to Willy Wonka?

Depp looks like a, uhm, errr, how to put this ... a chick. 

And Depp sounds like a 16-yr old goth schoolgirl brat - especially when he goes "eww!"

But if there's anyone that can make this film worthwhile, it's Depp :) 

he is obviously having fun making the flick.

I can't wait to see Keith Richards as his poppa in Pirates of the Caribean 2. 

but I thought the other two EE's were much better than the theatrical cuts. They just flowed a lot smoother. TTT in particular benefited a lot from the EE. 

is an absolute gun, if Willy wonka sucks, there's a veru good chance it wont be because of him. 

Directed by
Pier Paolo Pasolini

Wow... just... wow... I don't really know what to say about this movie. It made my uncomfortable, it cleared out half of the theatre during the 3rd act.

I don't think I can recommend anyone except the extremely curious go watch this film. Not that it is a bad movie, it's VERY true to the original text (by Marquis De Sade) except for it being set in WW2 italy.

the Basic story premise is 4 friends ( 2 brothers) of powerful status in society round up 16 youths (including their own daughters, whom they marry off to each other), boys and girls, who are taken away to their villa. Then over the course of 2 hours they act out any and all perversions that they feel like. It starts with sex, and quickly turns into something else. Apparently this is all social commentary on fascism and anti consumerism by Pasolini... I can't really say.

In an ironic twist however Pasolini himself was murdered 1 week after the release of this film by a Male prostitute which he frequented.

The film was also banned in the UK for over 25 years, and probably in alot of other places.

This is a hard movie to watch, so bring a date. 

Why do I keep hearing about this? Is it being re-released in cinemas or something? Anyway, shit-eating and eyeball-slitting isn't really my cup of cha, if you know what I mean, so I'll probably give this one a miss. 

Pope set out to watch a movie centred on one taboo I picked a movie centred on another: canibalism. Ravenous isn't a Texas Chainsaw style slasher and is more entertaining for it. The music is good and is downright innapropriate at times which serves to add the the discomfort while watching some scenes. Also, I would recommend you don't watch this film if you're a little hungry. I did and I ended up feeling a little guilty over it.

Anyways, good movie. 

anyone seen it? what's it like? 

finally got around to seeing the enitre thing. First impression is that it wasnt as good as the previous EE's. FOTR:EE smoothed out the flow of the theatrical and the film was better for it. TTT:EE was the best one because I thought the theatrical cut was severely lacking and the EE fixed it up.

This one adds a few good scenes, but a lot of it seems like fluff (in a movie that already contained quite a few moments of cheese in between a lot of greatness). I would have added only the extended fight scenes, saruman's scene, the extended scene in the dead city (I liked the skull fall), the gandalf-witch king confrontation, the mouth of sauron scene and the aragorn-palantir scene. The rest didnt add much. The House of healing scene was ok, but was as poor in establishing the eowyn-faramir scenario as the theatrical was.

Still, I'm glad i watched it and maybe it works better on repeat viewings. 

The last 15 minutes were a letdown and the overall script could have been better but its a well made and reasonably well acted film. Stylish action and cinematography.

7.5/10 

So you saw Saw you say?

It was a shakey cam. The funney thing is that the colour shift the process causes was apropriate to the film.

All I can say is that the amount of time left in the film was proportional to how much sense it was making. In a good suspence movie you don't know the ending before it happens, but when it does happen you feel like you could have seen it comming. No body could have seen the ending of Saw comming. I bet the writer didn't see it comming either. He probably got fucked up on cocaine, went on a writing binge, and when he came to was shocked at the ending he had written and submitted. 

Clunky, muddled film from Orson Welles. Maybe the hour that was cut out by studio execs could have redeemed this but in its current form, it is a bit of a stinker. Welles is miscast and the film seems to change tone every 5 minutes for no real reason.

The only reason to see this through was Rita Hayworth. I know whe was a WWII pinup etc but I hadnt seen her apart from in photos. What a stunner! Every time she's on screen, it's hard to take you eyes off her. Pity about the film though. 

[b]The Incredibles[/b] - Very good, only it whets my appetite for what Pixar can do when they break off from Disney. Their best film since Toy Story (the others were good too but these 2 are my favorites).

[b]The 39 Steps[/b] - Good early Hitchcok film, very reminiscent of the later North by Northwest but noas spectacular. Its a very good film in its own right though, and quite funny too.

[b]Bourne supremacy[/b] - pretty good action flick, let down by frenetic editing in two key action scenes which looked like (from what was possible) that they were actually decently staged. I prefer bourne identity but this is still not bad.

[b]The Lady Vanishes[/b] - another good early hitch film that starts off more a comedy than a mystery but gradually moves along with his signature direction. Some of the dialog is hilarious.

[b]The Postman Always Rings Twice[/b] - good noir film thats more of a romance than a crime film with romance. Still, its pretty good although the first half seems to be in slow burn while the second whistles past too quick.

[b]This Gun For Hire[/b] - Low level early film noir. Above average script coupled with avergae direction and some average to above average performances. Not bad, but hardly the best noir film goign around. Veronica Lake does look very pretty though. 

Was fucking awesome. I haven't seen a movie great in such a long time. Gonna pick up a copy sometime this week for myself, a buddy of mine rented it and we're both gonna buy it. It was funny, it was a comedy, a horror flick, and drama all at once and worked so remarkably well. Great stuff, diffenently one of the tops for the year. 

Loved it. every part that was added I loved...

Spoilers, I guess, here on in.

...except I have mixed feelings on Saruman being killed on top of his tower rather than the original film being closer to the book and leaving him there for all eternity. (In the book he later escapes and is killed in much the same way as in EE, but that's besides the point). But I like how it made the seeing orb (can't remember it's correct name) make sense being in the water... alot of the additions made me happy this way, making things make more sense.

My fave addition was The Mouth of Sauron, which confuses me why it was cut, since it was excellant.

Now I need to get the EE of the first two films, which I missed. Hope those are as cool as this. 

IMHO the first two films have betetr EE:s, especially TTT (though FOTR was almost perfect in the theatrical anyway). 

Yes, I felt that the EE's of the first two films generally worked better than the ROTK EE, despite suffering from the same pacing problems (there's a reason we don't see the EE's in the cinema, and it's not just because of the running time). Although I hated Fellowship's extended Hobbiton intro, which was pants IMO. 

because I thought the theatrical felt disjointed and not very smooth. The EE fixed that up. 

Gilda - Had to see this after being gobsmacked by Rita Hayworth in Lady From Shanghai. On its own, it's a decent low level noir film which would have been better with a better ending and an actor like Bogart in Glenn Ford's role. Still, it provides for further gobsmacking as Rita Hayworth looks absolutely stunning. And she knows she looks absolutely stunning. That combination makes it a breeze to sit through the film.

The Killers - Saw the 1946 version with Burt Lancaster and Ava Gardner. This is a damn fine hard edged noir film, just the way they should be. Whilst nothing that comes afterwards matches the sheer brilliance of the opening, its a very well made and engrossing film that would have to be one of the masterpieces of the genre. 

I saw Finding Nemo last night. I honestly wasn't expecting much, but it turned out to be an amusing and entertaining film.

I also watched The Butterfly Effect (the DC, not theatrical version). I have vague remembrances of people saying it sucked, but I rather thought it was good. But people were probably talking about the theatrical version, which apparently had more of a Hollywood ending to it. From the descriptions I've heard of the theatrical ending, the DC ending really makes a lot more sense and fits in better with the movie. But then again, I'm a sucker for introspective films, so I'm apt to liking this one. 

can I ask why you thought it would suck?

Just interested. 

Pixar movies for me have a habit of looking like they are going to disapoint me by sucking badly, when I originally heard the premise for Monsters Inc. I thought it sounded crap, saw the trailers, got interested, went to see it and loved it. Same with Finding Nemo. And while I haven't seen the Incredibles yet I fully intend to in the next few days as the trailers have convinced me that it might actually be a good film. :)

I think it is just an aversion to some of the stinkers Disney has put out over the last few years. While I know that Pixar only makes good films, I see the Disney logo on the first teaser trailers and it sends me into a cold sweat. 

I assume you're refering to Nemo.

Quite frankly the premise didn't sound interesting to me. I mean, a fish swimming through the ocean looking for his lost son? It sounds like a boring story and boring visuals.

And people had mentioned that they thought it was funny, but not as funny as other Pixar works. My sense of humor is rather warped--and comedies that are supposed to be "uproariously funny" tend to only hold one or two laughs for me--so I figured I wouldn't find it amusing at all.

So by this point I'm thinking, boring story, boring visuals, unfunny--why bother?

Except, of course, I was wrong. 

I want to see The Incredibles when it comes out on DVD, as that looks like it will be amusing, too. (See? It's not that I'm not interested in kid's movies; I'm just not interested in kid's movies that I'm not interested in. Make sense?)