Woohoo!

[andrewducker]

When you see a film review containing the words What the picture represents, in a very real way, is the death of cinema you know you have to go and see it. Especially as I was planning to anyway.

Comments

[protempore.livejournal.com]

Update us.

I don't intend on it, at least not intentionally. I doubt there's any thing offered in the movie, aside from bikini-shots.

[andrewducker]

Well, I loved the first one, so unless the second one isn't as good (always a possibility) and doesn't live up to the trailers (which were excellent), I'll probably be happy.

I'll let you know :->

[protempore.livejournal.com]

It may just be that we have different taste in movies, too :-)

I can't think of any thing in the theatre's I want to see, right now . . . I did enjoy dumb and dumber-er . . . if only for seeing Bob Sagat say "shit" 8 or 9 hundred times.

[andrewducker]

Whereas I think you'd have to pay me to see Dumb and Dumber-er. It looked beyond stupid :->

[protempore.livejournal.com]

It was well beyond stupid . . . a genre my wife and I tend to gravitate toward. We go for the brainy artsy films . . . and the mindlessly unredeamable ones.

I liked phone booth.

[andrewducker]

I have to admit to being somewhat similar. I need films that are either serious, and treat themselves seriously, or films that refuse to do so.

So I loved Armageddeon because it refused to take itself at all seriously, The Bourne Identity because it never showed me anything I couldn't believe, and Charlies Angels because it was amazingly cool and completely unbelievable all the way through.

All of them were obviously written by smart people - either smart ones trying to draw me into something, or smart ones having a good time.
Films that expect me to take them seriously while presenting something that's completely unbelievable aren't interesting to me at all (most action movies, for instance).

[heron61.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with you about both the first Charlie's Angels movie (which I enjoyed and found better than I expected) and any of the alleged comedies like Dumb and Dumberer - modern humor often baffled and appalls me.

I knew the first CA movie would be fluff, with was very pleased to see that it was surprisingly well-intentioned and well-executed fluff, which exceeded my expectations - I primary went to it because my friend Dawn wanted to go, and she is excellent at providing a deeply amusing running commentary for dubious films (which was thing that made seeing Bulletproof Monk at all tolerable.

[allorin.livejournal.com]

I can't wait to see it. You're right - the first one rocked. The second one looks like more of the same - ideal.

[kpollock.livejournal.com]

he heh. Did you see the (mtv?) 'ass coach' thing with the CA crew. Hilarious. Especially for Sean who came in halfway through and was much baffled.

I only go and see filns with explosions in. Sean says he goes to the cinema to take his brain out for a while. I don't mind, most more 'intelligent' films are about people's relationships with each other (and usually about sexual and/or love type ones too) which is something that I'm just not interested in. I don't need to dpress myself about how stupid and overly emotional most people are.

[andrewducker]

You might like Secretary, which at least shows an odd relationship, and has James Spader in it.

I don't tend to like relationship centred films, unless they're comedies, because I can't take them terribly seriously most of the time.

And the ass coach thing was great, if a bit too long.