RealGM

RiotPunch wrote:
Good points. Didn't mean to rattle your Big Willie Style cage.

Awesome.

You didn't rattle my cage! THAT'S JUST THE WAY I TALK!

I can't believe anyone believes Will Smith is a better actor than Jamie Foxx. I guess to each his own but whew, take away Booty Call and the resumes speak for themselves. While I think Smith has carved out a nice little niche for himself as an action star, he doesn't have the chops to stack up to Foxx. TBH, I've always had an issue with him since he ruined Ali.

This situation reminds me a bit of Basterds. Initially Adam Sandler was supposed to play Eli Roth's character of Donny "The Bear Jew" Donowicz. In fact the part was specifically written for him ash e and QT are very good friends. In the end he dropped to film "Funny People" and Roth was asked to do it. While the character was small, it was significant, and the more I think about it, Sandler could have ruined the entire movie given 5 minutes of screen time.

Finally found the time to catch up on Fringe, man this season has been awesome, sad that there are only 3 more episodes left.

jakecronus8 wrote:This situation reminds me a bit of Basterds. Initially Adam Sandler was supposed to play Eli Roth's character of Donny "The Bear Jew" Donowicz. In fact the part was specifically written for him ash e and QT are very good friends. In the end he dropped to film "Funny People" and Roth was asked to do it. While the character was small, it was significant, and the more I think about it, Sandler could have ruined the entire movie given 5 minutes of screen time.

My god that would have been horrible.

PkrsBcksGphsMqt wrote:

jakecronus8 wrote:This situation reminds me a bit of Basterds. Initially Adam Sandler was supposed to play Eli Roth's character of Donny "The Bear Jew" Donowicz. In fact the part was specifically written for him ash e and QT are very good friends. In the end he dropped to film "Funny People" and Roth was asked to do it. While the character was small, it was significant, and the more I think about it, Sandler could have ruined the entire movie given 5 minutes of screen time.

My god that would have been horrible.

No doubt. The Mike Myers cameo was bad enough.

Anyone keeping up with the final season of The Office or season 5 of Parks & Rec? I'm excited for both to return.

Also excited to check out 1600 Penn. Looks pretty funny.

Caught the pilot of 1600 Penn. Other than seeing Bill Pullman as the president again I wasn't impressed.

RiotPunch wrote:Lincoln was very good, but I would not call it great. It was very slow and focused a bit too much on the wrong things, I thought. Some people raved about it, but it was something like a 7/10 for me.

Lincoln: DD Lewis is a lock for best actor and Tommy Lee Jones may get best supporting. It is the kind of politically correct movie the Academy loves. It's basically another Shindler's List type movie. It was very narrowly focused exclusively on the 13th Ammendment Freeing the slaves. These movies are never that entertaining, but it was very well done.

The most entertaining flicks I have seen this year (no order); Safety Not Guaranteed, End of Watch, Arbitrage, Dark Knight Rises, Skyfall, and The Avengers.

John Dies at the End was the most unique movie, and kept your interest.
Ted was the funniest.
Disappointments: Taken 2, Dredd, and Killing Them Softly

I thought The Avengers was horrible and Batman was okay, but I'm so tired of all the superhero stuff.


2012 Favorites: Lawless, Argo, Lincoln, Moonrise Kingdom, End of Watch, The Grey, Looper, Ted, Marley, 21 Jump Street.


Haven't seen Django or Zero yet.

Be nice when a movie comes out about Wall Street that doesn't demonize the industry. All in all, a good year for film.

blazza18 wrote:Caught the pilot of 1600 Penn. Other than seeing Bill Pullman as the president again I wasn't impressed.

When NBC showed a special preview about a month ago it was so poorly received it trended on twitter for the better part of a day just by people talking about how awful it was.

I just saw Ted about a week ago and I thought it was incredibly overrated. With that being said I'm not a fan of Family Guy at all. Although the little bit of Seth MacFarlane stand up I've seen is actually pretty decent.

Nebula1 wrote:Be nice when a movie comes out about Wall Street that doesn't demonize the industry. All in all, a good year for film.

Agreed, I usually avoid all Wall Street movies because I just assume it will be a politically motivated 90 minute smear by some liberal director.

Nebula1 wrote:I thought The Avengers was horrible and Batman was okay, but I'm so tired of all the superhero stuff.


2012 Favorites: Lawless, Argo, Lincoln, Moonrise Kingdom, End of Watch, The Grey, Looper, Ted, Marley, 21 Jump Street.


Haven't seen Django or Zero yet.

Be nice when a movie comes out about Wall Street that doesn't demonize the industry. All in all, a good year for film.

I'm not a huge super hero guy either- it def has been over-played, but they will keep doing it until the crowds bow out. That said, I still found them to be well done and entertaining, but didn't even bother to see Spiderman, Green whatever, and Captain America.

As far as Wall Street- I've been in the Financial services industry for 15+ years- most of my adult life. I really have no problem with anything about the movie Arbitrage or the Wall Streets or that other movie about the banking collapse. There was/is a lot of dirty crap being played out there by a few ultra greedy that ruin it for the rest. Hard to pick stocks today because of all the programmed trades being made which often have nothing to do with the tech/financial health of a company. A few people can unfairly manipulate the market like never before. The banking/mortgage collapse was easy to forecast - was shorting the **** out of the market and getting all my clients who would listen to do so as well. That was another careless greedy act- they deserve the fallout. Wallstreet has always been kind of villianized and will continue to in the future.

PkrsBcksGphsMqt wrote:I just saw Ted about a week ago and I thought it was incredibly overrated. With that being said I'm not a fan of Family Guy at all. Although the little bit of Seth MacFarlane stand up I've seen is actually pretty decent.

Nebula1 wrote:Be nice when a movie comes out about Wall Street that doesn't demonize the industry. All in all, a good year for film.

Agreed, I usually avoid all Wall Street movies because I just assume it will be a politically motivated 90 minute smear by some liberal director.

Uh-oh.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/

Damn, I'll probably have to check that one out just because Scorsese and Dicaprio are probably the best Director/Actor combo going right now.

I gave 1600 Penn fifteen minutes and knew it was a bust. From what I saw the stupidity of the son is it's down fall.

Out of boredom for lack of something else to watch, we have watched several episodes of Full Throttle Saloon the last two days. That show is interesting to me because of the logistics of pulling that event off, and the dailey fires that raise up constantly that need putting out.

The money that thing brings in is crazy. Four million dollars in ten days!

Fast forward through any Rusty scenes and it a cool show. We started watching it because my wife thought it said Full Throttle Salon instead of Saloon. We ended up liking it.

The Wolf does look good and I have no problem with some of the movies that have come out (Wall Street, Boiler Room). No doubt some dirty stuff goes down on Wall Street, but there are also amazing, great moments that happen as well. I'd just like to see a couple Wall Street movies that illustrate the opportunity. Personally I'm honored to work for a Wall Street firm and love every day of my life.

Pursuit of Happyness did a decent job of showing the good side of the business.

Scattered counter-shots, with rubber bullets:

Pursuit of Happyness did a decent job of showing the good side of the business.

Yes, Wall Street has its good side. But IMHO it's a beast from the wilderness. With the excitement, potential, and danger that suggests. Our American society sure shouldn't kill it or straight-jacket it, but we should contain it within some bounds. Keep it from hurting us.

I usually avoid all Wall Street movies because I just assume it will be a politically motivated 90 minute smear by some liberal director.

I don't like smears from any source, but I'd say liberal values are not over-represented in the current USA. Me, I welcome almost all values -- as long as they don't (from right or left) call for destruction and mayhem. As long as they don't claim the absolute truth.

It is the kind of politically correct movie the Academy loves.

I don't have much in common with the Academy. But I'm glad to share Lincoln with them. And, hell yes, Schindler's List.

jakecronus8 wrote:I can't believe anyone believes Will Smith is a better actor than Jamie Foxx. I guess to each his own but whew, take away Booty Call and the resumes speak for themselves. While I think Smith has carved out a nice little niche for himself as an action star, he doesn't have the chops to stack up to Foxx. TBH, I've always had an issue with him since he ruined Ali.

This situation reminds me a bit of Basterds. Initially Adam Sandler was supposed to play Eli Roth's character of Donny "The Bear Jew" Donowicz. In fact the part was specifically written for him ash e and QT are very good friends. In the end he dropped to film "Funny People" and Roth was asked to do it. While the character was small, it was significant, and the more I think about it, Sandler could have ruined the entire movie given 5 minutes of screen time.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that one is a better "actor" than the other (and if pushed to do so, I'd probably lean towards Will). I would say that Will is a more charismatic and engaging actor than Jamie by leaps and bounds, but I think Jamie is better at taking specific direction. To me, looking at Will in Ali and Jamie in Ray are indicative of that fact. Will has his own persona, his own identity, that seeps into every role he takes. That persona doesn't always mesh well, especially when he isn't willing to stretch to fit the role he's supposed to play.

I'm not sure how that impacts Django. He could've added a bit more flare to the character in a positive way, but the edge that Jamie brought to the role was good as well. It's hard to say.

The Sandler comparison is useful, but I think he's a much inferior actor and far more limited in range than Smith. I think it would've been interesting to see him as the Bear Jew - it might've brought a whole new perspective to his acting ability. But, the risk probably outweighs the reward.

I think Foxx's best work trumps Smith's best work (Foxx in "Collateral" was near brilliant) but Smith generally has made more entertaining films.

Foxx is also reportedly an insufferable douchebag in real life whereas Smith seems to be a genuinely decent guy.

Zero Dark Thirty is awesome.