You mean a threesome with Penelope Cruz and Scarlet Johansson "kissing" with Javier Bardem is only going to be PG-13?
Whatever nigga.

Cause she wanted to go topless in The Island and Bay said no (the only legit reason anybody should ever give for hating him) and now this.
I am not happy.
And I hadn't even heard of it yet.

shits too power to be seen on a screen. plus, the longer she holds out the bigger it'll be when she does go nude for a movie. that movie wil gross a shit load for that scene alone

http://vicissitude.net/Images/IndianaJones-FaceMelt.gif

i guess there is no nudity but i dont care. the movie looks great

i could have sworn it said they both would be appearing buck.
-------------------------------------------
Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chaidealo/sets/

http://www.hollywoodtuna.com/images/Scarlett_Johansson.jpg

Quit toyin' with my emotions, my dude! LOL

"Fuck the streets!"

-?uestlove

www.myspace.com/djjedi1

If you are, you are also a joke.

I'm more disappointed that the love scene is going to be so tame that it will be PG-13.

What I am implying is their ain't going to be not T&A from the girls, especially Cruz. Oh well Cruz already has enough T&A in Hollywood. I know the white bols is ready for Scarlette.

we are ready for scarlett.

http://shaunbockert.muxtape.com
http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/whitenotion/

It has gotten some very good and great reviews.

Allen's best since Match Point. Penelope Cruz should win Best Supporting for sure.

-taperedjeans.blogspot.com-

Allen's best since Match Point. Penelope Cruz should win Best Supporting for sure.

-taperedjeans.blogspot.com-

Dry, incessant narration.

Exposition all over.

Lazy throughout.

Even in Woody's last mess, Cassandra's Dream*, I at least half-cared for what Colin Farrell's character was going through. With this ensemble, I didn't care and wasn't interested, so when those emotional pay-off scenes come, they ring nothing but hollow. I mean, the ending is like a bad comedian finishing a set by abruptly sitting on a whoppie cushion.

And Scarlett Johansson? She should make movies for eight-year olds, because that's where her acting skills lie. There is a quick scene where she's meant to be pondering some great romantic dilemma near a body of water. However, her silently looking out at the water isn't even believable. It's like her face is trying to express "contemplative and concerned", but all the audience gets is the overly self-conscious straining of a vapid actress who is the talent-equivalent of a real-life Romy and Michele type. Normally, I know I would and should blame the director for any actor's perceived shortcomings, and while the writing is wretched, she makes it all the more unbearable an occasion. (Great breasts still.)

But Penelope Cruz? In her abbreviated stint on screen, she tries her damndest to inject a little life and credibility into the story. It's the type of bursting supporting performance that can get award consideration if it weren't so undercut by the aforementioned narration, a couple embarrassing montages, and a general lack of development. Was Woody rushed or did someone steal a reel of film? I say this because her scenes seem to jump so suddenly. If anything, the triangle between her, Johansson, and Javier Bardem should have been the main storyline and not just an excursion. This is not to hold anything against Rebecca Hall, because she's not bad, it's just that she's stuck in a bad movie.

The cinematography, which takes full advantage of the wonderful architecture, art, and landscapes of Spain, is the movie's strongest point. Look, no negatives in that sentence.


*I've seen 23 movies from 2008 so far. Woody has two in the bottom five.

whereas before I was kinda thinking maybe I want to see it.

if I take a date,
would it be acceptable to badmouth it afterwards?

Did you see what Sarris wrote?: "I may still give an edge to 1979’s Manhattan and 1977’s Annie Hall, but not by too much."

I've seen reviews praise VCB, and some trashing it (one reviewer said this made him give up on Woody for good or something), but Sarris' comment made me want to see what PTPers thought of it.

>And Scarlett Johansson? She should make movies for eight-year
>olds, because that's where her acting skills lie.

What did you think of her in Lost in Translation?

>But Penelope Cruz? In her abbreviated stint on screen, she
>tries her damndest to inject a little life and credibility
>into the story. It's the type of bursting supporting
>performance that can get award consideration if it weren't so
>undercut by the aforementioned narration, a couple
>embarrassing montages, and a general lack of development. Was
>Woody rushed or did someone steal a reel of film? I say this
>because her scenes seem to jump so suddenly. If anything, the
>triangle between her, Johansson, and Javier Bardem should have
>been the main storyline and not just an excursion. This is
>not to hold anything against Rebecca Hall, because she's not
>bad, it's just that she's stuck in a bad movie.

What % of screen time would you say Clarkson, Bardem, Cruz, and Hall respectively had?

I appreciate your write-up, but I don't have any response to your criticisms because I haven't seen it yet.

>Did you see what Sarris wrote?: "I may still give an edge to
>1979’s Manhattan and 1977’s Annie Hall, but not by too much."
>
>I've seen reviews praise VCB, and some trashing it (one
>reviewer said this made him give up on Woody for good or
>something), but Sarris' comment made me want to see what
>PTPers thought of it.

No, I had not read that comment from Sarris, but I can definitely tell you it's nuts. Let's not even dare to mention those two classics in this conversation again. As far as being the best from Woody in ages, is it better than Cassandra's Dream? Yup, but that's no great feat. Never saw Scoop, but it certainly isn't better than Match Point. So it's the best film he's done in, what, two years, and it's still piss poor.

I hadn't read more than a couple headlines from a couple reviews. However, after seeing it, I headed over to the film's imdb boards and was surprised as hell to see most of the posts there being positive. I use those boards now as sort of the common folk's version of a RT / metacritic, and while you still have to wade through trolls and pre-teens mouthing off, usually they're pointed in the right direction. However, with them, with Andrew Sarris, whomever, I honestly don't know what accounts for the strong difference in opinion. Lazy filmmaking is lazy filmmaking, at least I always thought. (blue23 and I seem to agree consistently on movies, so I was relieved to see him in the same lane with me.)

>>And Scarlett Johansson? She should make movies for
>eight-year
>>olds, because that's where her acting skills lie.
>
>What did you think of her in Lost in Translation?

I was half-curious but mostly afraid to revisit LIT after coming out the theater yesterday. That's a movie I liked and thought she was at least suitable in, if not good. Maybe that was a case of the casting / character being just right though. Then she was appropriately, hmm, aloof, let's say, in The Man Who Wasn't There and fine enough in Ghost World. So, it's not like she's God's gift to the Razzie Awards, but she plays pensive about as well as I play concert violin.

>What % of screen time would you say Clarkson, Bardem, Cruz,
>and Hall respectively had?

Clarkson has three, perhaps four scenes. One early on and then she's absent for a while. 10% maybe.

Bardem might have the most screen time. He and the non-actor are neck-and-neck for that honor, at least. (Though Scarlett has a really clumsy disappearance from the movie for a bit.)

Cruz might be talked about on screen more than she actually appears. (You should cringe at the utterly contrived way her and Bardem's characters are first introduced into the story by Clarkson and dude who plays her husband.) Anyway, she's there maybe 15% of the time. Four or five scenes.

Hall is as close to a Woody stand-in as the film has, though she comes in behind Bardem and Johansson for screen time.

Dude has gone off the deep end.

Ya Sarris is certifiably insane these days.

He had Casino Royale, Junebug, Knocked Up, The Death of Mister Lazarescu, L'enfant, and 2046 among others in his yearly top-tens.

That sort of balances out having Juno at #1 and whatever questionable evaluations people can point out.

were it not for the fact that you were defending her in this thread:
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=23&topic_id=29703&mesg_id=29703&listing_type=search



~ ~ ~

Grrr (c) Tatiana

"My God was it over-written."

This is my criticism for most of Woody Allen films since his whole scandal. He's shut himself away from every one and just over works everything and has no one to collaborate with. In the 70's and 80's he bouncing off ideas and working out scenes with a bunch of different artists. Now I have to assume he either has nobody, or just yes men around him.

A meditation on love.

Javier was sexy


It was enough for me.
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~

http://unodostres.etsy.com

http://playvicious.com/

juan antonio is my idol

Woody, why? Why? I think that the....why????

Okay, now that that's out of the way: Why??!!??

and nary a titty in sight.

Not to mention this motherfucker hasn't made a good movie in over ten years (last one I'd say that was as entertaining was Deconstructing Harry at the latest) and probably saw Scarlett naked on set both times while giving the viewers nothing to work with but some ill-timed annoying-ass fades.

And now this one, a hyped threesome with PenelopeFuckingCruz and this shit is rated the same as 27 Dresses?!?

As if Woody has any fucking audience that's not legal driving age anyway, shit, most of them are AARP age.

I'm heated about this.

...dude at the party and takes her panties off is one of the sexiest scenes i've seen her in i think.

j

I walked out. That fucking annoying narrator telling shit you can see with your own two eyes combined with the terrible script and crap acting was just too much. I can't see how/why anyone is sticking up for this one. It's garbage.

The narrator is meant to give exposition and keep you abreast of the mentality of the characters throughout the movie. Sorry you didn't like it.

P.S. You obviously haven't seen 'Definitely, Maybe' if this is the worst movie of the year for you.

very tongue in cheek
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~

http://unodostres.etsy.com

http://playvicious.com/

it was the sex on the floor that made me wonder.

is this the official "vicky" post?

if so, i officially think it wasn't as funny as reviews made it seem, and penelope wasn't as insane as i thought she'd be.

the scenery was gorgeous though, and i kept thinking that vicky looked like a slightly less striking rachel mcadams....

and i realized watching the movie that javier isn't as physically cute as i thought he was, but he definitely is very very sexy.

...now I'm pretty sure I can wait until it's OnDemand.

Thanks.

it's about love
and thank god for that
i was praying it wouldn't be a teenage porn/lust fest

tastefully done with the theme quite firmly centered
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~

http://unodostres.etsy.com

http://playvicious.com/

.

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~

http://unodostres.etsy.com

http://playvicious.com/

O_E has a dick and liked this movie a lot.

I don't understand y'all.

Y'all some overcompensating muthfuckuz

Seriously

Maybe its because the bitch I saw it with was badder than
the two snowbunnies in the movie.

I was just able to sit and watch it, and not even think about
no threesome. My dick and the girl sitting next to me was all
the sexual imagery I needed. Just being honest, sorry.

It was a funny, well-written movie.

Niggas complaining about the narrator didn't understand
this movie, and probably none of Woody Allen's movies. You
just dumb. The narrator was there to basically make fun of
the characters, talking in a condescending, slow sarcastic way.

The film was basically a caricature of these type of white
people, and it was relevant and brilliant

That's what makes Allen so dope -- I don't know a filmmaker,
maybe EVER, who makes fun of dumbass white subcultures better
or more effectively than Woody Allen does. Half his films are
clowning the SHIT out of the subculture who thinks they are so
goddamn important and cute. His films be like "look at these
dumb ass pretentious motherfuckers...haha"

If you didn't get that, than you completely missed the
fuckin boat

And whoever said Penelope Cruz wasn't damn good needs to
be thrown into a well

Seriously

WTF

The characters kind of miss it a few times. The descriptions and unnarrated results are interesting.

seen. It isn't highlighted.

>Niggas complaining about the narrator didn't understand
>this movie, and probably none of Woody Allen's movies. You
>just dumb. The narrator was there to basically make fun of
>the characters, talking in a condescending, slow sarcastic
>way.
>
>The film was basically a caricature of these type of white
>people, and it was relevant and brilliant
>
>That's what makes Allen so dope -- I don't know a filmmaker,
>maybe EVER, who makes fun of dumbass white subcultures better
>or more effectively than Woody Allen does. Half his films are
>clowning the SHIT out of the subculture who thinks they are
>so
>goddamn important and cute. His films be like "look at these
>dumb ass pretentious motherfuckers...haha"
>
>If you didn't get that, than you completely missed the
>fuckin boat

god DAMN she was sexy in that scene.

good movie, too

I didn't even bother to see Scoop. Not better than Match Point though.

I enjoyed this movie.

although I would have loved a sex scene with cruz and scarlett

http://www.amazon.com/Vicky-Cristina-Barcelona-Javier-Bardem/dp/B001DJ7PR8/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1230686397&sr=8-11