• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Just a STRANGE Movie

"Titanic" was sci-fi? Okay, Kate Winslet's breasts were fantastic, but still....
 
Obviously the Titanic in More peoples eyes.
Not mine.

You're comparing 2 different genres and 2 different ratings

In this case both are sci-Fi and had an R rating.

Thank you for helping me make my point.
The Phantom Menace, a PG-13 sci-fi film, grossed more than X2, also a PG-13 sci-fi film. I fail to see your point.

Please tell me you can see how a PG-13 movie would have a bigger audience than an R rated one.
 
Please tell me you can see how a PG-13 movie would have a bigger audience than an R rated one.
Of course I do; I have a degree in Film Studies, after all. That's not the issue here. The issue is you were comparing two films in the same genre with the same rating. I was doing the same, albeit using a different rating. You were saying that due to The Matrix's high gross, it was a better film than Dark City. Would you say the same thing about The Phantom Menace and X2?

Maybe you should go back for further studies.

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Your trying to compare Star Wars crazed fans with a new franchise in the Matrix?
 
Maybe you should go back for further studies.

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Your trying to compare Star Wars crazed fans with a new franchise in the Matrix?
I should go back for further studies? Your grammar and spelling are like something out of my worst nightmares.

I'm not trying to compare Star Wars to The Matrix. In fact, I'm comparing the gross of The Phantom Menace, the fourth film in a then twenty-two year old franchise, with X2, the second film in a then forty-year old franchise. This is a more than fair comparison. The fans are equally as rabid and obsessive, yet The Phantom Menace grossed more...and is a poorer film. Ergo, a film's gross has no direct correlation to its level of quality.

Can't argue with that logic-well, you can, but only to reveal the depths of one's ignorance. I think you make a very valid point. Another valid point would be that Matrix and Dark City BOTH steal from authors like William Gibson-so really, who's to say where the original ideas came from?
 
Can't argue with that logic-well, you can, but only to reveal the depths of one's ignorance. I think you make a very valid point. Another valid point would be that Matrix and Dark City BOTH steal from authors like William Gibson-so really, who's to say where the original ideas came from?

Not to mention The City of Lost Children is a major influence on both. As they say, there are no original ideas left, and all of four or seven stories (depending on who you ask).
 
Maybe you should go back for further studies.

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Your trying to compare Star Wars crazed fans with a new franchise in the Matrix?
I should go back for further studies? Your grammar and spelling are like something out of my worst nightmares.

I'm not trying to compare Star Wars to The Matrix. In fact, I'm comparing the gross of The Phantom Menace, the fourth film in a then twenty-two year old franchise, with X2, the second film in a then forty-year old franchise. This is a more than fair comparison. The fans are equally as rabid and obsessive, yet The Phantom Menace grossed more...and is a poorer film. Ergo, a film's gross has no direct correlation to its level of quality.

The Phantom Menace was the first Star Wars film in 16 years and the supposed beginning of the movie saga so people were pretty rabid to see it.
The X-Men films have been around forty years? hmmmm..

The first film was very well received so why wouldn't folks be rabid to see the second?

You are trying to compare proven franchises to (at the time) two new films.

Lets use The Matrix as an example
The Matrix
Worldwide: $460,379,930


The Matrix reloaded
Worldwide: $738,599,701

See how the second film made more money for a proven franchise?

The Matrix Revolutions
Worldwide: $424,988,211

See how the 3rd film didn't make as much as the first film because it sucked?

And you went to school for this stuff?
Seems like common sense to me.
 
Obviously the Titanic in More peoples eyes.
Not mine.

You're comparing 2 different genres and 2 different ratings

In this case both are sci-Fi and had an R rating.

Thank you for helping me make my point.

The Phantom Menace, a PG-13 sci-fi film, grossed more than X2, also a PG-13 sci-fi film. I fail to see your point.

Not to kick a horse over a bonfire...but good point!

Rob
 
The Phantom Menace was the first Star Wars film in 16 years and the supposed beginning of the movie saga so people were pretty rabid to see it.
Agreed. Hey, we agree on something!

The X-Men films have been around forty years? hmmmm..
No, they have not -- but the franchise has been around since 1963. Notice how I used the word "franchise", not "film franchise".



The first two Star Wars films were more well received than Jedi; why should people be rushing out to see TPM?




Man, what is it with you and The Matrix? Give it a rest.




Oh, wow, crap I know already. Thanks, Dad!



Oh, more crap I already know! You also have to consider that Revolutions was released a mere few months after Reloaded, and people were more than likely Matrix-ed out, regardless of perceived quality.

And you went to school for this stuff?
I did. Did you even go to school at all?

Seems like common sense to me.
What does?

Not gonna bother dissecting your post but You're the one that brought the Matrix into the whole conversation not me.
You're the one saying that Dark City is better than the Matrix not me.
 
Not gonna bother dissecting your post but You're the one that brought the Matrix into the whole conversation not me.
You're the one saying that Dark City is better than the Matrix not me.
Actually, if you can bother to read, Robert Scorpio first brought up The Matrix. My post immediately followed his.

Oh yeah, you are correct.
I got confused because you are the first one to make a stupid comment. :p
 
So no one is allowed to have their own opinion about a film being "good" or "bad" around here without being blasted for it... Nice. The adult response would be "I disagree", not "you're stupid for thinking so".

Anyway, I seem to recall Neroon saying way back there to stop derailing the thread with this petty argument.
 
So no one is allowed to have their own opinion about a film being "good" or "bad" around here without being blasted for it... Nice. The adult response would be "I disagree", not "you're stupid for thinking so".

Anyway, I seem to recall Neroon saying way back there to stop derailing the thread with this petty argument.

I would like to state for the record that I fully respect PK's opinion regarding Dark City. He is allowed to have it. I, however, do not respect his treatment of me as an idiot for enjoying it, not to mention his uncalled for drug abuse remark. When I insult him, I'm replying to his personal attacks on me, not his taste in film.

And Neroon is right; we were told to take it to PMs, and we did. It only got worse there. I simply cannot abide attacks on my intelligence and alleged lifestyle.

EDIT: So as not to weigh down the thread with petty bickering, I have deleted many of my posts in it out of respect for my fellow forum members and implore PK to do the same. I am, at last, finished with this thread.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah, you are correct.
I got confused because you are the first one to make a stupid comment. :p
Don't go trying to make me look like an idiot because your reading comprehension is so low you can't finish "Go, Dog, Do".

You don't need my help, you're doing fine by yourself. ;)

My part in derailing this thread is done and I apologize to Robert Scorpio for doing so.
 
Oh yeah, you are correct.
I got confused because you are the first one to make a stupid comment. :p
Don't go trying to make me look like an idiot because your reading comprehension is so low you can't finish "Go, Dog, Do".

You don't need my help, you're doing fine by yourself. ;)

Geez.... :rolleyes:

1 infraction for trolling.


Oh yeah, you are correct.
I got confused because you are the first one to make a stupid comment. :p

That second sentence hardly seems like a complete thought...not to mention inaccurate. You seemed baffled to the point of catatonia when Robert mentioned that The Matrix stole ideas from Dark City. Don't go trying to make me look like an idiot because your reading comprehension is so low you can't finish "Go, Dog, Do".

Ditto. One infraction for flaming.
 
Now .... "STRANGE Movies" ......

I seem to recall an odd film called "Laserblast". It wasn't terribly good, so maybe that's why it seemed so odd in the first place.
 
Adam Rifkin's "The Dark Backward" (1991) starring Bill Paxton as a heavy metal accordionist, and Judd Nelson as a talentless stand-up comedian who suddenly comes to fame when he spontaneously grows a third arm from the middle of his back. A totally surreal film set in no particular timeframe on a twisted parody of America. Recommend it highly.

Barry Shilis' "Motorama". (1991) A ten year old boy gets tired of life with abusive parents and cashes in his piggy bank and steals a Mustang. He rides off into a surreal America playing "Motorama," a game sponsored by Chimera Gas Company. He has various encounters with different people, and eventually reaches the Chimera Gas Company where he finds they are not playing by the rules of the game.

Cory McAbee's "The American Astronaut" (2001). A space cowboy is on a job to deliver a girl in a case for a handsome boy to trade to a planet of Venusian women in exchange for their former king, whose remains are wanted back on Earth by his wealthy family. Not a problem. Except a psychopathic old friend is trying to kill him. Strange. black and white. Highly surreal.

Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" (1985) 1984-ish dystopian future, with a surreal twist. Brilliant visuals. Astounding cast. Funny and thought provoking. Make sure you see the unrated European edition, or the Director's Cut, and not the horrible Universal Studios' edit, which totally butchers the story, and which necessitated most of the visuals be cut out to make their bastardized version of the story work.

And a recent one...

Andrew Currie's "Fido" (2006) a disturbing zombie comedy set in a surreal Leave it to Beaver-esque world, where the undead are "controlled" and used as domestics. Starring Scottish comedian Billy Connolly as a boy's "pet" zombie, and Carrie Anne Moss as a heavily armed version of June Cleaver.
 
I saw Motorama-as I recall, it went well with cannabis and cheezits!:)

And Brazil certainly qualifies as strange. In fact, the sanest, most mainstream of Terry Gilliam's (spelling error?) movies qualify as strange now that I think about it. Most all are worth watching, too. I mean, anybody who casts Robin Williams as a giant, disembodied head....
 
Now .... "STRANGE Movies" ......

I seem to recall an odd film called "Laserblast". It wasn't terribly good, so maybe that's why it seemed so odd in the first place.
Damn, I remember watching that on video in the early 80s....yeah, it was odd - but more than that, it was absolutely awful!

MST3K did a show on it, I recall. Very funny. :D
"Titanic" was sci-fi? Okay, Kate Winslet's breasts were fantastic, but still....
Yes. Yes they were. Absobloodylutely!

And my nomination for strange? Eraserhead. Lynch, you have a strange, strange brain.
 
Event Horizon IMHO

I think that I got the gist of it but it raised more questions that it answered and I found the ending lacking. I don't know if the execution of it was off or if I just didn't "get it". I would've liked more explanation/answers about WHERE the ship had gone before it reappeared (Hell?), what happened to the original crew and what happened to Wier and Laurence Fishburne's (what was his name?) character after the rest of the ship separated. It's actually not too bad of a movie and I usually find myself sucked into watching it whenever it comes on TV but it always leaves me mystified.

Runner up would be Donnie Darko which I've only seen once so far, almost certainly not enough time to grasp the apparent complexity of it. It was a very intriguing movie however and I plan to re-watch it at a later date.
 
In fact, the sanest, most mainstream of Terry Gilliam's (spelling error?) movies qualify as strange now that I think about it. Most all are worth watching, too. I mean, anybody who casts Robin Williams as a giant, disembodied head....
Yet another pic I just happen to have already:

rbaron2.jpg


His most normal may also be a Robin Williams vehicle..."The Fisher King".
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top