Widescreen Warrior - Latest Comments

Re: Weekly Blend #332 – Fervent Fanbases, Old Sport

talnhess — Thu, 16 May 2013 18:24:17 -0000

Yeah, I guess I meant that more about visible appearance, but it is linked to age as well. Look at Eastwood - he looks a bit like tough leather, but he's redefined himself as a dramatic star. Ahnold is still trying to be an action star, but he looks too dry and aged to pull it off well. His redefinition came in the form of politics, and I think trying to go back is a mistake - not so much because of his age as because it's going to come across as a parody of his prior work.

Re: Weekly Blend #332 – Fervent Fanbases, Old Sport

Luis A. Ramirez — Thu, 16 May 2013 16:45:50 -0000

Schwarzenegger's skin being more leathery than the jacket he wears seemed like an ageist comment to me. But perhaps you were just referring to his looks? Still the comment was in reference to his failed movie return in "The Last Stand".

Re: Weekly Blend #332 – Fervent Fanbases, Old Sport

talnhess — Thu, 16 May 2013 13:55:06 -0000

Apparently, I have to go back and listen to my own show. Where did ageist comments come in this time?

Re: Weekly Blend #332 – Fervent Fanbases, Old Sport

Luis A. Ramirez — Thu, 16 May 2013 13:32:38 -0000

Once again ageism creeps up in the discussion of older actors. I've never been a believer in the idea that "galloping around the cosmos is a game for the young". And while it is possible for someone to go past their prime, I don't think that age should be the only determining factor. Remember Rafe, you liked "The Crystal Skull" starring septuagenarian Harrison Ford.

As for Kickstarter debate, I'm not against Zach Braff seeking funds from the public. I look at Kickstarter as an evolution of the patronage system. Instead of waiting for a commission from an individual or, in this modern day, a movie studio, an artist can go universal and ask the world via the internet for support. And being a recognizable name gives the project a certain amount of credibility for its worth. That point was immediately made in that more people supported Braff than they did Melissa Joan Hart, who also attempted and failed at a Kickstarter bid, because people didn't believe in her or her product. Kickstarter and the openness of the internet takes away the decision from the few executives in movie studios or music companies in presenting what they think you want to see and hear and open the doors for a worldwide audience to decide.

Kickstarter shouldn't be seen as for the less financially viable. That completely denounces the idea of a free internet. You could make your decision to not give Braff money because you know that he could finance the film himself, but why should he denied services that should be available to all.

I. perhaps naively, also believe in the concept that the "cream rises to the top." If you put out a product that is worth something then you will find an audience that will support you in your endeavors. Admittedly there are those who are better financially prepared and have the time and resources to be able to put out a more solid product, but I think the world is big enough to give everyone a chance. And the internet and Kickstarter make it all the more easier. To quote The Field of Dreams, "If you build it, they will come."

Glad I kept this short.

Re: Easter Eggs – Paul Edition

Biowulfe — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:40:29 -0000

In the town, Duel is on the movie marqee…

Re: Weekly Blend #328 – Oscar Wrap Up 2013

Guest — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:56:51 -0000

As for the director/surprising snub debate, I've said numerous times in the forums it's mainly due to the voting system and if they move away from only 1 vote (really counting) per Oscar member in most categories at the nominee stage and have (up to) 5 votes counting per branch member that issue will (mostly) disappear.

However, I think there's one of two things they'll actually do. Either (like the Bafta's) they'll credit the director/s as well as producer/s with the Picture nomination so even if they're snubbed for director they'll still get an Oscar if their movie wins Picture or (like the Emmy's) they'll move up to 6 nominees per category.

Re: Weekly Blend #328 – Oscar Wrap Up 2013

TonyBeard — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:50:17 -0000

Oscar nerd alert! I know everyone's desperate to find out more on the tie for Sound Editing. It's actually the 6th time a tie has been declared but the first exact tie. The Academy rule is if a nominee is within 3 votes of the 'winner', a tie is declared and two Oscars are awarded.

Oscar nerd update! There seems to be a lot of debate on whether a tie these days has to be an 'exact' tie or whether the 3 vote rule is still in place. Should be noted that Pricewaterhouse did declare the Streisand/Hepburn '68 tie an exact tie at the time but with the Academy still (to this day) not allowing an official release of Oscar voting for each year very difficult to verify this sort of thing so I suspect a lot of the stuff on the internet is pure speculation rather than fact.

As for Sound in general, the simplistic explanation is that Sound Editing is the creation of sounds for a movie and Sound Mixing is the mixing together of the various Sound elements. So, to use Star Wars as an example, Sound Editing is things like the lightsabers, tie-fighters, laser guns, Darth Vader's breathing etc. whilst Sound Mixing is the'mixing' together of the various sound elements - John Williams score, dialogue, sound effects etc. .

Re: Weekly Blend #328 – Oscar Wrap Up 2013

NotTheWhosTommy — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:02:19 -0000

Dude... I've got SOME class. Give me a bit of credit.

Re: Argo and the Other 2013 Oscar Winners

Doctor Rotten — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:09:56 -0000

Do I have to say it? Yay! For Ang Lee winning Best Director with Life of Pi. Well deserved, if you ask me. Thankfully, Ben Afleck wasn't nominated so he could win. Woot! LOL The cinematography, music and visual effects nods well deserved too. Rafe, go see this film!

And! How about that TIE for Sound Editing. Wassup with that?

Re: Argo and the Other 2013 Oscar Winners

NotTheWhosTommy — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:55:31 -0000

ANG! MY BOY! WWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Re: Private: Widescreen Warrior’s 2013 Oscar Chat

Luis A. Ramirez — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:19:58 -0000

*Star Trek transporter sound* "I'm aboard."

Re: Rafe’s 2013 Oscar Night Predictions

NotTheWhosTommy — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:00:02 -0000

"... they can weigh Phoenix’s Masterful performance ..."

... OH I GET IT.

Re: Thomas’ Obligatory Best Films of 2012 List

NotTheWhosTommy — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 17:15:38 -0000

Time to have another What You've Been Watching battle!

Re: Thomas’ Obligatory Best Films of 2012 List

talnhess — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:28:26 -0000

I tried Safety Not Guaranteed last night based on your recommendation. I... uh... didn't like it as much as you did.

Re: Thomas’ Obligatory Worst Films of 2012 List

NotTheWhosTommy — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 10:49:24 -0000

I thought that it was an engaging premise for a satirical dark comedy, but found the preachy monologues and overall celebration of Joel Murray's character to be very one sided and immature, especially after the more nuanced genius of Bobcat Goldthwait's previous film God Bless America.

Re: Thomas’ Obligatory Worst Films of 2012 List

Colin — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 06:44:33 -0000

Just out of curiosity, why were you disappointed by God Bless America? I personally thought it was amazing.

Re: Identity Thief [Review]

Luis A. Ramirez — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:51:03 -0000

Sounds like a lesser version of "Planes,Trains and Automobiles". And seeing how my faith in movies hasn't been completely restored (especially at an $11 per ticket pop) it won't make my must-see list.

And as for Bateman, don't forget his badass character Lorenzo Zoil from "Paul". Nothing like aggressive profanity to break out of a typecast.

Re: Weekly Blend #326 – Side Effects May Include Mayhem

talnhess — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 19:41:18 -0000

Everyone's a freakin' critic.

Re: Weekly Blend #326 – Side Effects May Include Mayhem

NotTheWhosTommy — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 19:33:01 -0000

*Seven Psychopaths

Re: Weekly Blend #325 – It’s All on Thomas

NotTheWhosTommy — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:55:00 -0000

Apparently I'm Dr. Strangelove... which totally works for me!

Re: Gangster Squad [Review]

Luis A. Ramirez — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:29:30 -0000

All right I read your review but I'm still wondering if you've seen The Untouchables yet. If not then stop what you're doing and find it (it's streaming on Netflix) and watch it and then tell us about it here or in the forums. I'd really like to hear a comparative take about both films.

Re: Gangster Squad [Review]

james rodrigues — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:38:02 -0000

I do agree that the film would've been better if it went all out as a cartoonish gangster film rather than trying to do that while being dark and gritty. and some better character development would've been nice

Re: 2013 Oscar Nominations Led By Lincoln and Life of Pi

NotTheWhosTommy — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:12:51 -0000

It just missed my top ten. Best crowd pleaser of 2012.

Re: 2013 Oscar Nominations Led By Lincoln and Life of Pi

Doctor Rotten — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:19:41 -0000

Wow. Silver Linings Playbook has nominations in all 6 major categories: Picture, Director and the 4 acting. That's rather impressive.

Re: 2013 Oscar Nominations Led By Lincoln and Life of Pi

Luis A. Ramirez — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:29:14 -0000

Wow. I think you're more crankier than me in regards to past Oscar Best Pictures. I would have said 20% are forgetful and would have gone back 60 years ago to point out irrelevant films. I think I'll have to abdicate my throne as the Official Curmudgeon and place the crown on your head Tom.

As for the Oscars, my instinctive vibe towards "Lincoln" dominating the Oscar race has only gotten stronger. It may not be the best film of the nominees but it hearken back to what a traditional Oscar winning film should be: a grand historical epic filled with drama and tragedy. And I think this year the Academy is going to get all nostalgic again despite Seth McFarland hosting.

BTW McFarland was actually quite funny during the presentation of the nominees. Kinda a sedate Ricky Gervais. Not to hard-hitting but not playing the soft game either. He may actually turn out to be a good host as long as he doesn't bring Stevie or Brian along.

And is it me or does McFarland remind anyone else of Peter Brady hopped up on steroids?