Movie/TV recommendations

[Roderick]

You're tearing me apaaaaart, Lisa!

[Lu]

sLs-PkfUS2g

[Gwardinen]

I keep hearing about the Room, but most of the things that people tell me are "so bad they're good" just leave me thinking they're so bad that they are actually just quite bad. That said, that clip did make me chuckle, so I may grab some friends and alcohol, as advised, and see if it's worthwhile.

[Roderick]

There's lots of smoky sax during the softporn scenes that riddle the first half of the movie. But really, it's something to behold. Tommy Wiseau's acting is a thing that never loses its incredible awkwardness.

[Orv]

I'm a big subscriber to the "so bad it's genius" idea, so The Room for me was fantastic(ly bad.)

[syntheticgerbil]

Even though complains that the last 30 minutes or so of Sushine are

crap because it becomes a slasher film,

it's one of the things that makes me like it more.

I do realize it's an abrupt change in tone and story pacing, but I feel it was appropriate because space feels so violent to me anyway so in the end, it was welcome (and chilling).

[Orv]

Still enjoy The Borgias. Yeah, it has a few issues, but I got over them in The Tudors and I can do it here.

You've all seen the RDJ Sherlock Holmes, yes? Just watched it again. Liked it even better the second time, I think. Rectify, if needed.

[Thyroid]

I want to see this movie. (Edit: d'oh.)

hRT86ZggCEk

Edited April 18, 2011 by Kroms

[Nappi]

I want to see this movie.

v=hRT86ZggCEk

Meta.

[Snooglebum]

I want to see this movie. (Edit: d'oh.)

hRT86ZggCEk

Why are they making another one? The first one was awesome enough. /childhood.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Why are they making another one? The first one was awesome enough. /childhood.

I think they really believed there was more story to tell. Oh wait, no. It's for the money.

[elmuerte]

It's Disney after all, a company that became big by leeching of other people's creations.

[vimes]

It's Disney after all, a company that became big by leeching of other people's creations.

Don't you think you might be exaggerating just a bit ?

There were - and still might be - shady businesses at Disney, but you can't say that Frank Thomas, Milt Kahl, Mary Blair or even more recently Glenn Kean leeched their way to success : they pioneered animation and 2D art in a big way throughout the 20th century and it's ignorant - or if you know, then it's a bit asshol-ish - to not at least recognize that.

[syntheticgerbil]

Haha, the flack towards the company itself is more than well deserved for x number of reasons over decades upon decades. I always find it strange when people feel they have to defend such a large corporation

As some of the Nine Old Men you named and Mary Blair, I don't think El Meurte was explicitly attacking any of them. I'm not so sure it's correct to call them all pioneers since a lot of techniques that the animators or artists used at Disney had already been existing or started by someone else, the only major difference is the people you named and the other major Disney animators, many of which left to do other things with their career, tended to do it all well.

I sure do think Glen Keane is complete and utter shit though.

That is all getting sidetracked, but it's basically to say, I think in general when anyone is badmouthing Disney, there is a disconnect from the studio that was doing well in the 30s, 40s, and 50s (and a little more) that hardly anyone is referring to, especially the individual artists. I would venture to guess El Meurte is referring possibly to Kimba/Lion King, Nadia/Atlantis, and Thief and the Cobbler/Aladdin besides the fact that a large body of the studio's work consists of watering down an existing story and adding animal friends/talking objects.

[vimes]

Haha, the flack towards the company itself is more than well deserved for x number of reasons over decades upon decades. I always find it strange when people feel they have to defend such a large corporation

What does the fact that Disney is 'such a large corporation' has anything to do with anything? It's big, so it's wrong to defend it ?

By the way, I'm not the one making broad statement about a company with a century of history, dozens of CEO, surely a few hundreds of projects and several thousand employees; you seem to be.

You read me wrong if you think I'm defending the corporation as a whole : I'm not, I'm defending the fact that it is false to state that their animation branch became successful because everybody involved was an opportunistic bastard... management and Walt Disney himself did go down that route several times - I'm pretty sure I know about the most rotten skeletons in their closets - but to bundle everybody together is too much of a shortcut.

I sure do think Glen Keane is complete and utter shit though.

Complete and utter shit, then.

[MrHoatzin]

I am reading what elmuerte said as Disney's attitude towards public domain. Disney himself did wonders with public domain works in his early days, only to turn around and extend copyright to last forever and rape anyone who dare touch his/its IP.

[DanJW]

I do think that the company you choose to work for reflects upon you as an individual. Those people mentioned may be lovely and talented and uncorruptable, but surely they have an inkling into the less salubrious side of the organization. At that point it becomes a question of whether you choose to uphold your moral beliefs or compromise them for a chance of success. Of course nearly everyone would choose the same option, to be able to do the thing they love doing; but still...

Perhaps they are trying to improve it from within. I hope so.

[syntheticgerbil]

What does the fact that Disney is 'such a large corporation' has anything to do with anything? It's big, so it's wrong to defend it ?

For all of the following reasons:

By the way, I'm not the one making broad statement about a company with a century of history, dozens of CEO, surely a few hundreds of projects and several thousand employees; you seem to be.

You read me wrong if you think I'm defending the corporation as a whole : I'm not, I'm defending the fact that it is false to state that their animation branch became successful because everybody involved was an opportunistic bastard... management and Walt Disney himself did go down that route several times - I'm pretty sure I know about the most rotten skeletons in their closets - but to bundle everybody together is too much of a shortcut.

And the animated branch you are speaking of has been split, reorganized, redone, changed ideals, and is just generally really difficult to pinpoint that what's been going on in the last 30-40 years is the same as what was going on in the first 30-40 years. I just don't think "Disney: The Animation Group" can even be thought of a single entity for a century, even aside from the Disney corporations media tendrils extending far, far past just animation now.

I do think that the company you choose to work for reflects upon you as an individual. Those people mentioned may be lovely and talented and uncorruptable, but surely they have an inkling into the less salubrious side of the organization.

Good point. I think it's important to note that even in the golden age of animation, many artists and animators left Disney because of Walt himself, a lot having to do with his involvement in the Red Scare.

Edited April 19, 2011 by syntheticgerbil

[elmuerte]

I am reading what elmuerte said as Disney's attitude towards public domain. Disney himself did wonders with public domain works in his early days, only to turn around and extend copyright to last forever and rape anyone who dare touch his/its IP.

Yes, that.

I don't know much about technology developed by certain Disney employees; well, except the copy-paste method of movie making, the awful work conditions, the lack of recognition for employees work.

Seriously, the number of original Disney movies could be counted on 1 or 2 hands. Let's see: The Rescuers, The Rescuers Down Under, Lilo & Stitch, Ducktales the movie, erm...

[Roderick]

The Lincoln Lawyer: Bitching film. It's a relatively unassuming courtroom thriller, but craftily made and a very convincing performance from Matthew McConaughey.

[vimes]

And the animated branch you are speaking of has been split, reorganized, redone, changed ideals, and is just generally really difficult to pinpoint that what's been going on in the last 30-40 years is the same as what was going on in the first 30-40 years.

Yes, that's why I'm citing specific artists (I could also quote specific films and eras, because they're not consistent throughout their career; like James Baxter) for which I have lots of respect instead of qualifying the branch as a whole, forever.

[JonCole]

The Lincoln Lawyer: Bitching film. It's a relatively unassuming courtroom thriller, but craftily made and a very convincing performance from Matthew McConaughey.

That movie really surprised me. It wasn't anything particularly novel or original, but it was just so well executed that I had a blast with it. Not to mention the sheer amount of acting talent packed into it, which definitely helped even if an A+ actor wasn't fully used.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Vimes is right. Disney is a soulless fuck of a company, but to say that they only became successful because they leeched other people's work is untrue.

Also, to say they leeched from "public domain" works in their early days is untrue. Their first films were Pinocchio, Dumbo, Bambi, and they were all based on copyrighted works. Fantasia was original. Only their very first, Snow White, was a public domain story.

Edited April 20, 2011 by ThunderPeel2001

[ThunderPeel2001]

Your Highness. Your Dullness, more like.

[elmuerte]

Fantasia was original.

It was (partially) based on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer%27s_Apprentice