OrangeDragon wrote:And Gibson's career in Hollywood was over WELL before the Passion thanks to M. Shamalamacrapmovie's Signs mess, but if any of his directorial actions killed him there it was Apocalypto... what a miserable pile of crap that was.

Agree about Signs, utter crap, but Apocalypto? I can honestly say that you're the first person I've met that didn't think it was a great movie.

The only reason it didn't get multiple Oscars was because Gibson drunkenly bad-mouthed The Club. And beating up his gf, while deplorable, has nothing to do with his directing/producing/acting.

Polanski? Woody Allen? Role models, of course!

Sir_Quality_U_Feel wrote:

khmerinade wrote:By definition, the monks certainly are.

proselytizing: advocate or promote (a belief or course of action)

I don't think monks advocate and certainly do not promote their religion. How so?

I'm not really into arguing, so I'll just point you to one definition of the word. If you disagree, I will carry on just fine. Have a nice day!

promote: to aid in organizing.

vladimir wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:And Gibson's career in Hollywood was over WELL before the Passion thanks to M. Shamalamacrapmovie's Signs mess, but if any of his directorial actions killed him there it was Apocalypto... what a miserable pile of crap that was.

Agree about Signs, utter crap, but Apocalypto? I can honestly say that you're the first person I've met that didn't think it was a great movie.

The only reason it didn't get multiple Oscars was because Gibson drunkenly bad-mouthed The Club. And beating up his gf, while deplorable, has nothing to do with his directing/producing/acting.

Polanski? Woody Allen? Role models, of course!

Look at how their careers nose dove after their "incidents" as well. Hollywood doesn't like a high profile case being what people think about when reading the cast list of their latest film.

As for Apocalypto... really? Cinematics were nice, but the overall "here's 2 hours of watching some guy run in a jungle" was garbage.

General Mackevili wrote:

vladimir wrote: I can honestly say that you're the first person I've met that didn't think it was a great movie.

Nice to meet you. I'm the second.

OrangeDragon wrote:As for Apocalypto... really? Cinematics were nice, but the overall "here's 2 hours of watching some guy run in a jungle" was garbage.

Vladimir nailed it. Apocalypto recreated a world in amazing style and depth and color that felt so real you could almost smell it. Cinematics were more than nice, they were inspired. Every scene in the city was a sensory overload. You could watch the crowd scenes twenty times and still see something new each time. I thought it was a masterpiece. The long jungle chase was even interesting.

Signs, of course, was total shit which was surprising, because Mel Gibson usually selects interesting projects (although his Vietnam War picture was piss poor too). Signs was just lazy and pointless. I always thought that director was way overrated.

Wow, did we get this thread completely off topic.

OrangeDragon wrote:I wish I was more than a little surprised you buy all of the propaganda... but then again that's all most of non-america knows about America. (Though funny how they then lash out at Americans for talking about places they've never been or know little actual fact about.)

1) No... my sources were watching American friends and family, most of whom aren't extreme right wingers, flip out about it. For months. Constantly referring back to it. And are we reading the same wikipedia!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Stop_(film)#Critical_response

Rotten Tomatoes gives it a rating of 59%, based on reviews from 194 critics, with an average score of 5.8/10. The site's consensus states: "While Liam Neeson is undoubtedly an asset, Non-Stop wastes its cast—not to mention its solid premise and tense setup—on a poorly conceived story that hinges on a thoroughly unbelievable final act."

Entertainment Weekly, delivered a positive review of the film, grading it with a "B", and saying that "At a certain point either you'll fasten your seat belt and go with Non-Stop's absurd, Looney Tunes logic or you won't.

Susan Wloszczyna of RogerEbert.com submitted a medial review, saying [...] continuing by saying "The rather ingenious if preposterous premise, one that only goes way off course in the heavy-handed third act...'Non-Stop' is so ridiculously entertaining in spite of its occasional lapses in real-world logic."

This whole criticism you're seeing, is at the issues I outlined earlier. They just find that plot tool absurd and outside the realm of reality... odd considering the number of mass killings in the Us in the last year by white people instead of muslims.

Well we are getting into a lot of different topics, so I will split up my posts.

First, I am not "Non-America". I may not fly the flag on my avatar, but I have been quite open about my "Yank" Heritage and occasionally had some fun with it with our "mates" from "Down Under" and "Across the Pond". In fact I spent my first 30+ years in the USA and although I had no particularly religious upbringing nor did my family reside on the fringe right, I probably grew up in the same collective consciousness (allowing for some age differences) you did and drank the same kool-aid that you seem to still be sipping from

Second, Yes we are reading from the same Wikipedia entry and your citation of it (again) helps prove my point. Your original citation of "Non-Stop" was to somehow demonstrate that a film displayed a Positive Muslim Character despite a huge public uproar about this fact. Yet the ONLY sites I can find raising this issue are from such fringe right wing bastions of American culture such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Breitbart. The Wikipedia citation (and included reviews) you now raise contains not a single mention of outrage over a Positive Muslim character. They seem more concerned about the plot twist which included a villainous USA military character --unheard of in these days of 'support the troops' (implied meaning support war no matter what).

btw ---- i had never even heard of this movie and will now look to find it --- even though the ending has been spoiled.

Omar is a great non-Hollywood arse-creeping movie.

2 people don't like Apocalypto. From the same age group/nationality, interesting. I'd like to do a survey based on age/nationality.