I posted this yesterday, but it disappeared for some reason. Another reason Philip Seymour Hoffman is one of the best actors around. 
^he is definitely at the top of his game. I don’t know why I haven’t seen that yet.
Randomly channel surfed last night to catch this:
I was shocked at how ‘young’ Robert Redford looked; I had thought he was much older than in that pic.
Overall I enjoyed the prelude (which is the part that sucked me in) and the rest of the movie was also entertaining and interesting.
Savages is great flick.
Not a theme for a movie that you see often. Pretty dark, but superb script & acting.
Don’t know if anyone mentioned this film yet, but The Way is pretty great.
Martin Sheen is…well, Martin Sheen. What else do you say.Great actor.
But it’s Emilio Estevez’s film. He wrote (adapted) and Directed. Plays a small part.
He’s really a great director. Watch Bobby too if you want to see.
Another reason Philip Seymour Hoffman is one of the best actors around.
If you want some excellent Hoffman, check out Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead. Excellent stuff and a great movie too.
Yeah, saw that and loved it. Ive been on a mission to check out all his movies lately. Recently saw Moneyball and Ides of March, and have Capote ready to go.
If you want to see Hoffman at his devastatingly best, check out his performance in ‘Love Lisa’. Mentioned it once before on this thread. He was just crushingly good in this disturbing movie. I found some similarities in this character and the one he played in Savages. No argument that he is one of the best around today.
Thanks, ill seek it out…
What a dumb movie. A few laughs, but boy, was that awful. 
^lol, yeah, not a good flick. A fun one to watch with a few BEAHS, but that’s about it.
Finally got around to watching Inglourious Basterds last night. I loved it. Too bad Emmanuelle didn’t get to kill Colonol Landa, but I suppose he got his justice in the end, Scarlet Letter style. Haven’t watched a movie with subtitles in a while and it def. forces you to watch the movie differently.
Also had never seen No Country For Old Men. Suspenseful at times. Thought it ended a bit abruptly, but I’ll have to watch it again.
Not sure what took me so long to watch these movies. Well, actually I do, usually can’t keep my attention long enough to sit through movies. I just go for an episode from a TV show if I watch anything.
On deck is Zero Dark Thirty. Started watching it, but need to finish it.
Rented Hitchcock this weekend. Good for Anthony Hopkins impersonation of Hitchcock, and a little insight into the stress in making Psycho, but other than that, re-watching Psycho would have been miles more entertaining.
Used Mother’s Day as an excuse to take her and my Dad to this one. Pretty darn good….maybe better than the second one. Downey Jr. as Tony Stark just plain works in these movies, regardless of the actual plot. There’s actually less of Tony in the suit in this one and just more of him doing Stark things but it worked for me and they make up for it in the end. There’s some really clever things they do with that suit that I didn’t see coming. Ben Kingsley is really memorable as the Mandarin.
Saw Argo last night. Intense shit. Movie of the year, no, but very enjoyable.
Iron Man 3 is much better than 2 (which isn’t too difficult to do), but 1 is still the best.
I’m excited for Iron Man 3 and I loved the first two. Might even… PAY (!!!) to go see it? Who knows, I might be feeling bold.
Iron Man 3 is much better than 2 (which isn’t too difficult to do), but 1 is still the best.
Certainly agree with this. It’s not that 2 was really that bad…it was a fun, silly action flick…Rourke played a surprisingly good Russian. Just not as good as the first.
I’m excited for Iron Man 3 and I loved the first two. Might even… PAY (!!!) to go see it?
The only movies I ever see in theaters are action flicks with wacky effects that make it actually worth it to see on the big screen. Anything that’s dialogue heavy and such doesn’t seem like it’s worth it.
Saw Star Trek Into Darkness yesterday and liked it as much as I liked the first JJ Abrams handling of the series. Besides all of the special effects, I think Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto have really captured the Kirk/Spock characters perfectly. Good story as well as it ties in characters and plot lines of previous Star Trek stories.
My only objection to both movies is the existence of the older and younger Spocks in the same time frame.
Worth seeing if you like Star Trek or Abrams in any way.
^ JJ said on Stern that having the older Spock in the story shows that the “new” Star Trek is a completely different time line than the original, so JJ has the freedom to deviate from the storylines of the past episodes.
I have never been a Star Trek fan in the slightest. Tried watching the original series a few years ago, and it is laughable how dated it is. I guess it something you have to lap up in an earlier age. Have never seen even a second of any of the other incarnations of the shows. But I do enjoy both of these movies a lot. My only complaint is there is WAY too much of that JJ Abrams style camera flare going on. I shouldn’t be blinded by light reflecting off the camera lens.