And lo on Fri, 04 Jan 2008 12:08:24 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did  
spake, saying:

> Warp wrote:
>> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> #3 Island of the Twelve Monkeys
>>    What is that? IMDB doesn't know it.

Just IMDB Twelve Monkeys instead.

> It involves Bruce Willis in a dystopian future and a team of scientists  
> who keep sending him back in time to try to avert the terrorist  
> catastrophy that overtook civilisation - apparently perpetrated by a  
> band calling themselves "the island of the twelve monkeys". As it turns  
> out, this band is actually a bunch of kids out to cause a bit of  
> trouble, and the real catastrophy was brought about by an eminent  
> biological scientist who decided to murder the world. For no defined  
> reason. Obviously nobody believes that Willis is actually from the  
> future, and he slowly goes mad, eventually believing that his time spent  
> in the future is actually a hollucination.
>
> Basically, a very bad film that barely makes sense.

I really enjoyed it, for the first half of the film you're unsure whether  
Willis is really a time-traveller or just nuts, for the second half that  
all gets cleared up. I can't say more without spoiling it.

>>   For some reason when I watched Blade Runner, I found it  
>> incomprehensible.
>> The book was a lot more comprehensible. (I don't remember which one I  
>> saw/read
>> first...)
>
> I think I'd class that one more as "rather hard to follow" rather than  
> actually "incomprehensible".

I've got to admit for me BR was a bit too artsy; don't get me wrong I  
enjoy/ed it, but at times it seems/ed to be art for the sake of art. Meh.

> Dune made absolutely no semblence of sence. I mean, events happen, and  
> the events kind of vaguely make sense, but WHY are these events  
> happening? And who ARE these people? And WTF is going ON here? I'm lost!

To me the film with Sting had the contradictionary stance of a) not  
following the book's plot except in general, while b) only making sense if  
you'd read the book; not helped by having to cram it all into a keeping  
bums-on-seats time. The longer mini-series is much better.

> Ditto for 2001. (Seemingly a random selection of camera angles.)

Again I liked 2001 even if the first time I saw it I couldn't make head  
nor tail of it; it grew on me.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message