen please.

But it's not objective. That's all I mean. Donald Trump is the current POTUS. That's an objective fact. "Murder is bad" is not, for better or worse.

Find me a working first world nation that doesn't proscribe murder.

 

[chf]

Yeah, no more envelope pushing for him.

Elmore either.

 

[PatsFan2003]

I don't give a fuck. You opioid-intolerant pussies would probably OD on that shit anyway. Me, I do a rail of that shit every couple of hours to keeps the nerves on chill-mode.

The late great Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars..


Casino Movie Review & Film Summary (1995) | Roger Ebert

I never saw the film myself although I think Sharon Stone deserved an Oscar for Basic Instinct!

Update:

Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks that.

100 most memorable movies scenes!!

100 Most Iconic Film Images, Moments, or Scenes

 

[chf]

I was hoping for a good film. The grand shootout scene I described may have lead to one. The ending they went with sure as shit didn't.

Yep, what I like = good.

How's that working for you?

 

[Omar 382]

Than you're an idiot, and just a troll. Or you don't love movies near as much as you pretend to.

Quite the opposite. The movie is all I care about. If I read the novel, great, I'll rate that in terms of literature. Your conflation of movies and novels dilutes and undercuts the final movie product. Just like I didn't get mad when Kubrick changed the ending of A Clockwork Orange (4/5 stars) from the novel's ending (4.5/5 stars). It's Kubrick's own film, he has no allegiance whatsoever to Burgess.

 

[Omar 382]

Stop assigning me strawmen please.



Find me a working first world nation that doesn't proscribe murder.

This is where I know that you've realized your wrong. Where the fuck did I mention that we're only looking at "working first world" nations, and why the fuck would we ignore ~half the fucking world's society and their values?

 

[Omar 382]

Yep, what I like = good.

How's that working for you?

What I like = good for me.

This isn't a terribly difficult concept.

 

[Omar 382]

Stop assigning me strawmen please.

Oh for fuck's sake

Can you find a cannibal that thinks fava beans with human liver and a nice chianti is A-OK?

Sure.

I guess I'm supposed to infer in the context of your post that you think the world is full of cannibals who eat human livers?

 

[chf]

Quite the opposite. The movie is all I care about. If I read the novel, great, I'll rate that in terms of literature. Your conflation of movies and novels dilutes and undercuts the final movie product. Just like I didn't get mad when Kubrick changed the ending of A Clockwork Orange (4/5 stars) from the novel's ending (4.5/5 stars). It's Kubrick's own film, he has no allegiance whatsoever to Burgess.

And you're AGAIN, assigning me position that I didn't take. A film-maker doesn't have to slavishly stay true to the source material, I never said that. But YOU KNOW, that if the source material is great, then film-makers at least TRY to do it justice. The Coen brothers didn't make 'No Country' just as Cormac McCarthy wrote it, but they DID try to stay true to the source material.

If you're as big a fucking movie fan as you think, you KNOW this.

Which makes me think that sometimes you're just trolling. I know you CAN have good discussions about movies, because I've had a few with you. But now and then you seem to morph into asshole troll mode.

 

[chf]

What I like = good for me.

Heh. Except you RARELY say that Omar. You rarely if ever say, 'Hey this movie don't work for me too well, but I get why others like it...'

You say, 'Hey this movie SUUUUUUCKS!'

At least when you're wearing your troll hat.

 

[chf]

Oh for fuck's sake

Look it up man. Stop making me argue stuff I'm not.

I guess I'm supposed to infer in the context of your post that you think the world is full of cannibals who eat human livers?

Nope, how the fuck would you infer that?

 

[Omar 382]

Heh. Except you RARELY say that Omar. You rarely if ever say, 'Hey this movie don't work for me too well, but I get why others like it...'

You say, 'Hey this movie SUUUUUUCKS!'

At least when you're wearing your troll hat.

No, I truly do take the position that I think a movie sucks, but that others should of course be able to say that it doesn't or that they like it.

Example: I thought Out of Sight sort of sucked. You enjoyed it. I think it's great that you enjoyed it, but you too umbrage at the fact that I did not enjoy it.

I love when people disagree about movies (if they truly do). That's what makes them so fun- because they're enjoyment from the viewer's end is completely subjective.