View Full Version : saw jarhead last night
that movie was deadly. i was surprised how good it was, and how easily i got zoned into it.
Documad
11-07-2005, 10:27 PM
I don't suppose you read the book? Because I can't believe they could film the book.
jackrock
11-07-2005, 10:32 PM
wow! its out already! i haven't seen any commercials for it in a while.
documad... is it most certainly worth my $4?? lol
so how was the acting by jake whatshisface? or jamie fox?
how many thumbs up (out of 5) would you give it?
lol questions!questions! questions! :p
Maisailana
11-08-2005, 01:57 AM
jake gyllenhaal kinda bugs me, but i do wanna see this.
mickill
11-08-2005, 01:08 PM
We're talking about the director of American Beauty and Road To Perdition. This movie has a tremendously good chance of sucking hard.
HEIRESS
11-08-2005, 01:42 PM
Im going to see it this afternoon
yay cheap matineeeeeees
fucktopgirl
11-08-2005, 01:45 PM
i am not gona waste a dime on this movie (n)
beastiegirrl101
11-08-2005, 02:14 PM
jake gyllenhaal kinda bugs me, but i do wanna see this.
yea but he's eye candy so who cares.
beastiegirrl101
11-08-2005, 02:24 PM
I wanted to see this lastnight, but the girl wanted to see Saw II
yeah, you know the rest....
which girl...last I remember you had 3 in rotation.
jackrock
11-08-2005, 04:19 PM
wow! its out already! i haven't seen any commercials for it in a while.
CJM... is it most certainly worth my $4?? lol
so how was the acting by jake whatshisface? or jamie fox?
how many thumbs up (out of 5) would you give it?
lol questions!questions! questions! :p
hpdrifter
11-08-2005, 06:54 PM
We're talking about the director of American Beauty and Road To Perdition. This movie has a tremendously good chance of sucking hard.
I thought it was pretty good. Peter Sarsgaard is the shit and you are a tool.
i'd give it a 5.
acting was good. yes, i'd say it was worth 4 dolla. sucky, sucky, and it loves you long time.
i thought the movie was lame- nothing really happened. it was barely alrite for me and that is just cuz it was shot nicely- but i was pretty bored most of the time....... it looked like most the girls felt like that when i went. i guess it's a guy thing?
and was that poo on his shoulder in that one part? eeeeww....
ericlee
11-10-2005, 02:37 AM
so did they show the part when Anthony's platoon mate used the dead Iraqi as bayonette practice because he died with a "mocking" expression on his face?
hpdrifter
11-10-2005, 10:53 AM
i thought the movie was lame- nothing really happened. it was barely alrite for me and that is just cuz it was shot nicely- but i was pretty bored most of the time....... it looked like most the girls felt like that when i went. i guess it's a guy thing?
and was that poo on his shoulder in that one part? eeeeww....
My friends said the same thing and I just have to say that that was the point of the movie. It isn't meant to have a climax, its a retelling of events that actually happened. And the fact that it doesn't have a climax is a reflection of Anthony's experience in the Gulf. His experience there was boring, pointless, frustrating. The structure of the story is supposed to underscore the thematic elements. Didn't anyone see Adaptation? Same thing.
mickill
11-10-2005, 11:26 AM
I thought it was pretty good. Peter Sarsgaard is the shit and you are a tool.
Is it "pretty good" in the tradional sense of the term? Or just on the hpdrifter o' meter:
Good: Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle! (y)>--------Pretty Good: Romantic comedies! >---------Not So Good: Black & White movies>------Bad: Movies with subtitles (n)
hpdrifter
11-10-2005, 03:15 PM
Is it "pretty good" in the tradional sense of the term? Or just on the hpdrifter o' meter:
Good: Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle! (y)>--------Pretty Good: Romantic comedies! >---------Not So Good: Black & White movies>------Bad: Movies with subtitles (n)
Yeah, I'd totally throw it up there with Alex and Emma. That one was robbed at the oscars. ROBBED!!!!
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.