-
Posts
9,655 -
Joined
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by GLASSJAW
-
looks like an uplifting read
-
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
I don't think so, but I didn't see him much (if at all) with Barcelona. with PSG and Brazil he was centre, but would pretty much be all over the field and between both wings (probably fuelled by cocaine) - I never watched Milan routinely, but I know he played left wing there for a while because Kaka was still being touted as the next big thing while there, and he had the centre attacking mid role down -
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
you can clearly see that he is marked in one goal, and in the other he was being marked until the person marking him fell over. but i guess that doesn't count, because Brazil weren't really trying, or whatever. as for Scholes, yeah he was great too. And Keane is my all-time favourite midfielder, so I'm not denying their greatness. I have watched these guys play all through my childhood. And Xavi was a big fan of Manchester United - he even praises Wayne Rooney who I personally think is quite sh-t and tremendously overrated. In fact, Zidane himself said Scholes was his "greatest opponent" or something. but anyway, none of this has anything to do with anything anyone said. you said people who think Zidane was great are just pretending. then said "just my opinion" - your opinion about other people's opinions. my opinion is that your opinion of my opinion is wrong. so, i guess that ends the conversation. -
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
who even is the best right sided midfielder in more contemporary time? when i think of great wingers or wide midfielders, I can think of a bunch of great left ones. Even when I google it the results are Figo, Ribery, Ljunberg, Robinho (lol!) - but these guys all primarily play(ed) on the left or centre, I believe. Figo was a great player, but I'd easily take Beckham over Ribery, Ljunberg, or Robinho I know George Best was a right winger too, but I certainly never saw him play. -
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
which is more likely: the entire footballing world is mistaking Zidane for being great, or your viewing experience actually reflects the TRUE Zidane, and he just didn't dominate a game? which is more likely: Zidane was an all-time great, or the all-time greats who praise him are actually just pretending to like him so they look "cool"? how is this even a real conversation I have no idea how someone can rate and praise Iniesta but not Zidane. Zidane is like the Barcelona midfield rolled into one player. he just never had that level of consistent team work around him. but he certainly dominated plenty of games - and he did so in multiple leagues, at multiple levels, and on the international stage too. did you not watch the 98 World Cup? or even read about it? Did you not watch the final? I have never seen Messi come close to even a fraction of that performance on an international stage. JUST SAYIN in that he was one of the most popular in the world, and despite being unfashionable lately, was undeniably great for a long time? certainly wasn't the best or anything, but Beckham was a fantastic player - his distracting beauty and chiseled physique and badboi tats just made it distracting to see, sometimes -
any genre, region, or period preferences?
-
my favourite point of the entire thing was made by Tarantino. it was when he says that movies used to be made "for the people" essentially - it was a working class hobby and art form. and he says that while sitting next to David O'Russell who just made Joy and Silver Linings Playbook, two totally non-cinematic movies. seeing them both, with snacks, would cost almost $100 for a small family to see. It's an expensive hobby, and when you factor in how many hundreds of movies are released each year, it's difficult to pick which ones are "worth it" imo. Hollywood has priced a lot of people out, and now the studios are crying about it.
-
haha, maybe. but to be fair, i haven't read Catcher in the Rye for ages and ages, and probably only read it once or twice. Sun Also Rises I've probably gone through a bunch of times over the years i do like my country boi books too tho. mccarthy and faulkner are definitely up there
-
carol: 5/10 - i could imagine this being a substantial movie in, say, the 90s or before, when this sorta stuff was a bit more taboo. but since i'm not really shocked or inspired or offended by a gay/lesbian relationship, i don't find a two hour movie based on the inevitable sexual union between two women to be all that interesting. its like one slow burn leading to sex. the movie is literally about the sex we know is going to come (hurf durf), but it's so boring in the process. no character development, no decent dialogue, no nothing. just the confirmation that hey, two women can love each other. isn't that something? it was just perfectly average in every way. even the score just sounded like Philip Glass knock off material at times. not sure what the praise is behind this one?
-
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
-
this is pretty interesting if anybody is interested. round table discussion between the directors Quentin Tarantino ('The Hateful Eight'), Tom Hooper ('The Danish Girl'), Alejandro G. Inarritu ('The Revenant'), Ridley Scott ('The Martian'), Danny Boyle ('Steve Jobs') and David O. Russell ('Joy').
-
he's not exactly fashionable these days, but The Sun Also Rises is probably my all-time fav. novel
-
seymour: an introduction: 7.5/10. pretty good doc for those interested in music in a "serious" way brooklyn: 6/10: (c)harmless anomalisa: 8.5/10: won't be for everyone, but it will REALLY be for some others (Bookie?). the puppet sex scene is one of the most awkward scenes i can remember watching. got a couple left i was curious to see, but really this year has been mostly a let down for me. really wishin Hitchcock/Truffaut would leak.
-
oh dear
-
nah, Gleeson is only in it for like 30 minutes. he has that 'story telling' type role. don't watch it for him - and that would be one of my complaints again: put him in it more. i didn't realize Hemsworth was Thor, but that makes so much sense. I knew he was a comic book movie guy, just not sure which one. the dude stands at least two feet taller and three feet wider than everyone else on screen, it's kinda ridiculous
-
in the heart of the sea: 6.5/10 i kinda secretly had very reserved hopes for this one. i thought Ron Howard's last movie with Chris Hemsworth, Rush, was brilliant. Anyway, I don't particularly care for Hemsworth, but I was still optimistic because of the supporting cast of Brendan Gleeson and Cillian Murphy. On top of that, I love Hermann Melville, I love American and European history from the period this movie operates in. AND, even more than that, as a kid I loved whales(!) and still think of them as being pretty marvellous, majestic beings. Unfortunately I sorta think the movie was just decent, with enjoyable bits here and there. I loved the costume design, I loved the scene where they're digging out the oil. I loved seeing Gleeson performing a hammy old whaler. But the CGI was pretty weak, the action wasn't very tense, the dialogue was kinda cheesy, and I sorta just didn't care about many characters in the end. Still, I won't say I was bored or anything. Had this come out when I was 12 or 13, it would have been an instant favourite. I think I must have watched Free Willy at least 500 times. Anyway, it just reminded me also of the American Experience episode about the whaling trade. That was a 10/10 and brutally fascinating, if anyone's interested:
-
-
god, here's an article from 2012(!) which collects some of his "tone poem" and "experimental film" fantasies: http://entertainment.time.com/2012/01/18/george-lucas-wants-to-retire-and-make-art-films-sure-he-does/ I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds this tic of his sorta strange.
-
anyone watch the Charlie Rose interview with George Lucas? it's been making some headlines: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/movies/george-lucas-criticizes-latest-star-wars-installment.html?_r=0 I gave it a watch the other day and felt kinda uncomfortable a few times. him discussing the sale of Star Wars and Lucasarts to Disney using slave language is weird given how he has a black wife and championed "black movies" a few years back. you'd think he'd be more sensitive, lol but as a movie fan, i find it obnoxious how throughout the interview he harps on and on and on about his "artistic" ambition to return to his film school roots and make "tone poems" and "visual collages" and abstract stuff without the hollywood narrative. he essentially said that he made American Graffiti "because he could" or because he was challenged to, not because he wanted to. his heart, he says, was really in abstraction and "visual collages and tone poems" - the art form he's now going to return to. for those of you who were Star Wars nerds growing up like i was, you'll probably remember George Lucas saying this exact same thing in almost every interview he gave for the last 25 years. he's a billionaire who pretends to champion "art" but instead just talks about championing it. he talks about valuing story, about valuing character, and about how technology shouldn't interfere with good story telling, but he says this seemingly ignoring the fact he was responsible for the Star Wars prequels! he gives some seriously mixed messages about story vs. technology, and seems really confused about how to be progressive. he's definitely an intelligent guy, he just seems straight up delusional and that just compounds his arrogance I almost feel sorry for the guy. It's like he sees his reputation is tarnished, but instead of recognizing where he went wrong, he's doubling down on his work and implying that everyone else is wrong.
-
sigh, Travolta was so ahead of his time
-
Room: 6.5/10 Just wasn't feeling this one much at all. Definitely found it (very) emotional a few times, but those scenes were few and far between. I understand that the book it's based on is from a child's perspective, and the movie is an effort to extend that perspective, but that doesn't make it interesting to me - just makes the conflicts or adult's drama and tension seem shallow, or left totally unexplored. It's especially weird when you consider the movie/book's source material, and how gruesome and brutal the "real" story is. I mean, what purpose does it serve the horrific "real story" to bridge the adult issues and traumas with a child's ability to heal and move on so quickly?
-
nevermind, i won't try to bait the joke. but yes, monty, that's fine
-
i would appreciate it if you took listmaking more seriously, bookie. anyway, my top 5 for 2015: 1. the godfather 2. birdman 3. the man from uncle 4. star wars a new hope 5. steve jobs
-
The Official European Football (Soccer) Thread
GLASSJAW replied to Scottish⑦Canuck's topic in Off-Topic General
it's just how people talk and write about the sport, and probably always have. what membership are you referring to? look at redcafe, for example. almost every single poster on there says "we" in this context. reddit too. -
Steve Jobs: 8/10. Wonderful acting from top to bottom. Fassbender was great as he almost always is, and I wouldn't be upset if he grabbed a lot of nominations/wins. great supporting cast too. I love Jeff Daniels in his supporting roles. Aaron Sorkin's dialogue was dense but sharp, as it often is. both accessible yet powerful at the same time. kinda wish they elaborated on Jobs' hippie-ness and "good person" character arc a bit more. altho i will add that this isn't something i can see myself re-watching any time soon