The Underrated: Meet the Feebles

I’m going to hell for this one.

There are films out there that skirt the boundaries of poor taste. There are films out there that can see the boundaries of taste but push them anyway. There are films out there that stray over the wrong side of the boundary of bad taste. Then there’s Meet the Feebles- the film that knows damned well what is acceptable and then decides to take a huge dump on it.

This may at first seem like a strange choice for an underrated, because those that have seen it tend to think it’s a superb, albeit sick, little satire. However, the vast majority of cinema viewers haven’t even heard of Jackson’s second film, let alone seen it. It hasn’t got a DVD release in most of the world (Lovefilm deny it exists) and I personally think this is harsh. Sure, it isn’t exactly the film you’d take home to meet your mother, but it is a creative, deliberately offensive and downright riotous spoof of, amongst other things, The Muppet Show. And when would that ever be considered to be a bad thing?

To be absolutely clear from the off, this isn’t the antichrist of spoof cinema like it’s made out to be. I suppose people must get upset by it because of some sort of attachment to the Muppets, but in all honesty it isn’t even the most offensive spoof of Henson’s creation (in my opinion that still goes to Kermit the Frog’s cover of Nine inch Nails’ Hurt). It is, however, probably the only one out there with such a wide range of degenerate behaviour on display. There’s a sex-crazed rabbit that may or may not have AIDS, a compulsive eating hippo that eventually goes beserk with a machine gun. A blue elephant with a weak bladder and a paternity suit, a truly degenerate rat, a drugs kingpin walrus, and a green newt/ frog with a heroin habit and ‘nam flashbacks. Not to mention the homosexual fox stage manager and the shit-eating fly journalist. How could any of that possibly be seen as offensive?

Meet the Feebles follows the backstage dress rehearsal of a variety act before their big show. The rehearsal isn’t going very well, in all honesty, as the star attraction, Heidi the Hippo, is on the brink of  a breakdown, the knife thrower is in heavy heroin withdrawal, the rabbit has come down with a terrible and disgusting disease due to unhygienic sex and the boss, Bletch the Walrus, is either balls deep in upcoming star Sandra the cat or involved in heavy duty drugs deals. This is all really an excuse for gross out humour of the  highest order, some sharp writing hidden under it all and a veritable mound of piss-taking.

The puppet work isn’t exactly earth shatteringly brilliant, but it doesn’t need to be because the Muppets weren’t exactly the height of brilliance either. It is, however, accurate and appropriate in its depiction of a puppet world. None of the characters give any heed to interacting with other species, there’s inter-special sex galore, predators talk to prey and so forth. They are actually remarkably human in their behaviour.

As briefly touched upon, the writing is sharp. I know this sounds ostensibly daft in something that is basically a series of gross sight gags, but I’ll use the Vietnam/ Deer Hunter parody as an example. The heroin addled knife thrower explains to his hedgehog assistant about his time “in hell”- he was captured by “Charlie” and put through a terrible torture that comes straight out of The Deer Hunter. However, before the Russian Roulette, there is an absolutely priceless “re-education” session conducted by the Viet Cong, where the GI’s are schooled in front  of a blackboard with “Lyndon Johnson is a very bad egg” on it. When the Vietcong are by themselves it is even sharper with an exchange mocking the purity of socialism and debating whether capitalism should be allowed on a “Village level”. This is clever stuff. Of course, it’s really an excuse to take the piss- but that doesn’t mean it isn’t clever.

The final disastrous show emphasises this- with an audience of morons howling away at the elephant’s genuine discomfort, or rolling in the aisles with laughter when the knife thrower accidentally nails himself in the head. They’re cretins and it appears that the only thing they won’t find funny is a song, performed by a gay fox standing between two giant cocks about sodomy. Tasteful.

Then there’s the character writing. It’s sharp. Trevor the Rat (the funniest character in the film) is an absolute degenerate. He’s filming shady porn (really shady porn) in the basement, and dealing heroin to the cast. He’s slimy, oily and disgusting an ideal henchman to Bletch. Robbie the hedgehog has a pleasing naivete- his love for Lucy the Poodle (before she’s subverted by Trevor) is strangely touching, and Harry the Rabbit is a dying degenerate that truly believes that his fans love him regardless. It’s all clever stuff.

Having said all that, though, the real reason to watch and enjoy this film is that it is offensive. The bad taste is everywhere and very, very funny. A contortionist gets his head stuck in his own rectum, the porn filming has to be seen to be believed, the fly is horrible and Bletch rules over it all through a combination of bullying, sadism and playing on their vices. This is nasty stuff- but also very, very funny stuff. When Heidi eventually falls over the edge and goes on her machine gun rampage through the cast, it’s both deserved and amusing- although watching fuzzy puppets be detonated could be upsetting for some. Wimps.

Overall, Meet the Feebles is another Jackson film that’s more than overdue rehabilitation. Part of the reason that it’s been lost is that the dick was rude about it in his oscar acceptance speech, but in all honesty I’d rather watch this than the pile of excrement he won for. We’ve mentioned this a lot recently, but he was a much more fun director before he discovered dieting and success discovered him, and I wish he’d go back to his perverse roots and stop making pompous garbage that bores me to tears. That won’t stop the Tolkien fetishists from tearing me one for this, but there’s a creativity lacking in his Hollywood output that he had in abundance in his early days. Meet the Feebles is a great little film, and well worth watching.

Until next time,


Tags: , , , , ,

About Jarv

Workshy cynic, given to posting reams of nonsense on the internet and watching films that have inexplicably got a piss poor reputation.

308 responses to “The Underrated: Meet the Feebles”

  1. Continentalop says :

    Quick comment. I did not like this movie. I didn’t hate it, but this film tries way to hard to be ugly and controversial. Yeah, it works sometimes but IMO it just wears you down and after awhile becomes pointless. I mean, besides the shock value, what really is the point of it all?

    • Jarv says :

      Bits of it, particularly the nam sequence with the chipmunks discussing socialist dogma are legitimately clever.

      Some of it is not- especially Bletch’s fight on the pier.

      Trevor the Rat is consistently funny, though.

      • Jarv says :

        Also, the sheer variety of it has to count for something. The music is snide and clever, the degeneracy of the characters is spread with each having a different problem, and the crass morons in the audience laughing at the fiasco on stage.

        And then they don’t like the Sodomy song, which is probably the only good piece of music.

      • koutchboom says :

        Plus we need a sadaistic puppet movie. Its in the bible, Jackson was just kicking ass for the lord like he always does.

      • Jarv says :

        like he used to, you mean.

      • koutchboom says :

        We’ll see, he’s only had one misstep (Lovely Bones). Which if anything the one movie it kept reminding me of was Thirst. Well done and made, but just didn’t work.

      • Droid says :

        Kong sucked (potential for a cracking 100 minute fan edit there) and RotK was fine until it became the Neverending Story. TTT was okay. Too stop start, run, fight, run, battle.

        Lovely Bones was awful. He was working with shit material to start with, and somehow managed to make it even worse.

        All others were good to brilliant, apart from Feebles obviously.

      • koutchboom says :

        Kong Vs. T-Rex good enough for any man.

        Watching the Oscars again, seems like the Academy just wanted to tie the most oscar’s won for a movie. Just like this year they wanted the shitty little movie to triumph over the massive giant movie.

      • Droid says :

        Jackson Best Picture acceptance speech

        This is just unbelievable. I’m so honored, touched and relieved that the Academy and the members of the Academy that have supported us have seen past the trolls and the wizards and the hobbits and are recognizing fantasy this year. Fantasy is an F-word that hopefully the five second delay won’t do anything with. I just want to say a very few quick words especially to the people of New Zealand and the government of New Zealand and the city councils and everybody who supported us the length and breadth of the country–Billy Crystal is welcome to come and make a film in New Zealand any time he wants. A special thanks to Peter Nelson and Ken Kamins, who were with me right from the days of “Bad Taste” and “Meet the Feebles,” which were wisely overlooked by the Academy at that time. And I especially want to pay tribute to our wonderful producer Barrie Osborne. And I’d please like him to say a few words.

        Doesn’t really sound like he’s shitting on MTF… Just making light of the fact that they’re not exactly Acadamy material.

      • Droid says :

        Here is the site for acceptance speech transcripts.

      • Jarv says :

        TT is mediocre at best. ROTK is garbage, and Kong sucks a fat one, but there is a much shorter movie in there that’s probably quite good.

        It’s ironic, actually, that the fatter his film got, the more weight he lost.

        I don’t get this “one moment is good enough to make up for 3 hours of shit” argument, and I hear it a lot. No it isn’t. If anything, it makes the 3 hours of shit even worse because it shows that it COULD have been good.

      • koutchboom says :

        Whatever, I’m not a huge LOTR fan at all (in fact they are probably my bottom 3 Jackson picks, well right above Bones) but I totally agree with him getting it. Though with something THAT huge its more of a question, how much work did he really do? I mean they filmed 2 and 3 back to back. Its an epic fucking trilogy the deserved to be recognized. No other trilogy THAT BIG has been that good and made and pleased both fans and non fans of the source material.

        Its like one of those things, that I don’t think will ever happen again. Most fantasy dungons and dragons movies are uneven at best and LOTR is solid all the way through. I mean I’m just talking in theater, never had a disire to see them at home really. Just be happy it was a good year for film in general, where any of those three movies I would be ok with winning. Hey they could’ve given it to fucking Clint Eastwood again.

      • Droid says :

        Jarv, can you please watch The Lovely Bones?

        You will love it.

      • Jarv says :

        It’s the context. It’s so smug and twatty- like he was just marking time and now he’s graduated from this material.

      • Jarv says :

        I need to clarify a bit- if he’d just said:

        A special thanks to Peter Nelson and Ken Kamins, who were with me right from the days of “Bad Taste” and “Meet the Feebles,”

        Then it would have been a nice nod to his background, but by adding the second bit, it’s putting his older stuff down- if you didn’t like it, why did you make it, you fat cunt?

      • Droid says :

        how much work did he really do?

        At a guess I’d say… A lot.

        I think he deserved to be recognised. It’s the same with Cameron. They made difficult films that caught on with the audience. They weren’t necessarily the best that year (I’d have given it to M&C instead of ROTK) but I think it’s an impressive undertaking that’s pretty unique.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah I’d say Cameron did more work then Jackson. He filmed everything in Avatar and all that bull shit about the technology. There are whole scenes in the LOTR series that Jackson really had nothing to do with. I’m not saying its not some giant feat, just that you’d be surprised probably how much MORE work other people did on the film then jackson.

      • koutchboom says :


        It was a joke, also sort of talking about how fat they’ve come. Plus at the same time making light about his sort of movies after all its a movie about wizzards and goblins and talking trees winning best picture over a movie about Australians, Gangs in Foreign Cities, an Amazing Horse Tale, the best movie of the decade and the hip indy feature of the moment.

      • Jarv says :

        Not at all- it was a smug twattish joke putting down a piece of his own work- a piece of his own work, but one with a devoted fanbase.

        As I say, nobody forced him to write and direct it. If he’s so fucking ashamed of it now, then why make it to begin with- particularly Bad Taste that took 4 years to make? No need to be a dick about your earlier stuff now that you’re successful. You never hear Cameron rubbishing Piranha 2 in an acceptance speech, do you?

        And are you honestly trying to pretend that ROTK is better than City of God, Master and Commander etc? Because it isn’t.

      • Droid says :

        I doubt that very much, Koutch.

      • Droid says :

        Who you talking to? I just said M&C.

      • Jarv says :

        me or koutch?

      • koutchboom says :

        You highly doubt what Droid?

        Also Jarv go listen to the speech online. Its not that at all. Its really one of those lame LOOK HOW FAR WE’VE COME MOMENTS!

        Like when an actress brings up how she’s just a girl from a small town or some shit. Jackson just used to be some director of schlocky stuff now he’s made a movie that’s tied for most Oscars ever.

  2. Droid says :

    Yeah, I agree with Conti. Although I haven’t seen this since the early 90’s, and some it may have gone over my head, I found it overly unpleasant. There is definitely some funny stuff in it, and reading your review makes me think I should revisit it, but my memory of it isn’t very positive.

    • Jarv says :

      I remembered it actually as being far worse than it is. The only thing (aside from the rabbit) that really got to me was the shit-eating journalist.

  3. Tom_Bando says :

    Haven’t seen it. Doesn’t interest, really. I suppose you can take say Huckleberry Hound and Snagglepuss and make’em gay lovers and have Peter Pottomus be the equivalent of Notorious BIG or whatever, but so-? it gets old pretty quick to my thinking.

    I liked Lord of the Rings fine, but I certainly have lambasted Sir Petey for Jurassic_Kong and for the stuff in the trilogy he did that sucked(like the ending) or was just silly(the breakdancing wizards) ya know?

    Next up: Fozzy as Jim Carey. Who knew-?

  4. just pillow talk says :

    I’ll pass on this. I like the Rings, well mostly the first one, but this does not appeal to me at all.

  5. Jarv says :


    Take that IT Monkeys.

    I hadn’t seen it since the early 90’s and I agree, some of it (thinking of the rabbit) is a bit too far. However, the sodomy song is worth the price of admission by itself.

  6. Jarv says :

    And I stand by that- there’s nothing in Meet the Feebles as offensive as the Kermit the Frog Hurt video. Kermit beating off over a photo of miss piggy, OD’ing and all sorts of shit.

  7. ThereWolf says :

    Didn’t do anything for me at all – though I was fairly hammered at the time of watching and it was some years ago now. It seemed to be just being sick for the sake of it. Okay at certain points but overall, nah…

    I’ll stick with Lord Of The Rings.

  8. koutchboom says :

    I showed this to a group of people my freashmen year of college, and still in my senior year this guy was like “I will never forget that movie as being the weirdest thing I’ve ever seen.” That’s when you know you’ve changed someones life for the better.

  9. kloipy says :

    I liked Meet the Feebles. Didn’t think it was Jackson’s best of the early years but still cracked me up

    • Jarv says :

      Certainly not deserving of Jackson’s comment about it at the Oscar’s or it’s ignominius treatment. Which is sort of the point of these.

      • Droid says :

        What did he say at the Oscars?

      • Jarv says :

        That it was “wisely ignored” which in itself is true. In the context of that smugfest for winning for the worst film of trilogy looks sneering and twattish.

      • koutchboom says :

        Wait Jackson brought up Meet The Feebles during his Oscar speech?

      • koutchboom says :

        Hahaha wow the City of God guy was nominated for best director that year. And Peter Weir for Master. Hahahahah wow good year.

      • koutchboom says :

        Ok just listened to it. He’s just talking about his collaborators Peter Nelson Ken Kamins”who were with me right from the days of bad taste and meet the feebles which were, which were wisely overlooked by the academy at that time” it’s not really bad, its probably more of an inside joke more then anything.

        Though looking at Ken Kamins IMDB it doesn’t it show him working with Jackson at all outside of the LOTR and D9? And Peter only gets a Special Thanks in the first LOTR??? I guess that’s what those special thanks sections are for, people you thank when you win an award. I wonder who they are?

        Also didn’t realize that the Weinstiens had a hand in getting money for the LOTR series. No wonder they fucked off and tried to make their own company.

      • Jarv says :

        Should have been City of God. If they were going to give it to a Rings film, then it should have been fellowship (the only passable film of the 3).

  10. Droid says :

    me or koutch?

    You asked if one of us thought that ROTK was the best film that year or something like that. I’d already said M&C.

    You highly doubt what Droid?

    I highly doubt that some unrecognised person worked their ass off to make the LOTR trilogy while PJ sat with his feet up eating pies and watching Jerry Springer. I’d have to say you don’t know what you’re talking about. Unless you have spent time with Jackson, how do you know that?

    • koutchboom says :

      I’m not talking about just some random ass person. I’m talking about maybe the 2nd unit director. There are special features on the DVD that show this. Like Jackson is on the other side of the world while some scene is being filmed, or he’s filming another scene while someone else does a different scene.

      • Droid says :

        Of course the 2nd Unit Director shot stuff. Thats why he’s the 2nd Unit Director. If you’re trying to somehow convince me that 2nd Unit shot most of the film then you have rocks in your head.

      • koutchboom says :

        I’m just saying that I bet Jackson had a fuck ton of help on this film, probably more then others. I mean the 2nd unit usually does pick up shots and action shots, not whole scenes with the main actors.

      • Droid says :

        Where have you seen 2nd Unit directing “whole scenes with actors”?

      • Jarv says :

        Sure, that may be true- about the cast not seeing jackson constantly.

        An alternative interpretation may be that Jackson was under the mother of all deadlines so gave the various units precise instructions as to what to do, and was in frequent contact with them to make sure it was going to plan.

        Just because the cast didn’t see him didn’t mean he wasn’t giving direction.

    • Jarv says :

      Oh, I was talking to Koutch.

      In a way, I think I know what he’s getting at with that lack of work thing. LOTR, and Avatar for that matter, were massive productions and there’s bound to have been a lot of the actual directing work done by Assistant Directors.

      Although having said that, seeing as Jackson adapted it, and he did oversee the whole monster, it’s a bit unfair to say he didn’t do anything.

      • koutchboom says :

        Jarv I guess you missed the whole joke:

        goblins and talking trees winning best picture over a movie about Australians (Mystic River), Gangs in Foreign Cities (city of God), an Amazing Horse Tale (Seabuiscuit), the best movie of the decade (Master and Commander) and the hip indy feature of the moment (Lost In Translation).

        But I would say God/Mast/LOTR are pretty close to equal. Sure its a cop out for Lotr 3 to win for them all, but come on everyone saw it coming and I agree with it.

      • Jarv says :

        No way, no how not ever.

        CoG and MaC thrash that flaccid LOTR. Fellowship, maybe, and even then I’d go for the other two, but not ROTK.

        It’s a prime example (another one) of the academy giving the award to the wrong film for earlier work- see Paul Newman in the Colour of Money- or Scorcese for The Departed.

      • Droid says :

        How is Mystic River about Australians when it’s set in Boston, starring Americans, made by Americans, based on a book by an American…

        Oh, it was a shit joke about paedos. HAhAHahaHAha….


      • Jarv says :

        I think you’re being unfair on him here- there’s more to direction than saying “action”. LOTR was a monumental achievement and he’d been the guiding hand behind it- from adaptation, through storyboarding etc.

        As much as I dislike 1 and a half bits of it, It was a great achievement and I’d have given him best Director for ROTK- because that’s the trilogy complete and it was shot back to back.

        I would not in a million years have given it best film.

      • koutchboom says :

        I think you guys are going over board with what I said about his direction. There is no DOUBT that he had tons to do with it. He over saw it, had his harem of women write the screenplay for him and took credit and yes did a lot of the direction. But if you watch the special features, he’s off working on special effects and other shit while some 2nd unit guy is filming a scene. It’s nothing bad, but its as Jarv said its really more of a colloborative effort then one person’s vision. As compared to a movie like Lost in Translation and city of god.

      • Droid says :

        I think you might need to learn about filmmaking. The 2nd Unit is directing everything to the Director specific intruction. If they’re directing a scene then they’re doing exactly whay Jackson told them to do.

      • koutchboom says :

        Ok according to Sean Astin’s book Jackson had a million crews and he would just give them a scene to film with some deadline and then they would never hear back from Jackson again. Stuff like that. I know what a 2nd unit is for, but come on the dude was filming two giant movies at once. There was a lot of decision making he didn’t make.

      • Jarv says :

        I don’t think something like ROTK compares to LiT. Seriously. One is basically a small, intimate borefest, and the other is a vast, showy, special effects laden borefest.

        I imagine the directorial requirements for both (aside from making sure that you bore the audience) are entirely different.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah I know, thats why its odd that you could even begin to compare directors like that.

      • Jarv says :

        Further- a better comparison with Jackson would be Heavenly Creatures to Lit.

        Or if Coppolla ever managed to make anything that wasn’t complete shit to ROTK.

      • Droid says :

        Okay. I stand corrected. You’ve read Sean Astins book so you’re the expert.

      • Jarv says :


        I’m not. I’m comparing the films, and saying that City of God and Master and Commander are massively better films than ROTK- which was the academy giving the best gong to the wrong film because it didn’t give it to the right film. What even won when Fellowship was nominated?

      • koutchboom says :

        I’m not saying YOU COMPARE them, I’m talking about the Oscars. Like whats the point of putting movies like Avatar up against The Hurt Locker or LOTR against Lost in Translation.

      • Jarv says :

        Oh I see.

        Well, if you start splitting it, then you may struggle to get meaningful entrants. Best Sci-Fi of the year? Most years you’d have problems getting 3 good films let alone one award worthy one and 4 contenders.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah I agree Jarv, once you start breaking it down to that level it becomes stupid and that’s what all those other award show’s are for anyway.

      • Tom_Bando says :

        All things Lord of Da Rings:

        *I agree about Blanchette etc. Dull. Martin Csokas as her hubby is a fine actor(well can be…), but you had him in it for 3 lines and two poses. Not so much eh? You can cut much of this stuff out to my way of thinking.

        *Sir Petey actually Planned on bastardizing the end of the book, having Sauron show up as a big iron-clad baddie ala the start of the movie-facing off w/ Aragorn, but decided that was pushing it too far.

        Ditto having Liv Tyler leading a force of elves at Horn’s Deep. That was going too far too.

        *I liked the opening in the Shire.

        *Thought they roached too much of Two Towers–sure. I was NOT impressed w/ Aragorn’s little swan dive, the constant flashbacks, etc. Treebeard well I actually liked (most) of that. So go figger.

        *Second Unit Director-YAKIMA CUNUTT. Okay-? but NO one would ever have claimed he directed more of his given flicks than say Howard Hawks or John Ford. No fuckin’ way. Uh-uh.

        *Return of the King needed those Giant Robot Lions we keep hearing about-


      Astin goes into this a lot in his book. At one point he says something like he didn’t even see Jackson as the director, he saw him more as the manager of the film. He was overseeing like 20 units, and sometimes sitting behind a fucking Batcave setup of monitors talking to the directors of each unit via microphone. I really think he is the one that convinced Spielberg to direct Tintin via webcam.

      And as far as this other people doing the work and the director getting the credit, its happened many times in the past, one of the more recent stories was Mr. and Mrs. Smith, the stunt coordinator directed like most of the fucking movie while Liman was tripping on shrooms or not even showing up.

      But yeah– Jackson…fucking hack. You’ll see him continue to bank of younger far more talented directors from now on, slapping his name in front of em ala ‘Quentin Tarantino Presents’ and spending press appearances (comic-con for D9) doing nothing but rambling about his own shit (the hobbit) for half the fucking time instead of promoting the project at hand.


      • Jarv says :

        What are your feelings on Feebles, Danny?


        Dont remember it enough…I saw it many years ago. But I was fucked up on something and its like a distant dream.

        I don’t really think he’s ever done anything THAT good. His best shit is probably Frighteners, and even that isn’t THAT good.

      • Jarv says :

        Fair enough.

        No feelings about Heavenly Creatures?


        haven’t seen Heavenly.


        And for the record— Return of the King is a terrible film. I saw all three again about 3 months back.

        It gets worse every time. There are like 30 minutes of greatness sprinkled throughout sure, but overall its a mess, and I welcome the day when people start coming clean about this.

        Fellowship is consistently strong though, and the only one of the bunch that truly feels magical and epic.

      • Jarv says :

        Thank you.

        Fucking finally.


        Its like he put all his heart/resources/efforts into the first film and just assumed the others would fall into place.

        On every level the films get weaker as they move forward. People bring in all the goodwill from Fellowship and allow it to influence their opinion of ROTK. But just looking at it as its own entity, it fucking sucks.

        I still think all of fucking Rohan should’ve been cut, and it should’ve been two 3 hour movies. In my opinion it would have been tighter, and far more consistent in quality.

      • Jarv says :

        I’d ditch Rohan- and I’d also ditch a lot of the fucking around in hobbit land at the start of Fellowship (which isn’t really that exciting, let’s be honest). I’d also ditch almost all of Sam and Frodo buggering in Mordor, a lot of the elven stuff and tighten it up generally.

        2 kick ass 3 hour films is right- good shout.


        Yeah…the Elvish shit is a massive waste of time. Galadriel rambling for 20 minutes about absolute fucking nothing.

        “It is what will come to pass, If you should fail. The Fellowship is breaking, it has already begun.”

        Yeah I know…I’m fucking watching it happen you cunt. Do I really need fucking commentary to explain what I’m seeing in front of my motherfucking eyes?!

      • Jarv says :

        Not to mention that Blanchett was FUCKING terrible in that role- sitting there Speaking. Very. Fucking. Slowly- in a lame fucking attempt to give her words more weight and therefore make her sound all ethereal and wise.

        Fucking awful performance in a boring scene.

      • Droid says :

        That was Jacksons fault as well.


        And Jackson is a hypocritical piece of shit that crafts a film to be as bloated as his goth lover. He went on and on about how anything not directly pertaining to Frodo needed to be cut. So what the fuck is the point of Rohan? Why do I give a fuck about that entire group? I don’t. There is no peril. There is no tension. Like Eomer and Eowyn…..I never understood what the fuck they had to do with anything. Judging the films as films and not having a hard-on for the books, they mean nothing to the larger story. It should have focused on no character outside of the Fellowship. Focusing on Rohan and Urban and Theodon and shit so fucking much just diminishes the value of Legolas and Gimli and you realize in this telling, they really do exist to be dumb fuck buddy-comic relief.

      • Droid says :

        From what I’ve read thus far, it’s Pippin and Merry that got short changed in the films.

      • Jarv says :

        It isn’t. It’s Saruman.

        I’m all for curtailing Pippin and Merry anyway. Annoying pair of cunts. But Lee should have been in ROTK.


        Well yeah– all four of them did.

        Those poor bastards spending an entire film in a fucking rubber tree….genius set-piece! Here’s a better idea, right smack in the middle of this massive bad ass battle in the mud and rain, where so much momentum is building– lets just cut right back to this Tree-Beard guy for a little comic relief for about 15 fucking minutes.


        Thats so funny!! Thats exactly what I wanted to cut to at that climactic moment.

      • Jarv says :

        and ROTK seems to be all about Pippin and fucking Merry for half of it. There’s so much bloating around those 2.

        I sort of agree with Danny, but I still maintain that the fuckup was moving Shelob into film 3.

        From a pure narrative point of view- it breaks the climax of ROTK, because what are Frodo and Sam ever going to do after that that’s remotely as exciting as fighting a giant fucking spider? Gaze longingly at each other over lava pits?


        Yeah the Saruman thing…fucking weird.

        Has there ever been a more odd send-off for what you thought was some major bad ass in the whole trilogy? Isn’t this the same shit people bitched about with the prequels, like there being no central villain? So really– at the end of the day the villain was a fucking floating eye-ball? I realize this is all real abstract and magnificent on the page, but uhhh…shouldn’t we have had some sort of fucking showdown at the end, and not the same crowds charging each other and clinking swords…I’m talking like epic good versus evil wizard on wizard shit? Again– the fight between Gandalf/Saruman in Fellowship, cooler than almost any battle in the second two.

      • Jarv says :

        the thing is, the actual end of the novel isn’t exactly a great kick ass send off for Saruman either.

        I’ve always said the books are hopelessly overrated.


        And I myself am a hypocrite, guilty of the same shit I bitch about everyone else doing– I spread the good from Fellowship across the entire trilogy. I still watch this trilogy every year for some reason….because I really do like FOTR a lot. But… know….FUCK YOU PEDRO.


        Yeah I know….that why at a point he had to say fuck the books and give Saruman a proper villain send-off. Make shit actually feel cinematic. People may cry for 5 minutes, but at the end of the day he finished the trilogy and they would be seeing it no matter what. It just feels so fucking lackluster they way he handled that, again– like so much that came before doesnt really matter.

      • Jarv says :

        he had a problem though, as the only thing that Chris Tolkien hangs onto tighter than his own cock is adaptations of LOTR/ The Hobbit. He yanked the animated version (by far the best) half way through because he thought they were taking liberties. Along the lines you mention, actually.

        Which is sort of ironic, given that he sees no shame in releasing any fucking scribbling of his fathers, no matter how worthless, provided it is set in middle earth.

        Not for the money, of course.


        That may have been the case with FOTR…..But I’m sure at that point he could’ve done whatever the fuck he wanted with ROTK and the family would have lapped the warm milk of Peter’s liver spotted Kiwi balls.

      • Jarv says :

        Dunno, man, they’ve got form for this kind of thing.

        They’re not exactly giving handjobs to raise the money for a can of beans either.

        Add in that Chris is a massive prick with a really misplaced sense of his own importance in the world, and that he really LOVES fucking over studios when it comes to his dad’s work.

        I bet he approved every fucking line of that script.


        this Droid line is hilarious for some reason.

        “Lovely Bones was awful. He was working with shit material to start with, and somehow managed to make it even worse.”

  11. Jarv says :

    Am I alone in the world in hating Lost in Translation?

    • Droid says :

      You’re not alone, there are people out there. But I liked it.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah I’m not a huge fan of it. I just don’t think it works really. I didn’t buy Scar Jo’s and Murray’s relationship. Its an interesting movie that I wouldn’t mind seeing again though.

    • Jarv says :

      I don’t get the love for it at all. It just bored me shitless.

      I think it’s a real Emporer being butt naked film.


      Yes. Again…you have no heart.

      Sex with you must feel like physical therapy.

      • Jarv says :

        Why? Because I don’t like a piss boring smugfest of a film that only received the accolades it did because of fucking nepotism?

        Or because Scar-Jo managed to somehow walk while being in a coma?

        Please, I put Eternal Sunshine, Daisy and Tsotsi on my best of list- all of which are actually touching. I just don’t give byes like everyone else does to shit that’s “nice” simply for being nice.

        I don’t get this at all.

      • Jarv says :

        and some of my favourite all time films are things like Harvey-

        I don’t hand out free passes to shit based on who made it or is in it. If it bores me to tears (LiT) or actively insults my intelligence (Love, Actually) then I’m going to reserve the right to dislike it.


      Yeah, you’re alright with Eternal.

      I really don’t think the nepotism came into play with it. I think thats definitely the case with Virgin Suicides…but Lost in very unique. Its like a poem. I can’t really think of another film like it. I’m sure there’s some dull indie shit out there thats a similar approach, but really– its the location, the photography, the music, the scarce dialogue….everything about it just works for me. Without having to outwardly display the progress of emotion with words, it does so with visuals and feelings. Love that fucking movie. And for some reason it gets me horny as fuck.

      • Jarv says :

        Well, takes all sorts to make a world.

        To be absolutely fair, I haven’t seen it since it was released in the cinema because it bored me so badly. If it’s on TV at some point I’ll give it another whirl.

    • Stuntcock Mike says :

      Hate it.

      It rubs me the wrong way. Just like every Wes Anderson film I’ve ever seen.*

      *I haven’t seen Fox yet though.

    • Tom_Bando says :

      Nope. A dull movie to me. I get what they’re saying, but-so? it’s nothing special.

  12. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    Jarv is right about Feebles, but then so is everyone else. How’s that for noncomittal. I recently saw it again too, and I actually disliked it overall more than I had in the past, but it’s also easier to see how amusing and transgressive it was at the time. I mean, Im used to comedy now that is mostly unpleasant without being sharp and funny.

    There was some sharpness there. However, as Jarv points out, the purpose and method of the film is it’s offensiveness. There is quite literally not a single other thing there.

    I don’t see Jackson as poo-pooing his old films exactly, but I think he sees them through the lens in which they were created–as almost single-minded jokes.

    That however doesn’t stop Dead Alive from being better than most of LOTR.

    As for LOTR, I recognize the achievement of the whole trilogy and I actually like everything Jackson has done EXCEPT Lovely Bones, but Return of the King is an unweildly mess of a movie.

    I still like it for the most part, but it’s just too sprawling and has too many obviously contrived moments that don’t really have a reason for being, especially when compared to the rather canny and intelligent adpating, editing and direction that went into the first film.

    • Jarv says :

      Bad Taste, Feebles, Braindead and Heavenly Creatures are all better than TT and ROTK. I would also say that Bad Taste, Braindead and Feebles aren’t as much of an achievement as Fellowship, but I prefer them.

  13. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    Danny, there are tons of indie movies, many released years before Lost in Translation that have similar feels.

    LIT was one of first to capture the attention of the mainstream. I think it’s a movie that really doesn’t hold up to second viewings, and strangely all those nice things you said about Lost being poem-like is the way I feel about Virgin Suicides.

    I would say however that calling it pompous is a bit much. I think if Sofia has a misstep it was neither of her first two films, but Marie Atoinette.

  14. Continentalop says :

    Jumping back into this late.

    Heavenly Creatures is without a doubt Jackson’s masterpiece. That is his most original and sophisticated piece. LOTR is overrated and KK is just bad.

    I’m a big fan of the LOTR books, but I found the movies (other than FOTR which truly felt like something full of adventure) to be bloated and full of it’s own self-importance. Michael Moorcock’s criticism towards the books are more apt for the movies – they are Epic Pooh (as in Winnie the Pooh). And I think the LOTR series started the horrible trend of male heroes constantly fighting off emotion and just on the verge of crying. LOTR, Spider-Man, Batman, etc, all seem to have the same idea that nothing says important as a hero with tears in his eyes and holding it together.

    As for Kong, it suffers from thinking more is better. KK should be a movie that makes you want more, not less. Well I definitely wanted less. Perfect example: Three T-Rex’s are not necessarily better than one. It was like the This is Spinal Tap of blockbusters….it goes to 11.

    • koutchboom says :

      Yeah the problem with Creatures is, why would you ever wanna fucking see it again? Its a good movie sure, but Frighteners/Bad Taste/KK/DeadAlive/Feebles I can watch over and over again. But what fucked up person would see Creatures more then once?

      I bet Forgetten Silver is his true masterpiece. He was meant for the small screen.

    • Jarv says :

      Fucking hate that trend.


    “Hey folks, Harry here. SO I just answered the phone, it was Sylvester Stallone calling… The conversation began with him loving on my ROBIN HOOD review.”


    And people talk about KONG being bloated and choppy or whatever….I’d say overall Kong is far more consistent and enjoyable than TT or ROTK.

  17. Continentalop says :

    As for the Departed, you guys can rag on it all you want, the world has spoken – it is a good movie (92% on RT, Academy Award, decent BO, etc.) Is is up there with Scorsese’s truly great movies (Taxi Driver. Raging Bull & GoodFellas) – no. Would I have preferred if he won the Oscar for something else? Yes. But Departed is hardly an embarrassing movie. In 2007 the Departed
    beat out Babel, Letters from Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine
    & The Queen for Best Picture & Director, and only The Queen is arguably better (arguably).

    And when you look at the Best picture winners from 2000 on – Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind, Chicago, LOTR:ROTK, Million Dollar Baby, Crash, No Country for Old Men, Slum Dog Millionaire & the Hurt Locker – I see only one or two movies better than it (and no it isn’t Gladiator or Slum Dog).




      • Continentalop says :

        I appreciate that Danny. Not trying to go down this path again but like you say later -Jarv started this.

    • koutchboom says :

      What two? No Country and Baby?


      Little Miss Sunshine is honestly a better film than The Departed, in sound quality alone.

    • Jarv says :

      That’s more an indictment of the quality of Best Picture winners since 2000.

      Scorcese SHOULD have won it for any of Goodfellas, Raging Bull etc. That he did win for a weak film is more that I meant they have form for giving it to the wrong film to make up for not giving him it for the better films.

      I would say that Letters was the best film of that list.


      Let the record show Jarv fucking started this.

      • Jarv says :

        I did.

        I just find it unquestionable that The Departed, whether you like it or not, is one of his worse films.

      • koutchboom says :

        Come on guys we all know that there was only ONE film that was truely cheated by Dances With Wolves winning best picture, and that movie is Ghost.

      • Jarv says :

        Is there something I should know about RE Scorcese?

      • Continentalop says :

        Worse? I would put it in his top half. Is it one of his true masterpieces, part of his Holy Quartet (Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull & GoodFellas), no. But I think it is the best movie he made this last decade, and his best film since Cape Fear.

      • koutchboom says :

        Does anyone outside of Conti think Mean Streets is a masterpiece? What makes that movie stand out from any other trashy low life thug movie of that era? The Rolling Stones?


        He’s boring…I dunno.

        And Ghost was a damn fine film. But Dances is still better…

      • Continentalop says :

        Danny and Koutch don’t like Scorsese because he doesn’t spoon feed you. They bought the bibs for nothing.

      • koutchboom says :

        Jesus Conti, I don’t fucking hate Scorsese like Danny. Just when a movie fucking blows a movie fucking blows and Shutter Island fucking blew. It blew mainly because it WAS scorsese.

      • Jarv says :

        See- I don’t get this. Maybe I’m coloured because of how much I like Infernal Affairs, but I really think The Departed is a mediocre film at best. The fact that it’s better than the likes of The Aviator doesn’t make it good.

        *shakes head*

        Agree to differ?

      • Jarv says :

        I do.

        Give over- Mean Streets is great.

      • koutchboom says :

        Whats GREAT about Mean Streets though? Beside the fact that “its great”? Its really pathetic to watch these days. Its embarrasingly lame and the relationship between Niro and Harvey in it rivals that of Heath and Jake from Brokeback.

      • Continentalop says :


        But I still want him to direct The Dyketective.

      • Continentalop says :

        Danny & Koutch, the bibs and spoon crack was meant as a joke. No offense meant by it, and if any was taken my apologies.

      • koutchboom says :

        I don’t really care one way or the other with Departed. I saw it then I went out side for a smoke and forgot it. I just mainly remember that Infrernal Affairs was better. I didn’t give a shit what one that year.

    • just pillow talk says :

      I thought Letters from Iwo Jima was much better than the Departed, which I’m just not that crazy about.

      And I think Gladiator and Slum Dog are both better than The Departed. I think I really dislike Nicholson now.


        I will say Nicholson as an Irish gangster is comedic gold. Especially the smacking the handful of coke on the bitch’s ass….I guess at that moment I’m supposed to realize how hardcore he is.

      • just pillow talk says :

        Oh, that moment came when he did his little rat impersonation. That’s when I realized he was “crazy” and Leo was really in trouble now.

        And I couldn’t have cared less to what happened to any of the characters either.


        Exactly. If you like not one character in an entire film you’re sorta scratching your head wondering….why am I sitting here with Marty’s balls in my mouth?

        And last thing on Departed– ‘Dropkick Murphys’? Of course. So predictable….so easy….so safe. Everything I would expect.

      • Continentalop says :

        I think “liking” a character is overrated. I do. A characters like-ability gives us stuff like Iron Man 2, where Tony Stark is personable but he isn’t a moral character at all (Iron Man is about him protecting only himself and his right to fly around in his armor – he isn’t a hero).

        Unlikable as you found the characters, it was about morality – about in the end doing the right thing and how sometimes that path is hard and difficult.

        And as for the Drop Kick Murphies, sometimes obvious is the right choice. Let me see, loud and in your face song by a bunch of guys who are over-top about their Irish heritage and Boston pride. Wow, sounds a little bit like some of the characters doesn’t it?

    • Tom_Bando says :

      I liked the Departed. Marky Mark rocked.


    No he doesn’t spoon feed me, he spoons feeds himself and his followers. I mean if he can put out something like The Departed and still get acclaim, there’s really no point debating. I think I came out of that movie laughing telling someone ‘Watch even THAT fucking movie get love!’

    • Continentalop says :

      And you have been appointed the arbitrator of what gets acclaim and what can be debated by whom again? I forget.

  19. Jarv says :


    Now that I’ve inadvertently started a war, I’m off to the pub.

    See you later. I’ve got unarguable classic Class of Nuke Em High to watch tonight, which is good but not as good as Class of Nuke Em High 3: The Good, The Bad and The Subhumanoid.

    Fucking love Troma.

  20. Stuntcock Mike says :

    So I finally got around to watching Master and Commander last night. It was on AMC.

    Yup, that’s an erect cock of a film to be sure but I have one question.

    Was it just because it was on tv or is the cinematography all 80’s misty like on purpose? It looked like the lens was permanently fogging up.

    • xiphos0311 says :


      Do mean when they were sailing around Terra Del Fuego? that is the only misty part I remember their being and from what I have read that is how that area is out on the ocean.

  21. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    a good bit of the film looks like that, and I suspect it was probably due to a few things. One is that some of the sea scenes really seem to have a kind of water-soaked feel to them, like you are viewing them through mist and a constant storm.

    I suspect some of that might have been due to dealing with actual issues of water-spray and things being perpetually wet. They might have just decided to give the movie that look.

    Peter Weir has several films that have that kind of misty look to them, like you are viewing everything through a haze or something. I’ve seen MAC on bluray, and it looks about the same. Very soft, almost blurry in areas, but it kind of adds to the general feel of being on a boat at sea I think.

  22. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    So, Danny, what movies are you looking forward to this summer?

    I actually bothered to read Harry’s Robin Hood review, first thing Iv’e read over there in ages, and unfortunately he’s actually basically right. He’s not saying anything out of turn, or just plain kneejerk. Every issue he points out is there, but I think I still liked it more than him because I finally just segregated it from the typical Robin Hood mythos.

    • koutchboom says :

      Echo how many times I gotta fucking tell ya?



      The only things I care about this summer….

      Robin Hood, Airbender, Inception and most recently Adjustment Bureau. Fuck everything else.

      • Echo the Bunnyman says :

        That sounds similar to my list but take out Airbender and replace with Toy Story 3 (cue Pixar rant) and that’s about right.

        Adjustment Bureau looks like ESOTSM meets Dark City so Im all in for that. In fat I’ve read the short story and I think it stands a chance of being pretty cool.

      • Hawaiian Organ Donor says :

        Airbender? Really? That seems to go against everything you rail about? It’ll have these big goofy CGI set pieces with next to no practical effects. There will probably be a ton of wire work. And there will be a lot of fighting with swords and poles. With the exception of having a bigger budget, Airbender will have everything you hate about Asian movies. I just don’t get it.

  23. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    I can’t even see that due to my workplace. It better have nothing to do with Seth McFarlane

    • koutchboom says :

      God you and Seth McFarlane I swear you should just marry him at this point, your always talking about him. Naw its fucking bad ass, it’s the trailer music for the last Robin Hood Trailer. Check it out when you arrive at your domicile.

  24. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    that would be all well good, but now that I’ve seen the movie I can pretty much ensure that a bad ass trailer isn’t accurate. It wasn’t a bad movie, but I doubt vry much that many will find it ‘bad ass’.

  25. Stuntcock Mike says :

    Ughhh, you guys and Scorsese. I won’t get involved.

    I’ll say this, his upcoming shit(George Harrison documentary, Silence, and Hugo Cabret), all have me excited.

    • koutchboom says :

      SCORSESE IN 3-D!!!!

      When it sucks will the people say “but no its a throw back to scholcky junk of the 50’s!” The second Scorsese makes anything point directecly out or come at the screen I am going to fucking punch anyone in the face that says it was an amazing use of 3-D.

      • Stuntcock Mike says :

        Is it seriously 3D?

        Fuck’s sake.

        I’ve still managed to avoid 3D like the plague. Well, that’ll all change with Piranha 3D anyway.

      • koutchboom says :

        DUDE Cock. See Dragons in 3-D. It really is worth it.

      • Continentalop says :

        Actually Scorsese was once tapped to direct Little Shop of Horrors and he was going to do it in 3-D.

      • koutchboom says :

        Ohhh jesus thank god that never happened.

      • Continentalop says :

        Did you see Little Shop of Horrors? God, it would have been an improvement.

      • koutchboom says :

        If Scorsese even touched little shop he would’ve made it the worst movie ever.

        Wait unless we are talking about the Corman one. Which one is it? Because I know that he sucked Cormans dick for some time. Corman taught him the master rule of film making, “You gotta suck dick before you can get your dick sucked.”


        You fucked it up Koutch, the proper quote Corman taught young Marty– ‘YOU GOTTA LEARN TO SWALLOW THE PISS, BEFORE YOU DELIVER THE PISS, MY SON….NOW LET US PRAY’ cause you know religious iconography follows Marty around everywhere he goes.

      • Continentalop says :

        Yeah, the religious iconography. Doesn’t have anything to do with the fact he was raised a devout Catholic and planned to be a priest.

        So you are asking a filmmaker NOT to be himself?

      • koutchboom says :

        Ummmm fuck that noise, Tom Cruise was closer to priest hood then Scorsese ever was. But Tom said fuck that, became a god instead. But keeps it all out of his movies.

      • koutchboom says :

        But seriously, what Little Shop were you talking about?

      • Continentalop says :

        He originally was tapped to do the musical one, that was a remake of Corman’s. So the one with Rick Moranis, he would have directed it.

      • koutchboom says :

        Ohhh god no. I couldn’t think of a more terrible paring of director and material. He would’ve completely ruined it. De Niro wold’ve been the dentist. The songs would all be replaced by Stones music, and the sets would’ve had that fake trashy feel to them not that nice set trashy feel like they have.

        If he was slated to do the Corman one I couldn’t give a fuck. But he’d probably ruin that as well not giving us the greatest musical movie of all time.

  26. xiphos0311 says :

    Way late I know but in defense of the Rohan parts of TT and ROTK they had to be in the movie because they were a major player in the books plus if they didn’t how would they explain the appearance of several thousand Cavlary at the gates Gondor?

    Could it have been handled better sure but they had to be in the movie. Just look how the Tolkien nerds reacted when Sir Petey cut out Tom Bombadil from FOTR. Lord Of the Rings geekdom went insane over a character that was in the book for about 10 pages. If they cut out the Rohirrim, who are are least a hundred pages in the books, the nerds would have rioted in the streets.

    Seeing geeks dressed as wizards and hobbits getting worked over by the cops would have been funny to watch.

    • Echo the Bunnyman says :

      good point, and I’d watch an entire movie based off that last image you provided.

      The real question though, is not how well they represent the books, but how does it stack up to the other big budget adaptaiton of the time? Lord of the Gstrings.


      It could have easily been explained pretty much as quickly as that god-awful ghost army shit in ROTK, for no reason whatsoever we had to sit through that…..something similar could’ve justified the Rohan forces in a montage. Like the lighting of the torches thing, they signal that white men need to unite to take out the people of color.

      • xiphos0311 says :

        C’mon Danny if they just had the Rohirrim show up almost out of nowhere you would have been all over Jackson for making up some last minute salvation BS nonsense and then told him to go gargle your piss. Which admittedly you would do anyway.

        Also you would lose Theoden’s big speech and his sacrifice and the charge would have had almost zero impact because the Riders of Rohan would be some left field human Deus ex machina. Additionally you lose Eowyns story and one of the midgets big moments and they were sort of important.

        They couldn’t have done a montage scene in ROTK Eye of the Tiger or an 80’s Synth song wouldn’t have fit.

  27. Echo the Bunnyman says :

    Im out of the Scorsese talk too. I’ve had this conv before, so all know where I stand.

    I’m really looking forward to what he will do with Hugo Cabret.

    It will either be magic, or probably something that just feels completely off. Unlikely to be just mediocre. I think he’s got the capability to pull it off though. I’ve read the children’s book (it’s massive, like a graphic novel really) and it’s pretty darn good.

    • Continentalop says :

      Where do you stand? You got to chose a side. it will be like the Sharks vs. the Jets. Dance fights.

      • xiphos0311 says :

        Is it alright to like Scorsesse and not like The Departed?

      • Continentalop says :

        NO! Love it absolutely or leave it!

        No, it is ok to like Scorsese and not like the Departed. Hell, it is ok not to like Scorsese. Just isn’t ok to constantly attack Scorsese just because he is respected.

      • Echo the Bunnyman says :

        I’m a big fan of old Scorsese, but I think The Departed is a mediocre drag of a movie, and Scrosese hasn’t really done anything great in quite awhile. In fact, I’d dare say that very few of the great American filmmakers of the past are still doing work that is comparable to their early stuff.

        I’m not sure if it’s the current film climate or what, but most of the films that feel similar or comparable to old Scorsese, Spielberg, etc. are being made overseas, and over half of them are Spanish language films. Just saw The Secret in Their Eyes for the second time. A great movie. And a Prophet is just awesome.

        But the side I come down on is Pro-Scorsese.

      • koutchboom says :

        I bet The Secret in Their Eyes isn’t any better then a good Law and Order Episode. To that guys credit he has moved up in life he’s directing House now and its been really good recently.

      • Continentalop says :

        Well not to defend Scorsese, in fact if anything this is pointing out his weakness, he has never been a storyteller like Spielberg or Hitchcock or Wilder were, who had much longer relevant careers. He is an iconoclast and “artist” like Welles, Goddard, Coppola, Altman, etc. and I think those type of filmmakers have shorter periods where they really shine and also have fewer films that really work. A guy like Hitchcock and Spielberg can just fall back at telling a well crafted story, but a guy like Altman and Scorsese, if they don’t have something to really say the project usually falls flat.

        And Un Prophete was the best film of last year.

      • koutchboom says :

        Maybe he doesn’t have anything to say but it also means he’s not a very ambitious film maker. I bet you could hand someone like Speilberg any script and he would say “yeah I can make that”, and he would do a pretty good job at it. Even Speilberg’s worst films are better then 75% of the other shit out there.

        Scorsese would get all weasley and get out of having to make it.

      • Echo the Bunnyman says :

        Koutch, sometimes–by which I mean several times a day– you say ridiculous things. Including that Secrets comment.

      • koutchboom says :

        Come on admit it, you know I’m right. Every fucking review of that garbage said “Its like law and order!”

      • Echo the Bunnyman says :

        Koutch, I’ve seen the movie. It’s notthing like Law and Order. But then again I assume you are making the connection because both movies have courtrooms in them.

        In other news, Sam Rockwell is Gary Oldman’s bastard son.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah, but seriously every review I’ve seen/read about it say its the greatest law and order movie ever made. I wanna see it, and I like Law and Order so its a good selling point for the film.

      • Continentalop says :

        You think if we handed Spielberg Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, GoodFellas, Fargo, Hardcore, Body Heat, etc. he would have been able to pull it off? If kids having abandonment issues with their parents or aliens are not involved, it isn’t a slamdunk with Spielberg.

      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah I think the Berg would’ve been able to do them just fine. Just Steven doesn’t waste his time with filthy stories. He’s more about the real world and living life.

        Also Fargo and Body Heat hahahahahah Scorsese WISHES he could’ve made those movies. And Crime Crime, Crime, Crime, more Crime, another Crime, Crime ehhh sort of Crime pretty much you just love crime movies. So yes I think Berg could make a fine crime movie.

      • Droid says :

        Koutch, have you seen Age of Innocence?

      • koutchboom says :

        Lets just say I have for the sake of wherever this is going.

      • Droid says :

        Not really going anywhere. Just saying that Scorsese can make terrific films that don’t involve crime.

      • koutchboom says :

        I’m talking about Conti’s love for crime movies. Also who even brings up Scorsese’s non crime movies in a “reasons why scorsese is the best” debate? I bet conti hasn’t seen Age of Innocence/Kundun.

      • Continentalop says :

        Just Steven doesn’t waste his time with filthy stories. He’s more about the real world and living life.

        Some times the real world is filthy. That is what guys like Scorsese, Schrader and Jacques Audiard do well – bring an authenticity that guys like Spielberg, Jackson and even Nolan can’t. Not just in how they look or talk, but how they think and act.

        And what part of Jurassiac Park, Hook, Minority Report and ET was the real world? I missed that part.

      • koutchboom says :

        Ummmm how do you know Hook/Minority Report/Et and Jurassiac Park aren’t real?

      • koutchboom says :

        But I will agree with you about A Prophit being more realistic then anything Scorsese has ever done.

      • Continentalop says :

        I’ve seen both Koutch. I think both are interesting movies but failures in the end – Age on Innocence being much more successful than Kundun though.

        Have you seen Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore?


        I’ve been splashing buckets of chimichanga shit on Spielberg’s face for awhile because he seems to have lost his fucking mind as of late, but really the guy can fucking direct anything when he wants to. There is easily more brutality and rawness in both MUNICH and SCHINDLER’S LIST than anything Scorsese has ever come close to. You know this to be true.

      • Continentalop says :

        More brutalness and rawness than Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, GoodFellas, Mean Streets, Last Temptation of Christ, Casino…right. Gotcha.

        Body count doesn’t always equal rawness you know. In fact, even ask Spielberg if he could be as raw as Scorsese and i am pretty sure he would say no. It was one of the reasons he tapped him to direct Schindler’s List originally – he didn’t think he could do the film justice (Scorsese convinced him otherwise).

      • koutchboom says :

        More brutalness and rawness than Raging Bull. Easily. FUCK How to Train Your Dragon is more brutal and manily then both those films combined.

        What’s BRUTAL about Raging Bull? Punching a wall?
        I mean at least with Mean Streets you could say the off screen anal sex.


        I’m not talking body-count at all. People brag about the latest Rambo– I didn’t think that shit was hardcore, it was just a shitload of people getting blasted.

        I’m talking actual real-world brutality that hits on a primal level and feels like its happening in front of your eyes. Spielberg can pull this off. Marty’s approach has always been more caricature, like the rubber bats in Casino all bendy and stupid looking or the fake ass pulled punches in Departed. People see what they want to see.

        On the flip-side of your ‘body count doesn’t equal rawness’ argument, I could say dirty ass photography doesn’t equal rawness either, its just dirty– doesn’t make the image anymore potent.

      • koutchboom says :

        I bet Scorsese saw the movie Hunger and realized that he was a pussy and doesn’t get to work with real actors.


        Like you’ve said in the past Conti– these are the themes and characters that interest you, so you therefore relate to the film as a whole and defend every technical element that falls under that. I relate more to a Spielberg outlook as far as theme goes. So really it doesnt come down to technical/aesthetic nitpicks at all…its the theme. If the theme grabs you, you will defend all the elements that make it what it is, and if you like a filmmaker enough you can find reason to justify everything in it and why it is the way it is. Everyone does that.

      • Droid says :

        Also who even brings up Scorsese’s non crime movies in a “reasons why scorsese is the best” debate?

        Obviously me, because I fucking brought it up you piece of shit. You were mouthing off like a fucking retard about how all Scorsese does is make crime films and how Steven fucking Spielbergs worst films are a lot better than Scorseses best, which is a fucking moronic statement even for a dickhead like you. Yes, Koutch. Hook is miles better than Raging Bull. 1942 is head and shoulders better than Taxi Driver. If you’re too fucking dense to realise how ridiculously stupid you sound I’ll go ahead and point it out for you.

        Jesus fucking christ. You do a lot of shit simply to wind people up, but I was merely pointing out a good non-crime Scorsese and you respond like something Don Murphy shat out after a big meal. If you’re clinging to your argument that badly that you’ve got to delude yourself to even continue, give it up. You only make yourself sound like an even bigger imbecile.

      • koutchboom says :

        When did I say the Berg’s worse are better then Marty’s best? That doesn’t sound like something I’d say. I don’t think you are reading what I write?

      • koutchboom says :

        Also what am I giving up? I already gave up drinking for a month? What more do you want from me?


        Thats a very extreme reaction.

        Man why do people have to ruin the fun?

        I haven’t directly called someone I’ve been speaking to all these years a name in a loooooooooooong time.

      • Droid says :

        Well Danny, you are the zen master.


        No. I just keep it fun.

      • Continentalop says :

        Agreed Danny. I will leave it at that…

        …except I will add, Koutch, Raging Bull is emotionally brutal. That is the point of the film. It is about a man who’s only way to express himself is with violence and anger and his own low self-esteem leads to his self-destruction and drives away everyone he loves.

        And I am just going add that Echo is right. Some of the shit you say is just head scratching…

      • koutchboom says :

        Conti, bro, Contilope. You know how I feel about Scorsese. I don’t hate the guy, I think you realize that. I do appreciate most of his films. Just for the life of me I don’t see why people get all up in arms over Di Niro acting like a mild retard like its some magnificent potrayal of an emotionally stunted man. Also he seems like such a douche bag in both Mean Street and Bull why anyone would ever feel sorry for him is beyond me.

        As for the head scratching shit. Its just nonsense fuck. I’m sitting in a cube all fucking day, just trying to keep things interesting.


        Yeah I know– but really when people tell me ‘Goodfellas’ is tough or brutal, I’m just as perplexed. I sorta compare it to people calling ‘Kick-Ass’ brutal and raw. It just feels like people are seeing a totally different thing than me sometimes….but I’m sure you feel the same.

      • Continentalop says :

        Shit. It is getting intense again so I am going to add the head scratching line was meant as a joke Koutch.

        I love you.

      • Droid says :

        Even Speilberg’s worst films are better then 75% of the other shit out there.

        Scorsese would get all weasley and get out of having to make it.

        I was going off this doozy. Granted, I didn’t quote it verbatim, and I probably overstated it, but its still horseshit.

        On that note, I’m getting my head out of this fucking computer.


      • koutchboom says :

        Yeah that had nothing to do with Scorsese. In fact its in a totally seperate paragraph? Lets say Hook is the worst Berg movie he’s ever made. Its still better then 75% of all other movies ever made. Maybe 50% if you hate children.

        As for Scorsese getting all weasley. I’m just saying that Scorsese would never even attempt to make a movie like hook because he would have no idea how to.


        And herein lies another problem….when people have outbursts or arguments or sling shit and as Will Smith would say “SHIT JUST GOT REAL” — the first instinct is to leave the situation and walk away, get outta the heat. Take it from a divorcee kids, its a mistake. Stick around– mutually cool yourselves down. Don’t leave those emotions unresolved.

        On that note– fuck all of you.

      • Continentalop says :

        I disagree Danny. GoodFellas is brutal. Emotionally and morally brutal. These are guys who dwell in a world were the idea of killing someone is completely acceptable. There is no sense of morality and fairness/unfairness, because that isn’t how they see it.

        Schindler’s List is bloody, but we all know that the Jews are victims and the film acknowledges the injustice, which is how it should be. Even City of God plays sides with who is right and wrong. GoodFellas does not do that because these characters exist in a complete moral blackhole. And we are shocked and offended by how these morally repugnant people can go about having a good time without being judge by themselves or the filmmakers. That is the truth of the mob and GoodFellas shows it – that crime is enticing and that that the people who enter the mob are not honorable. There is no fucking sentimentality whatsoever in that film.

      • koutchboom says :

        And seriously Droid, what you pulled was more Murphy then anything I did.

      • Droid says :

        Yeah, Koutch. Telling you how it is is much more Murphy. You were acting like a fucking tool and I told you so. It’s no different to anywhere else.

        If someone in real life was being a dick like you were I’d have said the exact same thing. Only you wouldn’t have played the fool in real life because I doubt very much you are one. On here, it’s a different story sometimes.

    • Tom_Bando says :

      Spielberg vs. Marty.

      Let’s see here:

      ET vs. Goodfellas.

      Jaws vs. Raging Bull.

      Munich vs. Mean Streets.

      We’re talking about two VERY different animals here.

      DeMille vs. William Wellman, you know? it don’t work.

      I like both guys stuff alot, I used to dislike Goodfellahs ’til I actually watched it a few more times and then grew to really admire it. Casino on the other hand starts out well then turns into the Sharon Stone screaming at DeNiro show-pass. It’s like a sequel of sorts to Goodfellahs and not a particularily good one at that.

      But I do like both Rickles and LQ Jones in it.

  28. Stuntcock Mike says :

    “What are we doin’, poopin’ around with dumb broads for? “

  29. Stuntcock Mike says :

    Koutch, I’m holding out on stuff like Dragons for a few years until Stunt Jr is of movie going age.

    I plan on instilling a Father/Son weekly movie night. Can’t wait.


    Ebert is a spineless piece of shit with his Scorsese/3D dick-suck. He whines about 3D destroying cinema for weeks, and acts like if a filmmaker of Scorsese’s caliber ever goes 3D, its the end of days. Few weeks later Hugo/3D is announced and Ebert’s basically like ‘I have faith in Marty.’

    Uh huh….spineless. Oh no thats…..jawless, rather.


    David Lynch = EAGLE SCOUT

    Nothing else matters.


    For some odd reason I’m thinking ‘Adjustment Bureau’ might end up being better than ‘Inception’.

    If AB handles the romance right, it could be an epic ass-kicking love story. Taking on the whole world for your #1 BITCH? Fuck yeah.

    • Stuntcock Mike says :

      That’s just crazy talk man.

      Tonight I shall see Robin Hood and celebrate after with the ceremonial “one-bite-only” meal(see below)

    • Continentalop says :

      I actually have little faith in either film. AB because it is Philip K. Dick, who has not been adapted well in most Hollywood films; and Inception because I have a feeling this might be Nolan’s New York, New York or 1941 – the success has gone to his head and he is do for a bad movie.

      Strangely enough, Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps just appeared on my radar because I heard some good buzz about it.

    • Echo the Bunnyman says :

      I hear ya. I hope they both rock. I think AB has the potential to connect more emotionally.


    Wait…you mean you think Inception might be Nolan’s Departed?

  34. Continentalop says :

    No, if I said that it would mean I think it was going to be good.

    Nice try.



  36. Stuntcock Mike says :

    ah then you hear that terrible high-pitched screamin’. The ocean turns red, and despite all the poundin’ and the hollerin’, they all come in and they… rip you to pieces.

  37. koutchboom says :

    So would now be a good time to bring up my issues with John Carpenter?

  38. Stuntcock Mike says :

    Wait Koutch, she actually has a career outside of Dexter?


  39. Stuntcock Mike says :

    Not a fan of Anne but I like that shirt.

    • koutchboom says :

      Ohhh Stunt, if only you were in charge of all private schools.


      Not a fan of Anne? Really? FUCK.

      That girl is near perfection. Dark hair, big eyes, pale ass milky skin, nice lips, full/natural tits with big pink ass nipples….DAYUUUM.

      She got that sweet/innocent exterior, but you know really she wants to fist-fuck your ass while tightening the baking twine wrapped around your fucking balls until they turn purple.


  40. koutchboom says :

    Looks like we bet our OLD RECORD!!!

    • Continentalop says :

      If someone brought up Batman/TDK, MMA, cocaine and Winona Ryder I think I could have personally doubled this number.

      • Droid says :

        Aah, Noni. I had quite a thing for her back in the day.

        Coke too. MMA? Not so much. MDMA, that’s a different story.


    Yeah let this be a lesson….to set records you need Peter Jackson shit-talking, Sasha Gray, Scorsese arguments, and a physical embodiment of Tony Scott’s filmography as a Goldschläger injected cunt.

  42. ThereWolf says :

    I can never be 11/12 again. I can never be that snot-nosed kid, sitting on the aisle stairs in the cinema cos all the seats were taken. I can never feel again the way I felt when that Star Destroyer rumbled into view, while a forgotten choc ice melted over my hand. When my eyes close for the very last time and the neurons in my head keep firing for a couple more minutes, I hope they take me back there to that moment, a moment when anything was possible and the harsh realities of adulthood would only happen to somebody else. In a way, they did.

    Now and again a film comes along and it’s like jumping in a time machine and going back, if not in body, at least in spirit. Lord Of The Rings was one of those films (as was Avatar). Getting back from the cinema, looking in the hallway mirror, I could see that 11/12 year old me twinkling in my eyes. It’s a nice feeling, being there again.

    I wouldn’t consider myself an authority in dictating whether or not a film is good or bad. I only know what I like, or don’t. Though I view LOTR as one movie, I love each separate film equally, I love ’em all to bits. Taking ROTK on its own, I’ll concede the green ‘ghost army’ is poor and there are too many endings. Other than that it’s a glorious anarchy.

    The Oscar, which I believe was awarded for the entire saga, was well deserved. I have yet to hear or read an opposing view to convince me otherwise.

  43. Tom_Bando says :

    Yeah Sir Petey got the equivalent of a ‘Lifetime Achievement Award’ 30 years early for the Trilogy. I have zero problem w/ it, either–the guy did some great work and it’s the closest to a David Lean production as we’re gonna get nowadays.

    Yeah I know.

  44. M. Blitz says :

    Hmmmm…..I remember really liking this. ALSO, love the Muppets. And, the Sad Kermit videos are ridiculous…very funny. When Kermit’s trying to get his vein up, smacking at his skinny little arm, holy shit. Oh well, children’s puppets acting demented, what’s not to like? Any Wonder Showzen fans??

    • kloipy says :

      ahh Wonder Showzen, use to watch that show high as a kite. Man that show is fucked up. I loved the Kids on the Street/Beat Kids sections. Anything with Clarance

  45. Jarv says :

    Right, well, far too late for this, but what the hell.

    I like Scorcese, old films, and would rather watch Mean Streets over anything Spielberg has done.

    If you want to talk about a director that gets solid fellatio no matter how inept the shit he puts on screen- it’s Spielberg.

    Seriously, Minority Report, WotW, Terminal, Indy 4 etc. are all solid shit and all get love to some extent.

    Not to defend Scorcese since Casino, because he’s also making shit.

    • Continentalop says :

      Not to defend Scorcese since Casino, because he’s also making shit.

      Ok, I agree that his quality has decreased (even though I like The Departed and thought Shutter Island was decent), but you really should see A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies, My Voyage to Italy & No Direction Home: Bob Dylan before saying he has made only shit.

      • Jarv says :

        That is true. I haven’t seen either that or Shutter Island.

        The Doc I’m most interested in is the Bill Hicks one that got released here yesterday

      • koutchboom says :

        I need to see the trailer for that Bill Hicks thing. I like him. You should check out Lenny if you haven’t seen it. Its a good bio movie. Starring Dustin Hoffman as Lenny Bruce.

    • ThereWolf says :

      Not seen Terminal or Indy 4.

      War Of The Worlds should have been set “in the last years of the 19th century…” I like the beginning, then it steadily becomes more and more yawn inducing.

      Minority Report is a good film.

  46. Tom_Bando says :

    I liked Minority Report-but it wasn’t anything great. War of the Worlds has a good first half and then tanks, Terminal is terminal, terrible. Indy Fore I didn’t mind but don’t plan to re-visit.

  47. MORBIUS says :

    So, about the FEEBLES…

    does the anthropomorphic aspect enhance or detract?

    • Jarv says :

      neither actually. Funnily enough, they just behave like people. So you don’t notice until one of them does something beyond the pale

  48. lordbronco says :

    This is a very even-handed review of a movie that is truly beastly.

    Yes, it masde me laugh, but more importantly my friend who was an alcoholic and suffering from heroin withdrawal gifted me this very poster as a gift from a friend to a friend.

    i may have lost track of the one-sheet, but i will always remember his kind sentiments.

    The “Nam flashbacks are simply priceless, and this particular movie is an underrated gem.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: