criterionforum.org

You know, I don't want to go to a movie that prominently displays a man's naked butt. Not just once, but from the sound of it, over and over and over again. It may appeal to gay guys (Not being gay, I don't know about that), and women with butt-fetishes - or people who want to be left feeling "pummeled".

I go to a movie for entertainment - an escape from my reality into a reality I'd like to (at least for a short time) become part of.

Ok, real simple question. How old is he, like seventeen at the most? So what exactly does "never" mean to him anyway? I cant stand hearing people, especially him, talk about how persistent he was and how he never gave up in the face of adversity. What adversity? He made his first million before he was old enough to drive a car. Is he aware that there are people out there that have been trying to make it the music industry longer than he's been alive. Adversity is working a sixty hour week and still not having enough to pay the bills. Persevering in the face of adversity is finding the strength to work your fingers to the bone every day of your life for pack of ungrateful children and a menopausal spouse without turning into an alcoholic. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on whether or not they like his music. But, it is not a matter of opinion to say that he is abnormally famous and wealthy at a remarkably young age. In other words, everyone else has worked harder for less. He never said never?!?! Of course not, he didnt have time between getting potty trained and learning how to talk. Don't tell me about perseverance you little queer, a hard days work and a cold beer would literally kill you. Justin, by all means, enjoy your success, but never make the colossal mistake of forgetting what you really are, lucky and blessed. More so than almost anyone else on the entire planet...Seriously, just say "thank you" and quit acting like you spent the last thirty years curing cancer.

The Shining is an older made movie. Jack Nicholson was really young and begining in his career. Jack is a father looking for a job to supply his family. He found an outlook hotel deep in the top of the montains. His son Danny would have visions of someone telling him not to go to the outlook, but in the end they decided to go. Everything seemed ok when they got their but they were going to be the only ones their since during the winter months that it would close only the caregiver and if he choose his family would stay there. Little by little Danny the child started seeing things that he couldnt explain, but his parents wouldnt believe him. He was always lead to an especific room where a father had killed his twin daughters and wife before killing himself. The surprise turn happens when his father Jack is the one going crazy from the isolation that he to begins seeng people. The difference between them two was that jack had really become possesed by the hotel and decided to kill his wofe and danny. They outsmarted him and he ended up deying. The is also a book for this movies and the book is a lot different than the movie is. Its and Ok moie but i wouldnt recomend it to anyone.

Holy shit, this movie was totally Candyman, except a romantic comedy and not a horror movie. That part where she showed him the remake of the fresco, and he was like "bitch please, this sucks," anyway that totally reminded me of when Virginia Madsen was like to her best black friend "our apartments are exactly the same as Cabrini Green, but we live across the freeway. That's the only difference" What the fuck was up with that dude getting all pissed off about shitty wine though? Europeans really take their wine seriously. I think it all tastes like paint thinner.

puxzkkx wrote:I really enjoyed this blurb of Certified Copy from another forum

It is distinctly a foreign film and that isn't a bad thing. Foreign films, unlike their American cinematic equivalents, take time in visualizing their subject. Anyone who has watched films by Truffeaut, Fellini or various other foreign filmmakers may find himself or herself bored with the stillness of the images. Again this is not a bad thing. This style of filmmaking allows you to experience the reality of the implied situation. These silences often give you the time to understand the land, the people or the object that is put upon the screen in front of you.

Those who don't like subtitles will be frustrated with the French only audio track.

Chocolat is an extremely well done foreign and one I would recommend to any film buff. I would not recommend it as your first foreign film, as it's a bit dense when compared to others.

aox wrote:Motion pictures are so pretentious. I'll stick with photography.

DVDTalk wrote:Foreign films, unlike their American cinematic equivalents, take time in visualizing their subject.

As someone who believes that there are literally trillions of inhabited planets out there in the cosmic playground of outer space and that much about their origins and destiny (as well as those pertaining to our own planet) have been revealed and documented within the last century in a series of 196 Papers known collectively as The Urantia Papers (or The Urantia Book) that were authored by various Beings-Not-Of-This-Realm who were commissioned to bestow this epochal revelation upon our planet including translating it into the English language (since English is not the native tongue of either our local universe of Nebadon or our superuniverse of Orvonton or of the Paradise-Havona Central Universe of Divine Perfection which is the dwelling place of the eternal God and around which everything else and everyone else revolves in accordance with the superuniverse plans of evolutionary progress and spiritual attainment), I was predictably pleased to watch a movie that to me asked: Are we really all alone in the universe of universes with this vast enormity of wasted space encircling us like lifeless set decoration or are we rather a part of some gigantic undertaking that is fusing perfection and imperfection and blending science and religion into one creatively unfolding project that is beyond our mortal comprehension to fully fathom and that involves other living beings on other inhabited planets who are in the truest sense, our cosmic cousins? So when I gaze into the starry heavens at the countless suns of space, I marvel at how seemingly insignificant it would superficially appear that our planet is and yet just as many movies highlight the important role that faith plays whether in regards to believing in a Higher Power or believing in the existence of alien beings far removed from our galactic proximity, I do have faith that our sphere (Urantia) is just as precisely administered and just as lovingly fostered as if it were the only inhabited world in all existence.

213 out of 219 members found this review helpful

MichaelB wrote:If I remember rightly, the late Gilbert Adair once wrote a review consisting of only one sentence.

But it was of Hitchcock's Rope, so I suspect it was deliberate.

Other one star reviewers have already highlighted most of the lowlights of this movie. I will just add what I would think would be some of the comments from a Tom Leykis review, should he ever switch from talk radio to movie reviwer..........

Number one, guys you never date a single mother, ever. Number two, you don't date a single mother when you find out she's still married. Number three, you don't still keep dating her when you find out her husband is in prison and is about to get out. Number four, when he does get out, you don't go to the welcome home party.

Need I continue?

I just question how hard up Allan Brooks, Bryan Cranston. and Ron Perlman were that they needed to take on these roles.

There should be a zero star option for reviewing stinkers like this.