Sexo Y Lucia(Sex & Lucia)


This Spanish film is about a girl called Lucia(Light) and Sex...More importantly it's about tangled love affairs,holes in the world,one night stands,killer dog,porn,long lost daughter....

Writer has one night stand on an island (Las Palmas,one of those) then goes home and meets Lucia who's an obsessed fan of his and they fall in love and have sex...A lot....Then he hears from his friend of a woman who's looking for a man who she had a one night stand with and who's the father of her daughter.He surreptitiously meets the daughter and her nanny and goes slightly mad with desire for the nanny and with paternal feelings for his daughter,he ends up going over to his daughter's house and I could go on but I'm not making much sense but trust me it's a very interesting art-house but accesible film wiht some wonderful performances and some graphical scenes of nudity as well...

Marvellous,sexy,deranged and so much better than my review!

I recommend it...

fanturmandos wrote:


...and Jerry Mathers as the Beaver

Did we forget anyone?!?!

But it's boring.

Anything about Russian history is interesting to me. I sometimes have very odd taste though.

I watched War and Peace on television the other night. Well made film. Never bothered to read the book before.

The Ring twO

[site: http://www.ring2-themovie.com/ ]
[WARNING: SPOILERS]

Directed by Hideo Nakata
Produced by Dreamworks

Goddamn, it could've been so much better.

Let's go back in time a bit. It all started with the 1998 Japanese horror movie about a tape which killed people seven days after they watched it, documenting a disturbing mystery about a little girl who was murdered, the circumstances of her death and a sadistic ghost. That was Ringu (based off a novel by K?ji Suzuki). Ringu grew to be a cult legend and an international smash-hit, prompting a wave of copycat films- not just in Japanese cinema but across the globe, with comparable successes in Korea and, eventually, the US, with the 2002 remake The Ring (directed by Gore Verbinski).

The Ring was fantastic. I loved it. Film purists will always cry that the remake is never as good as the original, but here we can dismiss that as petty whining. Verbinski's remake added a creative Hollywood twist to the slow-venom style of Japanese horror that made Ringu so famous, by adding some very well-executed "jump-scares," and employing special effects that Ringu could only've dreamed of. In the end, The Ring revived the phenomenon that was the original in frightening new life. With booming success in America (p[rompting a new wave of wannabes, like FearDotCom), a sequel was inevitable. And who to direct it?

Hideo Nakata. Better known as the director of the original Ringu. A recipe for success. When I heard of a sequel I was ecstatic. I couldn't wait to have my pants reshat with FEAR.

Where did it all go so wrong?

Where The Ring was an innovative film as far as the America horror genre goes, The Ring twO was just your average run-of-the-mill ghost movie. It makes all the mistakes its predecessor skillfully avoided. I had fun watching it only as an avid fan of the original, but as a movie on its own, it fell flat on its face. Nakata pulled off the monster that started it all, so we know he's capable of amazing stuff. And the writer for twO was also the writer for Verbinski's remake, so we know they could do better too. So why is twO so bland and uninspired?

The simple, sad answer is that it was a sequel made for the sake of making a sequel. And so a bit of greed and uncaring ruined what could've been a renaissance in American film. Don't misread me- it's happened before, and it's no surprise to me. After seeing the trailers I knew it would be like this. But still.

Goddamn, it could've been so much better.

Where does it go wrong? It forsakes key aspects that made the (American) original so fantastic.

Character development. Naomi Watts starred in The Ring as Rachel Keller, a determined reporter dragged into the terrifying world of the Ring when the daughter of a friend falls victim to the cursed tape. Rachel has a spooky son, Aidan (David Dorfman), and an ambiguous relationship with a man named Noah (Martin Henderson). All three become entangled in the curse of the Ring when they watched the tape, and have seven days to solve to meaning of the disturbing images contained in it or suffer the same fate as Rachel's friend's daughter.

Rachel is very much in control of her professional life, but we see she struggles to be a good mother to Aidan and has trouble really connecting to him. She has similar issues with Noah. None of this is spelled out for us- it's between the lines, conveyed over some subtle and intelligent dialogue that makes the characters real, and thus their plight and terror belieavable and significant. twO decides this is a bad idea. The characters become shallow, and thus, lose all terror.

Even the mother of the little girl in the tape- Samara Morgan, the ghost antagonist of the two films- is disappointingly unfrightening, simple, and dull. Rachel's opening dialogue with Aidan is groanarific- it opens with an awkward series of exchanges where Rachel unconvincingly pleads with Aidan for him to call her "mom," not "Rachel." Immediately we know this will become a theme later on in the movie when Samara possesses Aidan and Rachel must confront the ghost and search out ehr real son. If you can't tell that from this dialogue you would know it from the trailers, all of which explain this much.

The director and writer may as well have beaned you on the forehead with a mallet and very slowly explained to you the entire plot of the movie right now.

Rachel loses all her depth. She becomes determined to save her son from Samara's grip, even if it means confronting her wildest fears from The Ring all ove ragain, all of which she does with zero hesitation. How are we supposed to be scared if the protagonist is a stone-willed supermom with the personality of a shallow puddle?

In Verbinski's Ring, Rachel explored the haunted history of Samara, the Morgan Ranch and the killer video with a degree of trepidation. At first she really doesn't believe what is going on, and even as she accepts the horrifying reality Samara is creating, she only moves forward because she must, because her life is on the line and because the seemingly omnipotent, omnipresent and psychotic ghost of Samara is persistently goading her on with harrowing hallucinations and poultergeistry. In twO she leaps into danger's way, there's even a scene where her psychic son is literally screaming at her to drive and get the fuck out of a certain patch of road, and Rachel just sits there, dumbfounded, asking her son what he means.

At the end Rachel excorcises Samara's ghost from her son's body, but all is not over- the relentless spirit returns again, undaunted, to claim their lives. At this point I want to slap the schmuck who scripted this, because this is the one plot point that perfectly encapsulates why twO loses, via shittty character development, nearly all possibility for terrifying the audience.

Rachel immediately decides to confront the ghost, face-to-face, unfazed, and let the ghost take her into its world so that her son can be free from its grip. I repeat. She sacrifices herself to the ghost. In the first time she is (very rightfully) terrified of the thing- Samara's visions and hauntings are batshit horrifying, and all Rachel wants is to be free from them once and for all, to escape Samara's realm of terror at any cost. She never gives herself up to Samara, ever, in fact, every time she confronts her Rachel runs away in terror. Rachel is the audience's stand-in in the movie. If she's not scared out of her wits, how can we ever be?

But, no. Rachel confronts the ghost, gives herself up to it, then bests the ghost in a physical comeptition, and that's the end of the story. It's pathetic. what made Samara's ghost chilling in The Ring was that she could do anything, she could be anywhere- indeed, she was everywhere, the characters weren't even safe in their dreams. At the end of Ring, Noah actually tries to run away at the end of his seven days and the ghost catches up to him by teleporting agressively right above him. In twO, the ghost and Rachel are stucka t the bottom of a well and must climb out. Not only does Rachel get a five minute headstart where the director tries to build a suspense that should only be in action movies (it's a Does-the-hero-make-it-in-time? suspense, not a Holy-shit-something-terrible-is-about-to-happen suspense), but the ghost all of the sudden can't flicker, transport itself, or teleport like she does throughout the the two movies before that point.

That scene had the potential to be hair-raising. Samara is sufficiently creepy scaling the walls of the well- her joints bend in ways that human joints shouldn't, she moves with a frighteningly jerky speed undaunted by pain or difficultly. It makes her look really, really cool. I loved that part. what killed the scene, though, is that all it took to beat Samara was to go into the TV with her, climb a well faster than her with a big headstart, and close it. That's it. All of the sudden a horror mystery with your life on the line against an omnipresent, vicious spirit becomes an episode of American Gladiators where you compete against a dead five-year-old-girl. Spooky.

Nevermind that this opens up at least twenty-nine plotholes, and leaves you feeling sorely disappointed. Samara died in the first place because she was sealed in that very same well. So- why would, uhm, sealing her ghost in that well...stop it? As a matter of fact, it never stopped it before- the well was sealed when Rachel rediscovers it in Ring. You could suggest that the well Rachel seals in twO is the metaphysical well in the world of Samara's tape, but even that doesn't work. Why? Because every time you see the tape, you'll notice- there isn't a seal anywhere around the well.

And that's the other big reason why twO fails to deliver. It castrates all its insturments of horror. Samara is downsized from an unstoppable, undead, omnipotent psychopath who rips apart her victim's psyches for a week before disfiguring their bodies in a moment of raw terror and leaving the mangled corpse for their loved ones to find- to a dumb little witch who just wants a mommy really badly. Rachel even has a secret huddle-session with Aidan in their dreams, where Aidan explains very clearly literally exactly how to beat Samara. Wait. I thought Samara could invade their dreams? She could before. Whoops.

In the very beginning they ditch the very gimmick of the whole series, the evil tape, and switch to a ghost-on-the-loose plot. Where the first one tried to unravel the mystery of the perturbed imagery on the tape, the second is just an action-movie showdown between a fmaily and a ghost.

Rachel even delivers a tagline as she "finishes" Samara's ghost! You know, like when Ahnold goes "You have been terminated" as he kamikaze's the badguy in Terminator 3. As Rachel seals the well, she shouts back "I'm not your fucking mommy!" what in the holy hell were they thinking? You never, never have the goodguys face down the ghost, beat the crap out of it and shout back a final insult! what kind of horror is that? Not only is Rachel facing her fears without blinking, she's facing the audience's fears for them, and kicking the crap out of them.

twO ditches the tape gimmick and in doing so loses any real plotline. It drops character depth and so the movie becomes straightforward and dull. It castrates all the fearful elements of the original and so, all things considered, it moves from a goddamn scary ghost story to a cartoonish action-drama where we know the good guys will win, we know exactly how, and the horror elements become just simple bad guys.

To be fair, there were some awesome scenes, and some fantastic shots, and creative "twists." But they were few and far between, and far from enough to save the whole movie. All in all, twO feels like it should've been the crappy TV miniseries inspired by the movie rather than its actual followup.

Goddamn, it could've been so much better.

Oh well.

The Island

Just saw it. I consider it a good moive. Not so much as I liked the plot and setting, but that it had all the elements of a good movie. There was proper character developement as to care about these characters. There was a bad-guy that was all bad and a bad guy that had some good in him (which critics love, but in movie goers don't. The general population likes things black and white). The audience even cheered with a bad guy got hurt or killed. There were a lot of intense action scences and the score was good. The only thing I didn't like about the movie is all the product placement advertising. It was disguesting and the six movie previews I had to watch. So if you like science fiction flicks, see it in the theaters. If not, see it on DVD.

i haven't seen this movie yet!

soem people say its stupid
can some write a review aboot it
"date Movie"

I think maybe the product placement in The Island was on purpose -- kind of a comment on society.

It always seems the vices of today's society are either ten times worse or totally ignored in futuristic movies.

I keep wanting to write a review on Serenity, but I always end up going way into the show Firefly (the inspiration for the movie) and trashing the whole thing because it's not a coherent review. Let's see if my luck is better this time.

First of all, I loved Serenity. (Of course I was a hardcore fan of Firefly first, but we'll ignore that for now.) It was written by Joss Whedon, creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer -- which unfortunately gives him a bad reputation in my opinion. Buffy, for all its virtues, is cheesy. But with a bigger budget, better special effects, and believable characters and plotlines, Joss gets a chance to really show off his skills.

I have to take my hat off to the cast. Each one is perfectly chosen for her/his role. The dialogue is brillantly witty and the characters are familiar, but not stereotypical.

I also resent the comparisons with Star Wars. This isn't some shiny, bright, aliens-and-humans-and-robots movie. This is a future where one planet cannot support the human race, and so they've expanded to several planets which have been "terraformed" to support human life. After that, settler families are dumped on the planet with the bare essentials to survive, and are left to fend for themselves. It's very much based in the whole "Wild West" idea; much like Americans spread across America, humanity is now spreading ever farther out into the galaxy. And like the old West, things are not so orderly out on the border.

Enter Captain Malcolm Reynolds and his crew. They're the equivalent of Old-West good guys, the ones who sometimes have to be the bad guy to keep being the good guy. I'd run down the plot specifically, but you can just as easily look it up if you haven't already seen it.

The point is, I loved it because of its realness. Yes, there's new technology -- spaceships and flying cities and whatnot -- but it's all so believable, you feel as if you could go find Captain Reynolds and beg to sign on after the movie's over. The characters are well-developed -- there's a love interest between Kaylee and Simon that finally comes to fruition (if you watched the series, you know she's wanted him since episode one), as well as one between the captain and Innara that seems to lurk unspoken in every conversation between them. River's psychic outbursts (and her psychotic ones) are so well played, it's hard to watch the cast interviews afterward and see her acting normal. And Jane is just hilarious as the ruthless, classless, mercenary man's man. Zoe is brilliant as Mal's warrior-woman sidekick and Wash's loving wife; and I've always had a soft spot for the quirky, wisecracking Wash. (The scene where they crash-land Serenity on Mr.Universe's planet makes me cry every time.)

All in all, it's a fantasy I love getting lost in. The characters feel like old friends, the dialogue well-written and acted with perfect realism; the plot is filled with action and intrigue without the schmaltzy grandeur of a giant intergalactic battle between Light and Dark; the only thing resembling space monsters are the terrifying Reavers, who are presumed to be human all along (no fake foreheads or blue skin here); the technology is innocuous and seems essential in context, rather than shiny, new, and beyond the realm of imagination. The whole thing is a seamless blend of space adventure and wild western.

Even if you hate science fiction, this one's worth watching.

THanks

Sorry, I haven't seen Date Movie, otherwise I would critique it for you.

But doesn't it have Alyson Hannigan in it? I would think that alone would bring it up a notch, at least. She does good work.

I Dunno
People I Know Say Its Stupid And Imature
But what Isn't These Days

Kung Fu Hustle

Wonderfully funny, in a comical way, and exciting, I really enjoyed watching this film. Even with its moderate display of blood and violence I thought it was not overdone, or excessive.
Story of a group of gangsters who wish to teach a lesson to a neighbourhood of poor folk, problem being that numerous ex-martial arts masters reside there.
Running along side this story is of a young man who, as a child, longed to be a hero... a good guy, but after a run in with some young bullies decided that the bad guys will always win and now is desperately trying to join up with the gang.


I watched the movie with subtitles, so I can't really say if it was a good dub or not, I kind of think that live action is always best seen in its native tounge.

Marie Antoinette

If at any time in the coming few weeks, you are compelled to be outraged by an absurd rendering of the tale of a French queen’s life, there is no better place for you to be than in the front row of Sofia Copolla’s “Marie Antoinette,” (played by Kirsten Dunst).

The movie begins with a rousing rendition of “Natural’s Not In It,” played by Gang of Four, which was not all-together bad, however stark in contrast it was with anything which would feasibly have been played in 18th century France (or 18th century anywhere, for that matter), but it could be argued that the musical selections for the film were consistent with the motif for the rest of it: horrendously incongruous with reality.

However, there were distractions from vulgar fallacies which colored the film, if you happen to be diverted by any of the following things: Kirsten Dunst crying, Kirsten Dunst sighing longingly, Kirsten Dunst picking flowers, Kirsten Dunst smelling flowers, Kirsten Dunst choosing an outfit, Kirsten Dunst demonstrating frivolity, Kirsten Dunst engaging in drunken debauchery, or Kirsten Dunst sashaying down corridors, all of which occupied the one hundred minutes of the film which Kirsten Dunst did not spend spiritlessly trying to seduce King Louis XVI (played by Jason Schwartzman) in bed.

Don’t get the point yet? Close your eyes, and try to imagine spending one hour and forty-three minutes watching a single droplet of water descend the windshield of your car. I give my word (good as gold!) that “Marie Antoinette” was less stimulating.

The most powerful part of the film occurred towards the very end, as wrathful mobs assembled outside the gates of Versailles--yelling, brandishing weapons, and generally making a raucous... the din they created was nearly a fraction of that created by the audience as the credits exploded on screen.

For this crime committed against movie-goers everywhere and history as we know it, I recommend Sofia Copolla be sentenced to death by the guillotine (which was mysteriously absent from her production...) If you think that’s too harsh a sentence, you were evidently smarter than I, and elected not to see this movie.

1/2 Star (Costumes and set-design were well-done.)

---
Something I wrote for school, I'm open to criticism on the writing style and stuff.

V for Vendetta


I finally saw it on cable. Interesting. Did anyone else notice that William Hurt, who played the victim in 1984 is now the evil master in this movie? Anyways, I see what the author is trying to do, etc., It give hints that are happening now, like the rumor that Bush knew about 9/11 (It wasn't the Jews, people). If a nuclear bomb went off in an American city, a similar society might emerge were protection is more important than rights. In the US, Bushbots still think that Bush is the only person capable of stopping terrorist threats.

Conspiracy Theory; If after the democrats win the presidency in 2008, who wants to bet a terrorist attack will happen shortly afterwards?

Bridge to terabitha or however you spell it.

Horrible. Nice effects, but I left the movie with a feeling of disgust over the fact that girl died. Movies are suppose to make people feel better.

love Me If You Dare (Jeux d'Enfants)

This French film was lent to me by a friend, and until last night I hadn't really found much place in my life for a subtitled, very French, romantic yet dark film. But it's most definitely snuggled in there somewhere very comfortably now.

This film is charming, funny, so gloriously passionate and full of things that you do only in daydreams and wishful thinking. I wouldn't be surprised if the makers put some sort of 'not-satisfied?-get-your-money-back' kind of guarantee on it, because they can stay safe in the knowledge that this film is going to be a favourite of anyone who gets their hands on it.

The story revolves around a boy and a girl growing up in France, quite literally playing their lives away together in a never-ending game of Dares. Though their antics border on the downright unpleasant and unsuitable (such as the little girl dancing and singing on the grave of the boy's dead mother) somehow it's charming.
I particularly liked the script. Most romantic film scripts tend to be clichéd, but this one was humorous and nicely surreal, and I couldn't really find a cliché about it. It was fairly obvious they were clearly in love with each other, but I can't complain about the portrayal of how they start to come together at all.

Sometimes the story breaks into the bizarre daydreams of the characters, which I liked. I mean, who doesn't have those totally odd, frighteningly out-there daydreams? You can relate to the people in this film. They are human like you, vivid on screen. You come to know them and you begin to like them without realising it.

The ending was slightly shocking to say the least, and I wish it hadn't been spoilt for me because I think I would have been hit a lot harder by it, got the full effect - but nonethless, this film is well worth a watch for all its honesty mixed in with surreality and daydreams.

Bruce Campbell film: My Name is Bruce

i like his movies Army of darkness is to cool the boomstick rulez
top B-movie.

Hey I just recently saw two movie of Inception and sat but I like most inception movie because The story concept was really awesome but End was bad so I am little bit disappoint with end. But sat is ok movie not good. Angelina was looking very nice in this movie.

what an excellent review.

Interesting post dude.... discussion are always helpful in one way or the other. Thanks for giving out information. It’s really nice and mean full.

Koyaanisqatsi:

I hear the new Batman-movie, "The Dark-Knight rises" is a really good movie; people are just dying to see it...