Red Mosquito

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:We watched The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, and I liked it. Not gonna change anyone's life or anything. But people were talking about this like it was a crime against humanity. It's beautifully shot. Funny at times. It's fluffy, sure, and absurd, but that's kinda the point. I don't know. I liked it.

I didn't dislike it, but I think it was kind of a missed opportunity. Some of its messages seemed a bit contradictory.

Yeah, it's definitely not the best possible version of that story.

What seemed contradictory to you?

Spoiler: show

The whole idea of Ben Stiller supposedly wasting his life being meek and doing nothing, and the movie then celebrates how he breaks that cycle and goes on an adventure, but then the end saying that his meek, uneventful life was somehow worthy of the cover of the final issue of Life. What is that supposed to mean?

Spoiler: show

The idea being that his life was never meaningless or uneventful. He was working with the wrong definitions. It's very Wizard of Oz: You had a heart all along, Tinman.

Spoiler: show

I get that, but then doesn't the way the movie kind of glorifies the adventurous stuff contradict that? Not to mention that Walter was clearly unhappy with that life (as he was constantly daydreaming about adventure and romance), so why is the movie now saying it was actually meaningful? Sure, he was a good guy with a good spirit all along, but putting him on the cover of Life seems to indicate relevance and meaning. I dunno, it just didn't jell for me.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:We watched The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, and I liked it. Not gonna change anyone's life or anything. But people were talking about this like it was a crime against humanity. It's beautifully shot. Funny at times. It's fluffy, sure, and absurd, but that's kinda the point. I don't know. I liked it.

I didn't dislike it, but I think it was kind of a missed opportunity. Some of its messages seemed a bit contradictory.

Yeah, it's definitely not the best possible version of that story.

What seemed contradictory to you?

Spoiler: show

The whole idea of Ben Stiller supposedly wasting his life being meek and doing nothing, and the movie then celebrates how he breaks that cycle and goes on an adventure, but then the end saying that his meek, uneventful life was somehow worthy of the cover of the final issue of Life. What is that supposed to mean?

Spoiler: show

The idea being that his life was never meaningless or uneventful. He was working with the wrong definitions. It's very Wizard of Oz: You had a heart all along, Tinman.

Spoiler: show

I get that, but then doesn't the way the movie kind of glorifies the adventurous stuff contradict that? Not to mention that Walter was clearly unhappy with that life (as he was constantly daydreaming about adventure and romance), so why is the movie now saying it was actually meaningful? Sure, he was a good guy with a good spirit all along, but putting him on the cover of Life seems to indicate relevance and meaning. I dunno, it just didn't jell for me.

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:We watched The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, and I liked it. Not gonna change anyone's life or anything. But people were talking about this like it was a crime against humanity. It's beautifully shot. Funny at times. It's fluffy, sure, and absurd, but that's kinda the point. I don't know. I liked it.

I didn't dislike it, but I think it was kind of a missed opportunity. Some of its messages seemed a bit contradictory.

Yeah, it's definitely not the best possible version of that story.

What seemed contradictory to you?

Spoiler: show

The whole idea of Ben Stiller supposedly wasting his life being meek and doing nothing, and the movie then celebrates how he breaks that cycle and goes on an adventure, but then the end saying that his meek, uneventful life was somehow worthy of the cover of the final issue of Life. What is that supposed to mean?

Spoiler: show

The idea being that his life was never meaningless or uneventful. He was working with the wrong definitions. It's very Wizard of Oz: You had a heart all along, Tinman.

Spoiler: show

I get that, but then doesn't the way the movie kind of glorifies the adventurous stuff contradict that? Not to mention that Walter was clearly unhappy with that life (as he was constantly daydreaming about adventure and romance), so why is the movie now saying it was actually meaningful? Sure, he was a good guy with a good spirit all along, but putting him on the cover of Life seems to indicate relevance and meaning. I dunno, it just didn't jell for me.

The entire movie is his own perception of himself. Good and bad. Those around him and the adventures he goes on help him realize that he didn't need to dream all the time. He didn't believe in himself. But he was never really meek. It's not like his character from Along Came Polly turns into Rambo all of a sudden. I like the between stuff, the shades of human grey. It's not as cut and dry as first he's this and then he's that and now he's whole.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:We watched The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, and I liked it. Not gonna change anyone's life or anything. But people were talking about this like it was a crime against humanity. It's beautifully shot. Funny at times. It's fluffy, sure, and absurd, but that's kinda the point. I don't know. I liked it.

I didn't dislike it, but I think it was kind of a missed opportunity. Some of its messages seemed a bit contradictory.

Yeah, it's definitely not the best possible version of that story.

What seemed contradictory to you?

Spoiler: show

The whole idea of Ben Stiller supposedly wasting his life being meek and doing nothing, and the movie then celebrates how he breaks that cycle and goes on an adventure, but then the end saying that his meek, uneventful life was somehow worthy of the cover of the final issue of Life. What is that supposed to mean?

Spoiler: show

The idea being that his life was never meaningless or uneventful. He was working with the wrong definitions. It's very Wizard of Oz: You had a heart all along, Tinman.

Spoiler: show

I get that, but then doesn't the way the movie kind of glorifies the adventurous stuff contradict that? Not to mention that Walter was clearly unhappy with that life (as he was constantly daydreaming about adventure and romance), so why is the movie now saying it was actually meaningful? Sure, he was a good guy with a good spirit all along, but putting him on the cover of Life seems to indicate relevance and meaning. I dunno, it just didn't jell for me.

The entire movie is his own perception of himself. Good and bad. Those around him and the adventures he goes on help him realize that he didn't need to dream all the time. He didn't believe in himself. But he was never really meek. It's not like his character from Along Came Polly turns into Rambo all of a sudden. I like the between stuff, the shades of human grey. It's not as cut and dry as first he's this and then he's that and now he's whole.

That's a really interesting take on it. Now I want to rewatch it. I have a feeling the whole thing will still be a little too Hallmark for me, but still.

durdencommatyler wrote:And while flawed, it's hardly a disaster.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Hey, Burt, have you seen Universal Soldier: Regeneration and/or Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning?

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Hey, Burt, have you seen Universal Soldier: Regeneration and/or Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning?

BurtReynolds wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Hey, Burt, have you seen Universal Soldier: Regeneration and/or Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning?

I've only seen the first one and the one with Goldberg.

BurtReynolds wrote:There was one where the bad guy gets kicked in the head so hard that it temporarily transforms into a rubber chicken. Which one is that?

durdencommatyler wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:Anyone seen the movie Whiplash about a young jazz drummer?

Not yet, but I really want to.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:There was one where the bad guy gets kicked in the head so hard that it temporarily transforms into a rubber chicken. Which one is that?

I hope you mean that literally

LetMeSleep wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:Anyone seen the movie Whiplash about a young jazz drummer?

Not yet, but I really want to.

I have a pass so I'm hoping to see it next week. I'll let you know. In fact I have a plus 1 if you're keen.

Kaius wrote:What's up with people snapping at Alex? I don't like it. I don't like it one bit.

L_V...Ruddo...you've been warned.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Kaius wrote:What's up with people snapping at Alex? I don't like it. I don't like it one bit.

L_V...Ruddo...you've been warned.

Dudes been a d-bag to me and trolling the hell out of me lately. Quite frankly it is pissing me off.