Bruiser Chong Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Waiting looks like one of those flicks that could be funny if it didn't rely so much on the "bodily fluids = funny" formula. Correct me if I'm wrong, for those who have seen it. There's plenty of people in it I like, but half of the trailer seemed to be doing something disgusting for laughs, which usually misses with me.
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I'm not really interested in Waiting... myself. People spitting in food doesn't seem like it'd be any good. Also, having worked in a restraunt, I can't say I'm interested in a movie about one.
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Cinderella Man got an 84% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It. Sucked. Ass. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Cinderella Man was fantastic. Can't wait for the movie to come out on DVD.
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I haven't seen Cinderella Man, but it does look like a good film. I'll probably rent it when it comes out on DVD.
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 It is. Howard did a great job of capturing the depression, Russel Crowe was fantastic, the boxing sequences were very well done and Renee Zelwegger gave her usual understated performance. One of the few films where I've ever gotten emotional.
UseTheSledgehammerUh Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Wow, at first I thought Barron confused Crowe's movie with A Cinderella Story. Guess he did see it.
devo Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Does anyone know how much Firefly made in DVD sales? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> According to this article, it's sold over half a million so far.
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Does anyone know how much Firefly made in DVD sales? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> According to this article, it's sold over half a million so far. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks. I'll probably be buying the whole series soon. Perhaps Serenity will make its money back in DVD sales.
devo Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Hell, they might even break even in theatres. The film only cost approximately forty million to make. I'm thinking about seeing the film when I have an afternoon free, but there's other movies I need to see first (Wallace and Gromit, History of Violence). I never saw an episode of Firefly, but the incessant raving about Serenity has at least convinced me to give it a look.
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Hell, they might even break even in theatres. The film only cost approximately forty million to make. I'm thinking about seeing the film when I have an afternoon free, but there's other movies I need to see first (Wallace and Gromit, History of Violence). I never saw an episode of Firefly, but the incessant raving about Serenity has at least convinced me to give it a look. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I remember watching a few episodes of Firefly when it first came on, but I kept missing it and just gave up. If I could do it again, I'd watch the whole series from start to finish. Luckily, the Sci-Fi Channel had a marathon that allowed me to catch up on everything. I'm hoping that Serenity does break even, but if it doesn't, the DVD sales could greatly help it.
spman Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 It was a busy weekend for us at work, possibly due to the non-stop rain here in the Northeast. The Gospel did fairly well for us where I work, and actually did VERY well nationally as far as per-screen average goes. Serenity did little buisness last week, and was totally dead this week. Wallace and Gromit did very well with the kids, and was an excellent movie to boot, easily the best animated film so far this year. The other two openers this week, Two for the Money and Waiting pretty much got lost in the shuffle. Waiting will probobly have a much longer life on home video then it will in theaters.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Cinderella Man got an 84% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It. Sucked. Ass. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Cinderella Man was fantastic. Can't wait for the movie to come out on DVD. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bob, since you're known around here for your exceptionally shitty/gay taste in everything, your liking the movie only proves my point for me. It sucked. It was corny, cliched, and horribly predictable. The characters were one-dimensional drones reacting to the events of the film, until the eventual climactic Hollywood ending we saw a mile away. Everything in this movie had already been done in every other boxing movie ever made, except Raging Bull, which was 100x better than this crap. The positive reviews even acknowledge this, but somehow they claim they liked it anyways.
CBright7831 Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Although I'm not much of a fan of Wallace and Gromit, I may have to check that movie out. It's been ages (well, not really July 15-CCATCF) since I went to see a movie.
Placebo Effect Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Does anyone know how much Firefly made in DVD sales? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Edit: Question answered.
Hank Kingsley Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 the eventual climactic Hollywood ending we saw a mile away. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, it was called "Cinderella Man". What'd you expect?
the max Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 You make a pretty good case for expecting the filmmakers to sell you on the film before you'd see it, then you mention going to see Waiting and The Longest Yard, which put out horribly unfunny commercials, thus destroying your own argument. Unfunny from your opinion though. As far as Waiting goes, I like Dane Cook, Dave Koechner and Justin Long. Plus, I used to work in the restaurant industry. As for The Longest Yard, I like Adam Sandler and Chris Rock, plus I love the original film. Added into that I saw it when the girlfriend was out of town for the weekend and had absolutely nothing better to do with a free movie pass and there you have it. The only commercial I've seen for Waiting features a guy spitting in people's food. Somehow that's more appealing that a movie about space outlaws protecting a little girl from an evil assasin? Serenity isn't even a comedy and its commericals were funnier than Waiting. Again, this is you taking your opinion and telling me how wrong I am. Have you ever worked in the restaurant business? I know I never spit in anyone's food, but I can damn sure bet you that there were times that I wanted to say some of the things they say in this movie. You'd rather watch a guy spit in people's food than space outlaws protecting a little girl from an evil assasin? Again, this is you taking your opinion and telling me how wrong I am. As far as this "someone famous has to be in it" argument...If that's really a prerequisite for you to see a movie, then you're missing out on a lot of really great stuff. It's not a prereq. If I see the trailer and it looks like shit, I'll still look for redeeming values. Is it a remake/homage to a movie that I like? Do I know any of the actors? I can't blame you for not seeing it if that's the case. If you didn't like "Firefly", then you're not going to like Serenity. That's having a little more informed opinion than saying "I didn't see it because I didn't know any of the actors." You make it sound like that's the only reason that I said I didn't want to see it. It doesn't look interesting AT ALL. However, since the girlfriend and I see a lot of movies, I looked for reasons to see it. I read critics mostly for a laugh, because I find them to be dead wrong for me. I don't like the writer of the movie. But the last thing that I could think of was that I have never heard of anyone in the cast. Add that into the fact that the movie looks awful, the trailer didn't really move me to even look up information on the film and that I don't like the writer of the film...but hey, I just like watching movies about people spitting on other people's food. Waiting looks like one of those flicks that could be funny if it didn't rely so much on the "bodily fluids = funny" formula. Correct me if I'm wrong, for those who have seen it. There's plenty of people in it I like, but half of the trailer seemed to be doing something disgusting for laughs, which usually misses with me. The trailer takes all of that from one scene. However, they are constantly playing a pretty gross/homophobic game with each other throughout the movie.
Slayer Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I trust movie reviewers about as much as I trust politicians and car salesmen
2GOLD Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I trust movie reviewers about as much as I trust politicians and car salesmen <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Agreed. I don't want to see "Waiting" cause it didn't even make me chuckle. Reynolds is funny but he was also in the horribly unfunny "Van Wilder" so that isn't saying much. "Serenity" is more or less becoming a 'wait to spend two dollars on it' film for me basically because I HATE Simon and his stupid ass sister. Watching the show I wanted the evil guys to find her and kill her so I could become more interested.
AndrewTS Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 "The guy just knows what he's talking about. Whether he likes it or not, he's always there with the reasons he came to that conclusion" And plenty of times those reasons are total BS.
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Bob, since you're known around here for your exceptionally shitty/gay taste in everything, your liking the movie only proves my point for me. It sucked. Wow, you like one movie and Y2Jerk jumps all over you. All you just proved is that once again, you are a moron. It was corny, cliched, and horribly predictable. It was based on a true story, so what did you expect? Would you rather him not become heavyweight champion? Of course it was going to be predictable, since you knew what was going to happen. That still didn't stop Howard from crafting excellent boxing scenes and compelling characters, while at the same time showing the horrors of the Depression. The characters were one-dimensional drones reacting to the events of the film, until the eventual climactic Hollywood ending we saw a mile away. Everything in this movie had already been done in every other boxing movie ever made, except Raging Bull, which was 100x better than this crap. The positive reviews even acknowledge this, but somehow they claim they liked it anyways. Again, it's based on a true story. So the climactic Hollywood ending actually happened. As Superstar pointed out, the guy was called Cinderella Man for a reason. The characters weren't one dimensional at all. Crowe was fantastic and believeable as Braddick and Paul Giamatti and Renee Zelwegger both gave excellent performances, by not going over the top and letting the story dictate their performance. But go ahead and continue to accuse me of exceptionally shitty taste, since it doesn't make you come off as an elietist asshole at all.
Bruiser Chong Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 "The guy just knows what he's talking about. Whether he likes it or not, he's always there with the reasons he came to that conclusion" And plenty of times those reasons are total BS. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good use of examples. *waits for Van Helsing response*
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I agree with Bruiser. I mean I disagree with Ebert a lot, but he always explains himself well and I can see where he is coming from. The guy gave Millions **** and I thought he was on crack for it. But I read his review and it was a good one, despite our disagreement. But OMG HE GAVE GODFATHER II ***1/2 EBERT SUCKORZ
Black Lushus Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 off topic to bob: where's your SNL report, you had to know this last episode really sucked, right?
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Was at a U2 concert so I haven't seen it. I'm hoping my friend can upload it on his comp, but if anyone knows of a torrent site, let me know.
Black Lushus Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I wouldn't bother, bob...but I know you love the show and would want to see it rather than take someone else's opinion, so good luck!
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I know they did one skit that I don't like and Ashlee did two songs and Horatio did Update. Other then that I'm trying to stay spoiler free. I just want to see it because I'm a completist. Hell early in September, I freaked out when Roma Downey/Missy Elliot was on the Classic SNL, the one SNL I hadn't seen in 9 years.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I can't blame you for not seeing it if that's the case. If you didn't like "Firefly", then you're not going to like Serenity. That's having a little more informed opinion than saying "I didn't see it because I didn't know any of the actors." You make it sound like that's the only reason that I said I didn't want to see it. Dude, did you even read the post you were quoting? I was acknowledging that you DID have a valid reason for not seeing it. Unfunny from your opinion though. They built their entire commerical around an unfunny gag where they spit in a rude customer's food, as if that's the only joke in the whole movie. Hardly makes me want to see the movie.
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I want to see Waiting because it has a good cast. David Koechner, Anna Faris, Dane Cooke- not bad.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 It was corny, cliched, and horribly predictable. It was based on a true story, so what did you expect? For it not to be corny or cliched. That still didn't stop Howard from crafting excellent boxing scenes and compelling characters, while at the same time showing the horrors of the Depression. The characters weren't one dimensional at all. The compelling characters were: -The plucky underdog hero who is totally honest and always keeps his word. -The nagging wife who worries about her husband, but supports him in the end anyways. -The wise-cracking sidekick/manager who's there purely for comedy relief. -The cute kids who get into trouble and must be given a STERN TALKING TO from Dad the Boxer. -The EVIL boxer who isn't just the champ, but a bad, bad man and a potty mouth. I don't have a problem with the ending (since it was a true story), just the super-cheesy and obvious way it was presented. But go ahead and continue to accuse me of exceptionally shitty taste, since it doesn't make you come off as an elietist asshole at all. Is this the part where you tell me how talented Hilary Duff is? And making fun of a movie nobody saw is hardly elitist.
bob_barron Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I'll respond to the rest later but: Is this the part where you tell me how talented Hilary Duff is? Completely irrelevant to a discussion about Cinderella Man. And making fun of a movie nobody saw is hardly elitist. 61.2 million is not "nobody saw". Factoring in worldwide, it made about 100 million.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now