What Movie Are You Watching Or Watched Today?

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:27 am**

"To Die For"-Excellent black comedy

Nic Kidman, Matt Dillon, Joaquin Phoenix

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:16 am**

....and "Absolute Power"- Ed Harris, Clint Eastwood and the always interesting Laura Linney

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:43 am**

georgecat wrote:Just seemed bit predictable and boring.

The opposite for me: I found the ending completely unpredictable. I honestly expected the last scene to be the main character (can't recall his real or character name) on the ground shot through....and all that, but of course after some moment or act of glory. I was sincerely surprised by this ending. Fintan's use of "satisfying" is quite appropriate. This was actually a powerful film for me. Not in an action or plot sense but in the relationships between (again) the main dude and his wife and children.

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 7:50 am**

I've got that film Sideways sitting here.. anyone seen it? It's been here for 2 weeks yet I haven't got around to watching it.. I can't help but think he looks a little boring.

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:01 am**

Ali G Indahouse

Aight

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:48 am**

The Godfather.

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:49 pm**

MissWalshy wrote:I've got that film Sideways sitting here.. anyone seen it? It's been here for 2 weeks yet I haven't got around to watching it.. I can't help but think he looks a little boring.

Give it a go. I thought exactly the same after seeing the trailer for it , it just looked dull. When i did watch it i enjoyed it. General synopsis 'Feelgood film with decent dialogue, wry humour & some real laugh-out-loud moments . '

**Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:08 pm**

i went to see Brian De Palmas production of James Ellroys 'Black Dahlia' last night. Unfortunately i walked out at the end thinking "Either i'm missing something or the ending was crap" , judging by the conversations of others coming out i think most of my fellow viewers were as confused as i was.
Was slightly relieved today when the Sunday Times had this to say "...you can't keep up with the twists of the plot anyway, Josh Friedmans screenplay is so complicated that it's near impossible to follow what is happening - & frankly after 40 minutes you stop caring" .
Still , Hilary Swank looked damn fine in the role of 1940's poor little rich girl socialite.

**Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:33 am**

Caukill wrote:i went to see Brian De Palmas production of James Ellroys 'Black Dahlia' last night. Unfortunately i walked out at the end thinking "Either i'm missing something or the ending was crap" , judging by the conversations of others coming out i think most of my fellow viewers were as confused as i was.
Was slightly relieved today when the Sunday Times had this to say "...you can't keep up with the twists of the plot anyway, Josh Friedmans screenplay is so complicated that it's near impossible to follow what is happening - & frankly after 40 minutes you stop caring" .
Still , Hilary Swank looked damn fine in the role of 1940's poor little rich girl socialite.

SO YOU WOULDNT RECOMEND IT?

**Mon Sep 18, 2006 9:58 pm**

Niall wrote:
Caukill wrote:i went to see Brian De Palmas production of James Ellroys 'Black Dahlia' last night. Unfortunately i walked out at the end thinking "Either i'm missing something or the ending was crap" , judging by the conversations of others coming out i think most of my fellow viewers were as confused as i was.
Was slightly relieved today when the Sunday Times had this to say "...you can't keep up with the twists of the plot anyway, Josh Friedmans screenplay is so complicated that it's near impossible to follow what is happening - & frankly after 40 minutes you stop caring" .
Still , Hilary Swank looked damn fine in the role of 1940's poor little rich girl socialite.

SO YOU WOULDNT RECOMEND IT?

5 out of 10 , if you don't expect too much you won't be disappointed.

**Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:26 am**

Off-Topic Discussion
These forums exist for a more-or-less specific subject. They are not for free-association stream of consciousness babble. While any conversation can move widely afield while running its course, corrective measures will be taken against conversations that clearly have nothing to do with the topic they're posted under or are wildly off-topic for these fora.

**Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:32 am**

seamus_mcshanty1 wrote:Off-Topic Discussion
These forums exist for a more-or-less specific subject. They are not for free-association stream of consciousness babble. While any conversation can move widely afield while running its course, corrective measures will be taken against conversations that clearly have nothing to do with the topic they're posted under or are wildly off-topic for these fora.

Well, that's US warned then. Purple monkey dishwasher.

**Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:44 am**

seamus_mcshanty1 wrote:Off-Topic Discussion
These forums exist for a more-or-less specific subject. They are not for free-association stream of consciousness babble. While any conversation can move widely afield while running its course, corrective measures will be taken against conversations that clearly have nothing to do with the topic they're posted under or are wildly off-topic for these fora.

Reference:

viewtopic.php?t=430

Thanks for the reminder Seamus.

**Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:30 am**

Back to the topic :wink:

I watched Serenity last night.

Not bad

**Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:01 am**

DzM wrote:
seamus_mcshanty1 wrote:Off-Topic Discussion
These forums exist for a more-or-less specific subject. They are not for free-association stream of consciousness babble. While any conversation can move widely afield while running its course, corrective measures will be taken against conversations that clearly have nothing to do with the topic they're posted under or are wildly off-topic for these fora.
Reference:

viewtopic.php?t=430

Thanks for the reminder Seamus.

...............Gonna paint my wagon reeeeeeed!

What Movie Are You Watching Or Watched Today?

Who is online