View Full Version : Really, Jeff?
tsmith15
10-08-2008, 10:32 PM
I know this is late, but am I the only one who spurted milk out of his nose when he heard Jeff say he loved Appaloosa? I just saw it the other night and thought it was awful and one of the least enjoyable movies I've seen all year. 3:10 to Yuma was much much more enjoyable for me, and I saw the second and third quarters of that movie flipped.
I like Ed Harris, Viggo Mortensen, & Jeremy Irons; and they all did a decent job (especially Viggo imo) but there was no meat & potatoes to the film. The whole thing seemed so contrived, the characters had no motivations for half the movie, the woman was completely unfathomably WTF. I agree with Alex about it falling apart after she showed up, except I found nothing redeeming about the parts previous to it.
However, I absolutely loved that one gun sequence they referenced, and I thought the other woman (not zellweger) was very pretty.
Anyway, your thoughts on Appaloosa, and if there's already been a thread for it I'd like a link :P
darthender
10-09-2008, 12:08 AM
They did a review for it on the show.
tsmith15
10-09-2008, 01:09 AM
No, really?
trsjeff
10-09-2008, 01:51 AM
I know this is late, but am I the only one who spurted milk out of his nose when he heard Jeff say he loved Appaloosa? I just saw it the other night and thought it was awful and one of the least enjoyable movies I've seen all year.
...
The whole thing seemed so contrived, the characters had no motivations for half the movie, the woman was completely unfathomably WTF.
Not much I can argue with here. It seems that it just didn't work for you. For me, it did. I found every situation interesting and unexpected. Beautiful little moments that you never see in movies ("you gonna believe him over me?" "yep") and a story that played out in a very unique, captivating way.
I found 3:10 to Yuma to be the opposite. Obvious, cliched, and preposterous. Situations I could see coming a mile away and behaviors that seemed counter intuitive.
But, ya know, different strokes for different folks.
-Jeff
tsmith15
10-09-2008, 02:39 AM
Absolutely, by no means did I intend this as a personal affront. Undoubtedly there are movies I will like that nobody I knows will, and this will always be the case for everyone. As such a modern film fan I make it my mission to see the majority of films that reach my screens, and being also a dedicated fan of TRS, I never watch an episode if I can see the reviewed movies first. Personal circumstances prevented me from seeing Appaloosa until now, so I got to watch the episode from 2 weeks back, and I wanted to discuss the film with my forum peers.
Secondly, in being spurred to action by the "radical" difference in opinions between Jeff and myself, I did present a biased representation of my view of the film. Besides my aforementioned enjoyment of the gunplay, I also loved the old west adaptation of the Bros b4 Hoes theme so prevalent in the Apatow comedies of my generation and generally in modern society, among other enjoyable bits (outweighed by the larger, more sweeping dislikes).
I will also gladly admit I am not a well-versed viewer of Westerns, since they weren't a big thing when I was growing up (born in the 90s) and none of my close influences were Western fans. Aside from 3:10 to Yuma, I've probably seen 5ish Westerns, if you count Wild Wild West and the Once Upon a Time in Mexico films. That said, I had no context to compare Appaloosa with other Westerns, and instead had to compare it to contemporary films, a comparison unbecoming of its genre's intricacies and characteristics.
Lastly, some additional background into my "relationship" with Jeff's point of view. At the start of my ritualistic interactions with TRS (episode 7 or 8) I tended to side somewhere between Alex and Dan, and your point of view, Jeff, was foreign to mine, and frankly I didn't respect it. As time went along, and I got to compare my opinions with the three hosts's opinions more and more, I shifted to somewhat of an egalitarian position, where it varied week-to-week and I couldn't say with any certainty who I would agree with the next week. Then I watched The Shield (currently 3/4 through season 6) and big ups to Jeff, because it is definitively my favorite show on television ever (except for Arthur, which probably taught me more about life than any other thing did).
All in all, the complexities in the relationships and tastes of Jeff, Dan, and Alex make up half the show, and the complexities between the viewer and the hosts makes up the other half.
And a quick rebuttal to 3:10 to Yuma, I think that it was less intellectual and more straight-forward and action-oriented than Appaloosa. Personally, those types of movie are easily and often enjoyable, but very rarely loveable. Of my "favorite" movies, only a few of them generally forgo deep, subtle themes; complex relationships & character development; and poignant cinematography and imagery. Films like Transformers, The Transporter, and 3:10 to Yuma are likeable because of their "parts", whereas films like Fight Club, The Dark Knight, and Appaloosa are likeable because of the sum of their parts. Unfortunately, everyone's brain does the math differently, so being able to enjoy those latter films is more shades of gray than black & white.
heyseuss
10-09-2008, 05:29 AM
Open Range is better than both.
ike6116
10-09-2008, 12:19 PM
I think Clint Eastwood should stop being obsessed with WW2 and make a western so we can have one done properly.
Then Spike Lee can make a western with black people for the sake of making a western with black people.
I think Clint Eastwood should stop being obsessed with WW2 and make a western so we can have one done properly.
Then Spike Lee can make a western with black people for the sake of making a western with black people.
Unforgiven!??
I guess this was before your time? 1992?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105695/
Won 4 Oscars. Another 30 wins & 15 nominations.
deegraww
10-09-2008, 02:03 PM
Silverado FTW!!!
I think Clint Eastwood should stop being obsessed with WW2 and make a western so we can have one done properly.
Then Spike Lee can make a western with black people for the sake of making a western with black people.
Unforgiven!??
I guess this was before your time? 1992?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105695/
Won 4 Oscars. Another 30 wins & 15 nominations.
Pretty sure it was a WESTERN.
ike6116
10-09-2008, 03:05 PM
Unforgiven!??
I guess this was before your time? 1992?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105695/
Won 4 Oscars. Another 30 wins & 15 nominations.
Pretty sure it was a WESTERN.
I read it the first time and yes I am aware Unforgiven.
But 1992 was 16 years ago. Sooooo I think he could do another one.
trunolimit
10-09-2008, 03:17 PM
I think Clint Eastwood should stop being obsessed with WW2 and make a western so we can have one done properly.
Then Spike Lee can make a western with black people for the sake of making a western with black people.
interestingly enough i heard the original cowboys were black. being a cowboy was a shitty job that nobody wanted and being a cowboy wasn't very glamorous.