Which is an actual movie that came out in the 80's. Pretty much impossible to track down but it is pretty great.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097702/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Not to mention the military helicopter obviously had crashed into the roof, but it took some good old water damage before anything started falling through said roof.
I, like you, had seen Jason Biggs name and was less than enthused because of it. I decided to give the show a shot anyway. Nine episodes later I can safely say I officially am a huge fan of the show. It is superb and filled with fully realized, fascinating characters all played wonderfully by the actors...even Jason Biggs.
I know, I know. This is such a Trek nerd comment.
"The movie commits one of my big action movie pet peeves, which is when a bad guy is established in the beginning to be invincible, able to withstand impossible levels of physical abuse without batting a titanium eyelash, so that you are like how are they even going to be able to beat this guy, but then in the final scene he just gets beaten up and it turns out it’s pretty easy."
Vulcans are significantly stronger than humans, this ostensibly explains why Spock was able to hurt Khan and Kirk was not.
When I was 11 years old I was at the mall. For whatever reason, they like to put signs and advertisements in the middle of where people are walking. I was busy looking at the items in the various store fronts. Too busy, in fact, to see the large metal sign right in front of me. I smacked full force into it and bounced backwards.
As the sign proceeded to reverberate from my impact, I quickly whipped my head around praying no one had seen me. Unfortunately, the first thing I see is a store employee, in the entrance of the store, doubled over in laughter.
A couple years before that, I proudly announced to my parents and grandparents that I had discovered the word "fornication" in the game of Boggle we were playing. Not only did I not spell the word correctly, but I had no idea what the word meant. ...and THAT is what happens when you make your kid sit through sermons at church.
Today is my first day back at work after being out sick the rest of this week. Of course, I wasn't that excited to come back because I was basically told by HR that I will be out of a job two weeks before Christmas last Friday. Then I found out today from my father, if I end up unemployed for any real length of time, there is a very distinct possibility that my dad could lose his house because he co-signed on my student loans. For the last 5 years I've paid them for myself, but if I'm unemployed there is no way I could afford the $850 a month payments. It turns out, right now my father couldn't either. Throw in having had surgery back in June that still hasn't healed and all in all, not only has it been a great day but it's been a great year. Good thing the world ends in December!
There is so much to talk about with this film. I absolutely love it. That being said, I'm going to cop out and just post what I posted last week, else where:
The Master does not have a narrative arc in the traditional sense. It does not build to a overarching climax with the subsequent resolution. This leads some people to say "nothing happened." Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a rich film and highly substantive in my humble opinion. Perhaps due to my initial euphoric feeling upon first viewing, I would argue it is one of the best character studies and subsequently one of the best examinations of a certain corner of Americana that I have seen in a quite a while. PT Anderson's shot choices emphasize this focus, frequently alternating between extreme close-ups reminiscent of Carl Dreyer's "The Passion of Joan of Arc" and long takes that recall the apartment scenes in Godard's "Contempt". The press has focused on the supposed similarities between Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and L. Ron Hubbard. Frankly, I'm not sure how strong these similarities are but ultimately I find it inconsequential. This is not a film about Scientology. Near the beginning of the film Lancaster says to Freddie (Joaquin Phoenix), "You seem very familiar." One reason for this familiarity is Lancaster is staring at himself. Their situations and the way they compose themselves may be different but they are each empty husks. They are each a shell of a human being and they see in each other the potential to be whole. Freddie inspires a creative resurgence in Lancaster and he proceeds to write his second book. Perhaps it is coincidence, but to me the title of the book, "Split Saber," refers as much to Freddie and Lancaster as it does to any religious philosophy found within.
Fincher actually stated he was trying to reinvent Hitchcock when he made Panic Room. You can also very much tell that the Jodie Foster's character was supposed to be played by Nicole Kidman. All in all I think Fincher failed miserably. It reminded more of a Home Alone (substitute Pesci's ineptitude and yelling with Leto's) for adults than anything else. So, yeah, I definitely would side with those people who feel The Panic Room is Fincher's worst film.
Weird. I for one felt that Michael Pitt's character and performance was by far the worst. Not terrible, just really mediocre compared to the rest of the characters/cast. Speaking of missing people there was a distinct lack of Chalky in the premiere. More Chalky needed!
Comments