What's the last movie you've seen? (2nd thread)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Django. (Almost sold out on a wednesday night, btw.)

Eh. Quentin's the master in his own little genre, Campy Violence. I liked it a lot, better than the uneven Basterds. (Though here too, I'd wish the basics the story sets out from were accurate. The plot itself can remain as unrealistic as it needs to be, that's not a problem at all.)

I just realized that every part was no doubt subtitled EXCEPT the part when Schultz and the slave talk in German...the only part subtitled in my theater. Makes sense but still haha.

[minionofmidas]

Django. (Almost sold out on a wednesday night, btw.)

Eh. Quentin's the master in his own little genre, Campy Violence. I liked it a lot, better than the uneven Basterds. (Though here too, I'd wish the basics the story sets out from were accurate. The plot itself can remain as unrealistic as it needs to be, that's not a problem at all.)

I just realized that every part was no doubt subtitled EXCEPT the part when Schultz and the slave talk in German...the only part subtitled in my theater. Makes sense but still haha.

No... since those subtitles are part of the film artwork (they were in yellow and in some special font) and also a little higher up, further towards the middle of the screen than subtitles usually are...
these parts were doubly subtitled. which was indeed "makes sense but still haha".
I mean, there were a few subtitles elsewhere in the movie (like "1858, two years before the Civil War") that were doubly subtitled as well.

 (It was also unavoidable to note the actress doesn't speak German but did a pretty good job with the pronounciation guide they gave her. A normal second-language speaker accent sounds different.)

[minionofmidas]

One thing about the subtitles that was definitely strange was her name, of course. Brunhilde / "Broomhilda". Because they did indeed render it as Brunhilde when Waltz said it and Broomhilda when Foxx did.

[Paul Kemp]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

[minionofmidas]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

[Paul Kemp]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

Still, I've always considered Fort Sumter in April 1861 the start of the Civil War, not the secession.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

No one has answered "porn".......I'm somewhat stunned. 

[minionofmidas]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

Still, I've always considered Fort Sumter in April 1861 the start of the Civil War, not the secession.

"Correct" in the sense of "right", not in the sense of "accurate".

[Gustaf]

Les Miserables, preceded by Argo. Both pretty solid.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

I assumed the first part had to be in early 1858, it usually doesn't snow before Christmas anywhere that far south. Really having snow on the ground in Texas at all is pretty odd, maybe that scene was supposed to be in the panhandle. The later scenes were clearly spring. But who knows when the Civil War started in the Tarantino universe. Mind you there are plenty of other anachronisms, I'm pretty sure dynamite hadn't been invented yet at that time and a lot of the clothes people at Candie's plantation were wearing were obviously from the 20th century (knowing Tarantino it could've just been some tribute to other films.) And of course at the time Schultz would not speak of "Germany".

[Tender Branson]

Argo and Django.

[Eraserhead]

Zero Dark Thirty

Good, kind of disturbing and a little too long. I think someone (BRTD?) mentioned this already but all of the characters are pretty unlikeable. Also the raid at the end left me feeling angry and disgusted, but maybe that was the point. I'd like to look into how accurate certain parts of it were. Like The Hurt Locker, it's not something I'd be inclined to watch again but I'm glad I saw it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Zero Dark Thirty

Good, kind of disturbing and a little too long. I think someone (BRTD?) mentioned this already but all of the characters are pretty unlikeable. Also the raid at the end left me feeling angry and disgusted, but maybe that was point. I'd like to look into how accurate certain parts of it were. Like The Hurt Locker, it's not something I'd be inclined to watch again but I'm glad I saw it.

Yeah I pointed that out about the characters. All very flat as well, no doubt intentionally.

I think just about everything in the movie was supposed to be morally ambiguous. It was just saying "This is how things work whether you like it or not". Obviously everyone ends up with different opinions.

[Gustaf]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

I assumed the first part had to be in early 1858, it usually doesn't snow before Christmas anywhere that far south. Really having snow on the ground in Texas at all is pretty odd, maybe that scene was supposed to be in the panhandle. The later scenes were clearly spring. But who knows when the Civil War started in the Tarantino universe. Mind you there are plenty of other anachronisms, I'm pretty sure dynamite hadn't been invented yet at that time and a lot of the clothes people at Candie's plantation were wearing were obviously from the 20th century (knowing Tarantino it could've just been some tribute to other films.) And of course at the time Schultz would not speak of "Germany".

Dynamite was invented in 1867. But I think the concept of Germany was well established at that time, even though the state had another 10 years before coming into existence.

Haven't seen the film yet.

[Eraserhead]

Zero Dark Thirty

Good, kind of disturbing and a little too long. I think someone (BRTD?) mentioned this already but all of the characters are pretty unlikeable. Also the raid at the end left me feeling angry and disgusted, but maybe that was point. I'd like to look into how accurate certain parts of it were. Like The Hurt Locker, it's not something I'd be inclined to watch again but I'm glad I saw it.

Yeah I pointed that out about the characters. All very flat as well, no doubt intentionally.

I think just about everything in the movie was supposed to be morally ambiguous. It was just saying "This is how things work whether you like it or not". Obviously everyone ends up with different opinions.

The members of the Seal Team, in particular, come off like complete lowlifes.

[minionofmidas]

No one told QT the Civil War didn't start until 1861? Unless I'm having a complete mental breakdown . . .

I suppose it's possible that in the Tarantino universe the Civil War started a year earlier (much like Hitler dying early in a crowded theater) but I'm not sure how that happens.

I was thinking the same thing as I read it; but it's late in the year and the main part of the movie is in the next year, and of course the secession crisis also begun in late 1860, so with hindsight it's correct.

I assumed the first part had to be in early 1858, it usually doesn't snow before Christmas anywhere that far south. Really having snow on the ground in Texas at all is pretty odd, maybe that scene was supposed to be in the panhandle. The later scenes were clearly spring. But who knows when the Civil War started in the Tarantino universe. Mind you there are plenty of other anachronisms, I'm pretty sure dynamite hadn't been invented yet at that time and a lot of the clothes people at Candie's plantation were wearing were obviously from the 20th century (knowing Tarantino it could've just been some tribute to other films.) And of course at the time Schultz would not speak of "Germany".

Dynamite was invented in 1867. But I think the concept of Germany was well established at that time.

Quite.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I saw Rust and bone and I liked it, except for the ending.  Marion Cotillard was great and I think the film did a good job of raising an important issue (no spoilers).  I would recommend it.

[King]

Zero Dark Thirty

Good, kind of disturbing and a little too long. I think someone (BRTD?) mentioned this already but all of the characters are pretty unlikeable. Also the raid at the end left me feeling angry and disgusted, but maybe that was point. I'd like to look into how accurate certain parts of it were. Like The Hurt Locker, it's not something I'd be inclined to watch again but I'm glad I saw it.

Yeah I pointed that out about the characters. All very flat as well, no doubt intentionally.

I think just about everything in the movie was supposed to be morally ambiguous. It was just saying "This is how things work whether you like it or not". Obviously everyone ends up with different opinions.

The members of the Seal Team, in particular, come off like complete lowlifes.

They were rough, but I saw them as people who don't have much of a life outside their jobs and thus become their gritty and ugly work.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It was kind of disturbing though how casual they were about things like gunning down parents in front of their children (even if the parents were particularly despicable and unsympathetic individuals) and how that one guy didn't seem to care too much about threatening to open fire on the onlooking civilians if they didn't leave soon. Of course that's probably how most soldiers operate.

[Nhoj]

Looper I enjoyed it mostly, But it suffered the problem of most time travel films with certain parts not making any sense when I thought about it.

[afleitch]

Just watched the Iron Giant on TV. I almost forgot what a damned good movie that is.

[Insula Dei]

I saw Rust and bone and I liked it, except for the ending.  Marion Cotillard was great and I think the film did a good job of raising an important issue (no spoilers).  I would recommend it.

What did you think of Mathias Schoenaerts?

[Paul Kemp]

Safety Not Guaranteed

It was OK. Aubrey Plaza's monotone voice gets tiring after awhile.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Argo.

Been meaning to see it for ages, but glad I did. It's a really GOOD film, not great or trying to be so, it's a good and solid film.

[King]

I just saw Silver Linings Playbook.  Lawrence definitely deserves the Oscar over Chastain. 

Zero Dark Thirty was strong no matter what.  JL walks into what felt like a bad movie 30 minutes in makes it and everything around her good.