<br>Has anyone watched this?<br>A friend and I saw this the other night, It was quite interesting. It lost me with all of the "action" in the endľ as did Being John Malkovich. It is just so hard to decipher because of the fine line between fact vs. fiction. I just can not believe that the author Susan Orlean would allow such a film to made about herself. Its pretty cool though!<br><br>
Great movie. Didn't do too well at the box office, though... this is more of what you'd call an art house film - which means it's crap as far as Joe Q. Public is concerned. People in general would rather see Nic Cage play a hero in a flick like "The Rock" than watch him take on the twin role of two wimpy brothers, one of whom is highly neurotic. Great fun, though, and lots of surprise twists. Meryl Streep as a once-responsible, sober-minded journo-turned complete snorthead druggie was a delicious role for her. Her boyfriend is fantastic, too - forget the name of the guy who played him, but he's very good... he was the closet gay military buff next door to Kevin Spacey's character.<br><br>if you like that one, try on David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive." Another one that people hated. I'll have to rent that one again. Vintage Lynch with some great performances by some relatively newish actors who are only now starting to get their props.<br><br>max<br><br> Portlands (6.6 Mb)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MaxMacDonald on 12/03/03 01:38 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
People in general would rather see Nic Cage play a hero in a flick like "The Rock"<br><br>I don't know if that's true- a lot of his films of the 'non-action' genre have done extremely well- Leaving Las Vegas, Moonstruck, Wild at Heart- to name a few. The Rock and Con Air were really non-traditional roles for Cage, but it's always the shoot-em-up blockbuster movies that get more attention, and thus he becomes associated more with those roles...<br><br>I actually really liked him in Face/Off with Travolta, even though it WAS an action flick...<br><br>
I didn't get into Mulholland Drive that much. of course I only saw it once. It was at the theater and I missed the very beginning and the very end (don't ask.) I wanted to see more of the guy behind the dumpster. That whole scene was genius. I thought the way the 'sex' scenes were handled was a little too obvious. like Dave's getting old and just wanted to see two girls...<br>Blue Velvet now there's the LOVE! Also Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me is one of my all time favorite films. You can not believe how easily you can reference that film on a daily basis.<br><br><br>
Chris Cooper! Geez, the guy's name is right in the image you posted... anyway, yeah, I agree about the love scenes in Mulholland... as a guy I didn't object - (;->)) - but yeah, it was soft-core titillation for its own sake and certainly didn't forward the plot along. Just Lynch getting his rocks off, I guess. All the same, I thought there were scenes in that movie that rank right up there with the best of filmdom, though.<br><br>As far as Twin Peaks is concerned, the show lost me a few episodes in. Great music and plotline but it all got too precious and silly to carry its own weight. Give me Blue Velvet or Eraserhead any day.<br><br>max<br><br> Portlands (6.6 Mb)
Not the tv show, the movie after the show:<br>Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me<br><br>I like the series ok, but yeah it lost me a bit too. Like Homer Simpson said "Brilliant! I have no idea what's going on!" as the horse dances with the man under a tree in the moonlight. <br><br>
Ahh... never saw the flick. I guess I was turned off by the series having driven right off the road and I wasn't inclined to check and see if there were any survivors in the successor movie. (;->))<br><br>max<br><br> Portlands (6.6 Mb)
I thought this movie was one of the worst ever made. I don't mind when a movie doesn't have a happy ending, but in this case, the marketing was the nail in the coffin.<br><br>It was being touted as a comedy. I went into it with that in mind. Instead I'm watching a movie about a crowd of dysfunctional losers. <br><br>I was watching Cage play a self destructive Woody Allen. A complete dud and dissapointment. The director would show us a ray of hope for Cage, then pull it away time and time again. That formula got old very fast. <br><br>The thread killer
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>one of the worst ever made<p><hr></blockquote><p>Yikes! There is some pretty steep competition in that category. I was not saying it was near one of the greatest films of all times, just interesting. I don't know why it would be "marketed" as a comedy. Some parts were worth a chuckle.<br><br>Here is a good article that cleared up a few things for me:<br>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movi...&rid=822816<br><br>I am not saying you should change you mind, or that I even care...<br>I once had a teacher who said all the time 'if you see something don't like, you should look at it more.'<br>(or something to that extent)
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.