Comic Genesis Forums

Yeahduff wrote:

Laemkral wrote:more accurate portrayal of how things were/are

zzzzzzzzz

War is endless stretches of boredom interspersed with the occasional moments of pure and abject terror.

Or as we, in the Army, call it: "Hurry up and wait."

Laemkral wrote:

Yeahduff wrote:

Laemkral wrote:more accurate portrayal of how things were/are

zzzzzzzzz

War is endless stretches of boredom interspersed with the occasional moments of pure and abject terror.

Or as we, in the Army, call it: "Hurry up and wait."

that pretty much describes my life as a research scientist.

I'm not gonna sit here and argue about what war really is to someone who's actually lived through it. Similarly I'm not gonna base my opinions regarding war films on second hand knowledge of how accurate they are.

Yeahduff wrote:I'm not gonna sit here and argue about what war really is to someone who's actually lived through it. Similarly I'm not gonna base my opinions regarding war films on second hand knowledge of how accurate they are.

You could still assess the war film on its artistic merits. I don't pay attention to stuff like that because I'm the kind of person who can't remember the word to call a person who doesn't pay a lot of attention to the artistic merits of films.

Still... "zzzzzzzzzzzz" is an oddly accurate description of war, certain parts at least.

That's what I've heard from the various veterans who've cared to talk about it. "Hurry up & wait," specifically.

Guess it's difficult/impossible to set aside one's experiences while viewing a war film when you've actually seen war.

A movie called Restrepo comes out this week. Guess it's a documentary about a remote army outpost in Afghanistan. Sounds fantastic.

I finally saw Toy Story 3 today, it was awesome. Definitely one of the most universally solid trillogies out there, particularly when you consider how far the plot progresses in every movie.

I just hope they can do as good a job with Cars 2, though my expectations are not high.

Eclipse...
jacob is dreamy...

I enjoyed it...


too much...

Yeahduff wrote: A movie called Restrepo comes out this week. Guess it's a documentary about a remote army outpost in Afghanistan. Sounds fantastic.

I am fanatically eager to see this movie. When I first saw the trailer, my first thought was 'This is the movie "The Hurt Locker" SHOULD have been.' I have friends living on those exact kinds of outposts, right now, and I want to be able to understand as much as possible what it is they're going through.

Terotrous wrote:I finally saw Toy Story 3 today, it was awesome. Definitely one of the most universally solid trillogies out there, particularly when you consider how far the plot progresses in every movie.

I just hope they can do as good a job with Cars 2, though my expectations are not high.

I'm hoping that's playing in the theater on post by the time I get back. Should be. Of course, getting my mom into the theater on post while she's visiting will be another trick in and of itself, since they may check for military ID...

Yeahduff wrote:I'm not gonna sit here and argue about what war really is to someone who's actually lived through it. Similarly I'm not gonna base my opinions regarding war films on second hand knowledge of how accurate they are.

My impression is that most of war films do not intend to depict soilder life accurately, but rather to state something about war in general. You have anti-war films which emphasize all the most tragic sides of war - and "it's boring" just isn't a compelling enough arguement and on the other hand "war movies" in Kubrick's sence of the world, which glamourize war violence in a similar way gangster movies glamourize street violence.
From my limited experience, I can concur with Laem from a civilian's point of view that war consists of long stretches of ordinary life (albeit with constant reminders of the state) with sudden and short outbursts of violence - of course every war movie will cut the ordinary parts, partly with reason because those short parts are the ones we remember the most, but on the other hand it creates a somewhat warped impression of war as something abstract, a kind of black hole with no life in it other than soilders in gutters.
I always thought that war comedies like Air America or 'Allo 'Allo were reasonably accurate descriptions as far as civilian life goes, well save for all the comedy I guess. Films like Platoon or Saving Private Ryan - well you know that they're anti-war films, that message goes before accuracy and as far as depicting horrible things they're fairly accurate, but you don't go to them when you're wondering what overall experience is like.

And would you believe it - our friend Youtube has one of my fave films, "Innocence unprotected", a documentary about the first sound film in Serbia, filmed in Belgrade during german occupation.

Laemkral wrote: 'This is the movie "The Hurt Locker" SHOULD have been.'

Well, they're two completely different movies with completely different goals. I mean, one is actually non-fiction.

To be clear I wasn't suggesting that accurate depictions of war (or anything else) were boring, just that criticism based largely on verisimilitude was flawed and tired.

I vaguely remember something Ebert wrote about The Thin Red Line, how it's characters weren't being philosophical about war so much as war as it's depicted in war films. And that most movies about war are like that. Maybe I'll look up the actual quote.

Did you really think Saving Private Ryan was anti-war exactly? I suppose it's been years for me but I feel like while it didn't shy away from the horrors of WWII, it wasn't exactly arguing against it. Maybe I'm wrong.

I didn't watch it whole, I'm not exactly the one to seek out Spielberg's filmography, I'm just acquitanced with it's most famous moments. I had an impression that he tried to gross us out of the idea of war, the inevitable sickening feeling and all.

Say don't you think that Ebert has gone soft since his hiatus? It's like he never gives bad review to anything anymore.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... 39999/1001

edit: also, this one's funny:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /911199998

Iron Man 2, now seen it 4 times. Twice in theaters and twice here in Romania. Movie studios provide "advanced release screenings" on VCR tapes to the military, including the training base here.

I still am not sick of watching it.

McDuffies wrote:I didn't watch it whole, I'm not exactly the one to seek out Spielberg's filmography, I'm just acquitanced with it's most famous moments. I had an impression that he tried to gross us out of the idea of war, the inevitable sickening feeling and all.

Say don't you think that Ebert has gone soft since his hiatus? It's like he never gives bad review to anything anymore.

Marmaduke review... http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /100609990

McDuffies wrote: and on the other hand "war movies" in Kubrick's sence of the world, which glamourize war violence in a similar way gangster movies glamourize street violence.

I don't think that Kubrick is the best example to cite for this point.

Kubrick is the one who made that kind of distinction between "war" and "anti-war" films. If I knew someone else who explicitely used that terminology, I might have mentioned him instead.

Yeahduff wrote:http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... 39999/1001

edit: also, this one's funny:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /911199998

Well yeah ok, but you have to be reeally bad, I mean he mellowed, he even gave a good grade to Roland Emmerich film.

Apparently too many people on these forums watch BAD movies over GOOD movies. This actually ended up on the 2nd page. That or we're actually creating new threads!

So, "Youth in Revolt" was a rather interesting watch, if for no reason other than to hear Michael Cera use his grown-up voice. I'm rather impressed by his ability to be in this movie playing a 16-year old (and I buy it) and that he's also cast as Scott Pilgrim in "Scott Pilgrim vs The World", a character that to my understanding is 23. I've never read the series, as I am irrationally opposed to reading manga, so I'm going off what Amazon tells me.

Anyways, back to Michael Cera playing the same standard nervous virgin who just wants to get the girl. This dude is seriously typecast. But, thats why this is a good movie. His alter ego, Francois Dillinger is so different from what we usually see on screen that its actually enjoying to watch the dichotomy of the characters.

The plot itself is pretty standard fare, and the artsy side of the film is kinda interesting...nothing too special or unique. Really, a good rental but I doubt I'd own it.

Scott Pilgrim isn't a manga. It's drawn by a Toronto local for frigg's. I actually ended up reading it recently and it had it's moments. Its... a *different* comic, its hard to put one title on it 'MANGA' or 'COMEDY' or whatever.

Killbert-Robby wrote:Scott Pilgrim isn't a manga. It's drawn by a Toronto local for frigg's. I actually ended up reading it recently and it had it's moments. Its... a *different* comic, its hard to put one title on it 'MANGA' or 'COMEDY' or whatever.

Amazon said manga, so as far as I'm concerned that makes it manga. I'll watch the movie when it either a) comes to AAFES cause it'll only be $4 or b) when it hits iTunes cause it'll only be $4.

It ain't manga, it's much closer to american indy comics, like Andi Watson and that kind of stuff. I've read first two issues and wasn't exactly moved to seek further, although there's nothing inherently wrong about it and it actually takes a fair shot at being original.

Strange that they're making a film after it. I didn't think film producers were actually keeping an eye on alternative comic scene.