h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hmmn i think so.. and i think he was quite a nasty character..blackmailing poor old vampire into his sleazy true life movie... so i think vampire kills him in the end and we're quite glad about it

The War of the Worlds on DVD and very much enjoyed it.

Just home from seeing the new Harry Potter. Quite enjoyed it, though even if I hadn't read the book I think it still would have seemed like chunks of story were missing. I also thought the ending was quite abrupt.

Then I wondered if the HP movies would stand on their own, without people having read the books or knowing about the characters beforehand. I don't think they would.


az

Just gave up watching Steve Zissou's life Aquatic.

Quite simply Worst. Film. Ever.

No plot - was it meant to be a comedy? How they got such a stellar cast to appear in such a pile of poo is beyond me.

i saw the life aquatic a while back it is a strange film to get into but i stayed with it and quite enjoyed it but can see how many wouldn't... a quirky slow film...yes with fantastic cast... bill murray is very dead pan in it...

i wouldn't rave about it........ the ending was a little emotional.. had a tear or 2 there it was a very very dry type of comedy very unusual.... i'll have to watch it again with him outdoors.. as he didn't see it with me.. be interesting to see what he thinks...

he might well walk out of room in disgust as he did with dogville

I'm not a big fan of Bill Murray's. The only movies I've seem him in and liked were "The Life Aquatic" and "Broken Flowers". "Lost in Translation" was OK, but I wouldn't give it four stars or anything.

Finally watched "Pinnochio 964". The little blurb in my Japanese Cinema Encyclopedia said it was gory. it wasn't. It was a regular fest. BO-RING "cyberpunk" stuff, pointless, no plot. And in spite of reviews which said it contained "over the top violence and gore", what little there was of either was so phony, it was actually somewhat laughable.

Sad, because I'd heard good things about it, and had really looked forward to seeing it. And the copy of "The Imposter" that Netflix sent had the wrong DVD in the sleeve, so we were stuck watching it just so we could send it back for something we *want* to see.

Quite agree about Aquatic, the film just went nowhere, and I had no reason to care. The frustrating thing is, it could have been so good, unlike "Unleashed" which I had the misfortune to see today. Man is brainwashed from an early age into becoming a slavering animal who is used by Bob Hoskings to wreak carnage on late payers. Five minutes in the company of Mr Blind Freeman however, and the guy is comming on like Bobby Crush. What saved my weekend from a possible cinematic drought however, was a DVD given to me some time ago and which I'd left in the corner of my mind labelled "Boring" - It was "Girl with the Pearl Earing" and I would urge anyone who hasn't seen it to give it a try, it's a film that will stay with me for sometime.

"I'm not a big fan of Bill Murray's"

Nor am I. But "Rushmore" was pretty good, with Murray providing support. And "Groundhog Day" has Murray doing the lead pretty well. "Lost in Translation" has led me to pass on "The Life Aquatic ..."

but lets not forget him in ghostbusters.....he was greaaatt in that and the film was appealing to all ages.. thanks to his adult in jokes....

<< bill murray is very dead pan in it...>>

I thought that about him when I saw Lost in Translation. Then saw Broken Flowers and thought he was playing the exact same role in the same 'dead pan' way, which finally became a bit annoying, as though he were sleep walking through the film.

One trick pony?


az

I've only ever seen Bill Murray in comedys like ghostbusters or Groundhogday so Lost in Translation was a minor revelation for me. I liked the film.

Saw the last hour or so of the Passion of The Christ on tv last night - everything from the torture up to the crucifixtion. Teh reviewers weren't kidding when they said it was a bloody film. I'm not sure how they managed to disfigure Jim Cazveil so badly.

Oh dear. 'The villain' in Shadow of the Vampire (if that is what he is - I'd have my doubts) is John Malkovich as film director F. W. Murnau. The vampire ('Max Shreck') is played by Willem Dafoe (though you'd never know it through the make-up).

The main difficulty with it as a film is that it looks to me that a lot of it was left on the cutting room floor in an attempt to shoehorn it into recognisable 'genre', so a quirky little film about the making of a genuine cinema classic and comment on the sacrifices necessary for art was made to look like a fairly silly horror film. The same thing that happened to 'Monkeybone', which is a pretty good movie, but I'd love to see the original film before the studio got at it.

'Doom' looks dreadful. And comparing it with the awful, witless 'Event Horizon' doesn't give me any greater confidence in it either.

I didn't view it as being made to look like a silly horror film, thought it worked very well as ............... well I'm not sure what! Impossible film to categorise but I loved it. Dafoe was superb.

Watched Star Wars III again last night. Definitely the best of the prequels, but can't help feeling a little disappointed with all 3. They could have been so much better if he had stuck to just writing and producing, as he did with V and VI. Every scene between Padme and Anakin made me want to be sick! Having said that it has the best light sabre fights out of all 6 films.

The thing about Bill Murray is that, yes, he did have some success in very obvious comic roles in certain films, then he wasn't really heard about for several years. And then Lost in Translation happened and he was somehow 'reborn' as this totally 'deadpan' actor, suddenly sought out by independent film directors.

Well, fair enough. Except the 'dead pan' thing wears thin very quickly (imo). Starts to look like he is not even trying to act his roles, just non-acting them somehow.

Re: all the Star Wars prequels. I thought they were all total cr@p.

When the first Star Wars trilogy was being developed, George Lucas relied heavily on his long-time friend and renowned mythologist Joseph Campbell to help him with the storylines.

Joseph Campbell died long before the prequels were made and I think his influence is sorely missed. Also, a director is not necessarily a good writer. Especially a good dialogue writer - which I think is a rather specific skill. Hence, the dialogues in the prequels were so horrifically cringe-making.


az

Funny how the Bill Murray movies most of you like, are the ones I dislike very much ("Ghostbusters", et. al.), and the ones I liked most were the ones you all didn't. Of course, this will help provide me with a kind of reverse recommendation system.

I thought "Even Horizon" was an awful movie. It was one of those films that tries hard- too hard- and fails miserably. One of those movies you watch, then atferward you're wishing you could have that slice of time back and watch (or do) something worthwhile instead.

Waiting for Netflix to send a replacement copy of "The Intruder", and early Roger Corman film starring William Shatner (!) as a racist inciting violence during desegregation of the South. They sent the wrong disc in the sleeve last week. Sounds like it will be a great film.

My favourite 'Bill Murray' film is Groundhog Day. I thought it was very clever and funny, though I think most of that praise goes to the director.


az

Flippin' 'eck Tucker! You're in the US, right, PsychoCandy?

I'd love to get my hands on a copy of 'The Intruder'. Corman says it's he best film he ever made, and I've never seen anything but good words about it.

Yeah, Blues, I'm in the US. I wish I had a way to make a copy for you. "The Intruder" is one of the few Corman films we haven't seen, and I'm really looking forward to it. Will let you know what we think of it after I've seen it. Hopefully it'll arrive tomorrow. Everyone we know who has seen it, has really liked it a lot.

I wouldn't defend Event Horizon as a necessarily "good movie" it's more like enjoyable fodder of the no-brain-needed type.

As I said before, it's the least-worst movie Paul Anderson has ever been involved in, that doesn't make it good just not that bad.

Hope that clears that up.

psychocandy.. you are in florida.. yes?.........and yet you still maintain your devotion to our humble thread???

as a movie fan.. florida is the place for you, especially orlando... what with mgm and universal... make sure you get to the cinema over there and see a film as they are usually earlier than here...

and if you think our cinemas are big...anyway get out there and enjoy it, we'll just wait here.............in the cold and the rain