Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Spoilers What Movie Are You Watching?

Huntn said:
That was the Tesseract, a very Scifi plot device, a means to reach across time, you either buy into it or not. 🙂
Click to expand...

I know. 🙂

Spoilers
Thing is, why would 'they' (5th dimension folks) set up such a frail, luck dependent, 'bound to fail' method of fixing things in the past when they were smart enough to develop a Tesseract in the first place? Not to mention the basic question of how it is even possible for mankind to 'evolve' in such a way to rescue themselves from extinction in the past? edit: And I don't mean 'how did they create the Tesseract specifically' but how could mankind survive in the first place to evolve up to a point where it could rescue itself in the past? Basic question which always comes up when having to do with timetravel (or related 😉) topics - Nolan spells out a lot of things, details etc but avoids this basic question (unless I just missed it, certainly possible since I watched it in English).

I want answers, Huntn! ;D

As for the Kubrick ending, I absolutely love it!

But to anyone who liked Interstellar (and 2001 of course) and haven't watched those already: I highly recommend Moon and Tarkovsky's Solaris.
 
Last edited:
ritmomundo said:
I agree. It was really good, but I wish they hadn't milked the series and split the final movie into 2 parts. The more I think about it, Part 1 doesn't seem to stand as a movie on it's own, it's basically a long build-up to Part 2. Enjoyable, but somewhat incomplete nonetheless.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it should have been just one movie.
 
Cabinet of Caligari (1962) - this was fun. I wish it would have ended on the Twilight Zone zinger note since the climax felt like a classic TZ episode.

Annual Rewatch of The Wizard of Oz. Kind of like the 10 Commandments in our house.

I may dust off something tonight while waiting to fix my iMac.
 
Last edited:
Watching Harry Brown. Not a feel good film, but a sad reflection on some parts of our inner city's. Glad I live elsewhere for sure!
 
Watching "A Dog's Life" on Turner Classic Movies. It is one of my favorite Chaplin shorts, along with "Idle Class." Chaplin was a master in so many ways. It is a shame that movies like his early ones aren't made today.
 
twietee said:
I know. 🙂

Spoilers
Thing is, why would 'they' (5th dimension folks) set up such a frail, luck dependent, 'bound to fail' method of fixing things in the past when they were smart enough to develop a Tesseract in the first place? Not to mention the basic question of how it is even possible for mankind to 'evolve' in such a way to rescue themselves from extinction in the past? edit: And I don't mean 'how did they create the Tesseract specifically' but how could mankind survive in the first place to evolve up to a point where it could rescue itself in the past? Basic question which always comes up when having to do with timetravel (or related 😉) topics - Nolan spells out a lot of things, details etc but avoids this basic question (unless I just missed it, certainly possible since I watched it in English).

I want answers, Huntn! ;D

As for the Kubrick ending, I absolutely love it!

But to anyone who liked Interstellar (and 2001 of course) and haven't watched those already: I highly recommend Moon and Tarkovsky's Solaris.
Click to expand...

Replied to in the Interstellar Movie thread.
 
kazmac said:
Cabinet of Caligari (1962) - this was fun. I wish it would have ended on the Twilight Zone zinger note since the climax felt like a classic TZ episode.

Annual Rewatch of The Wizard of Oz. Kind of like the 10 Commandments in our house.

I may dust off something tonight while waiting to fix my iMac.
Click to expand...

Well, personally, I love the original (silent) version of The Cabinet of Dr Caligari; it is superb.

And the Wizard of Oz is one of those movies that repays endless viewings, and one never tires of watching it - it is brilliant from start to finish, a genuine masterpiece.



pachyderm said:
he he he... i love this film.

wait... 1962?

you ever seen the silent film version?
Click to expand...

I was about to ask the exact same question; the silent version is stunning - I couldn't believe that it had been made in 1919 when I saw it years ago in a university art house cinema - it was gripping and spellbinding cinema.
 
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957)
Victor Frankenstein builds a creature and brings it to life. But his creature behaves not as he intended.
Click to expand...
Screen Shot 2014-11-25 at 6.45.48 PM.png
 
Any fans of Sin City see the sequel ? I'm thinking about watching it but I don't wanna be let down. The original movie was so good.
 
millerj123 said:
Yes. You call it the Crystal Skulls, and you make it awful. And you cast Shea Lefuff. And you make it awful.

And, now I'm sad.
Click to expand...

Indeed. If there is an Indy 5, I hope Harrison uses his clout to retcon Indy 4 out of existence. Or maybe just Shia... 😀
 
I thought it was alright. I think its in keeping with the style of the older movies. Newer versions are never going to stand up to their older reveared predecessors.
Look at the Star Wars or Alien franchises.

----------

Can't see the new Jurrasic park movie going down well either.
 
SandboxGeneral said:
In a Lonely Place (1950)

View attachment 516151
Click to expand...

imma hafta check it out!

----------
Scepticalscribe said:


...


I was about to ask the exact same question; the silent version is stunning - I couldn't believe that it had been made in 1919 when I saw it years ago in a university art house cinema - it was gripping and spellbinding cinema.
Click to expand...


lub me some silent films...faust, the golem, metropolis, battleship potemkin, nasferatu and of course the aforementioned title...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back