Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Because KNOWING is half the battleFollow

#27 Mar 24 2009 at 6:47 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Darkknight wrote:

Again, I have nothing against Christianity. But I'd prefer to have some warning about this before I plunk down the money to see the story of the rapture in a theatre.

--DK
If the movies producers were to try and sell it as a christian salvation film would you have gone?

The interwebz are full of reviews, trailers, info about movies - do your homework.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#28 Mar 24 2009 at 8:41 AM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
12,281 posts
Can someone explain this part of the above linked review to me?

Quote:
The page seems meaningless, a work of madness. But by chance Koestler notices these numbers in a row: 91120013239. Koestler sees 9/11/2001, and when he googles 9/11 he finds that 2996 people were killed.



How exactly do you get 2996 from 3239? I haven't seen the movie yet and I just want to know if this is a typo on Ebert's part or there was more in the movie that explained it.

And 32 39 isn't the co-ordinates for New York City, it's 40 73.

Edited, Mar 24th 2009 12:42pm by Shaowstrike
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#29 Mar 24 2009 at 8:50 AM Rating: Decent
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,632 posts
Shaowstrike wrote:
Can someone explain this part of the above linked review to me?

Quote:
The page seems meaningless, a work of madness. But by chance Koestler notices these numbers in a row: 91120013239. Koestler sees 9/11/2001, and when he googles 9/11 he finds that 2996 people were killed.



How exactly do you get 2996 from 3239? I haven't seen the movie yet and I just want to know if this is a typo on Ebert's part or there was more in the movie that explained it.

And 32 39 isn't the co-ordinates for New York City, it's 40 73.


I don't recall at this exact moment if it was in the blog entry I linked earlier, or his actual review of the movie, but he said at some point that he didn't get the exact numbers from the movie.
#30 Mar 24 2009 at 9:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Spankatorium Administratix
*****
1oooo posts
Darkknight wrote:
STUFF
--DK


That is not how I saw it.

Spoiler Alert:

There was nothing talking about biblical rapture, end of the world from solar flare, yes. There was nothing showing this was God related.
The part about his father was minimal, it was more about tying up lose ends. Just because he asked if he was saved was not propaganda.
Those were not angels, they were aliens. I saw no wispy wings.
It's not because he was not saved, his dad was saved and he wasn't taken, your theory is off.
The children weren't wearing white robes, they were clothes.
If the world was ending, I'd want to be hugging my family too.
I pass Jesus Saves billboards all the time, so what if it's in the movie. If there's a bible sitting on a table in a movie are you going to freak out then too?

Again, I thought the movie was awesome.
____________________________

#31 Mar 24 2009 at 9:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Two barely related notes.

"Knowing" as directed by the same guy who directed "Dark City" (whose name I can't be bothered to Google). Ebert thought that "Dark City" was the best thing to happen to cinema since we stopped using those hand-cranked cameras. Personally, I though Dark City was two hours of boring dumb punctuated by the occassional Jennifer Connelly appearance but there ya go. Anyway, Ebert gave Knowing rave reviews whereas everyone else was... less impressed.

Also, I saw Lord of War the other day which some folks said was good and it wasn't. It was Nicolas Cage meandering through a movie aimlessly for an hour and change followed by a heavy-handed "message" ending. Who's the real bad guy, Evil Faceless Governments?? Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#32 Mar 24 2009 at 9:43 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Nick Cage is the biggest over-actor since John Travolta. When they did Faceoff together it was an unholy alignment of the planets that resulted in a monumental over-act-a-fest that could never be duplicated nor surpassed. Truly horrid.

Totem
#33 Mar 24 2009 at 9:44 AM Rating: Decent
Jophiel wrote:
Two barely related notes.


We can take two things from your notes. One: Ebert is full of ****. Two: Nick Cage hasn't been in a decent movie since Raising Arizona.
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 258 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (258)