Random Factoid #381

13 08 2010

There are influential movies, and then there are influential movies.

Sound like a profound observation?  It’s really not.  I just think it’s a fancier and more mysterious way of saying that there are two types of influences movies can have on us.

The more deep, lasting influences come from movies I dub “lifestyle influential.”  These movies change the way we think and the way we see the world.  These movies can be as profound as “Requiem for a Dream,” the movie that makes you never want to do drugs, or as hard-hitting as “Schindler’s List” and “Hotel Rwanda.”  On the other hand, I also place into this category movies that have a long-lasting impact on the way you do things.  So I place “Julie & Julia” here because it started me on the whole blogging journey.

Then there are the movies likely only to inspire a spontaneous change; I dub these “behavioral influential.”  The effect of seeing one of these movies is a sudden impulse to act like a character or do something they did.  “Eat Pray Love,” which I saw on Wednesday, can now officially fall into this category.  As Julia Roberts’ Liz Gilbert munches on some delicious Italian food, our mouth waters thanks to some lavish camerawork fondly known as “food porn.”  So when my family went out for dinner yesterday, I insisted on Italian food only because of seeing the movie.  I had a delicious seafood pasta that totally hit the spot.

What movies have influenced your behavior recently?


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #380

12 08 2010

Well, folks, it looks like I have just attended my last free movie screening of the summer.

These screenings are a luxury, and due to their mid-week timing, it’s certainly hard to make them work during the school year.  I have amassed quite a stash of promotional material this summer, some just from luck and others from skill.  Here’s a giant list of some of the prizes I’ve won:

  • A “Splice”-themed Drenvolution T-shirt
  • A “Toy Story 3” poster and Space Shooter Target Game (see Random Factoid #323)
  • A giant “Salt” poster and two smaller ones
  • A “Step Up 3D” T-shirt with a boombox on it
  • A “Dinner for Schmucks” bottle-opener along with other various prizes from the radio station sponsoring the screening
  • A whistle with “The Other Guys” written on the side, which I won for answering another Will Ferrell trivia question
  • A T-shirt for “The Other Guys,” which was too small so I promptly gave it away
  • 3 “Eat Pray Love” themed bookmarks
  • A giant “Eat Pray Love” poster and a smaller one
  • A women’s T-shirt with “Eat” written in pasta on the front, which I gave to my mother
  • A copy of “Eat Pray Love,” the book

It’s been a good summer, folks.  Maybe the quality hasn’t been there in spades, but I’ve been rolling in the merch..andise.


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags:
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #379

11 08 2010

In my first post, I talked a little bit about obsesssion:

I love movies, but I don’t want everyone who reads this to become as big of a movie lover as I do.  Then I will have manufactured a society of obsessive movie fanatics, and as fun as it would be to have people that I could really relate to, I don’t know if I would wish my level of infatuation with movies on anyone else.

I’m always interested in seeing how other people are obsessed with movies too.  I can’t find it now, but I remember reading about a woman who saw the movie “Walk the Line” over 70 times.  Now that’s dedication!  And thanks to a link on Cinematical today, I found other people who aren’t afraid to show their obsession – at a wedding, no less!

The author of the post seems to deplore their “Up”-themed wedding, but I totally dig it!  Not even kidding, I would actually have a wedding like this because it’s simple, tasteful, and not to mention absolutely adorable.  It’s not over-the-top obsessed, but they aren’t afraid to show their influence.  Compared to some of those awful weddings alluded to in “27 Dresses,” this is not bad by any stretch of the imagination.

Here’s Lynette, the bride, on the wedding:

We wanted the wedding to be unique, personal, intimate and beautiful which it turned out to be all of those things! We wanted every aspect to represent “us” from the handmade save the dates and invitations to the picnic blankets and baskets we used in lieu of chairs at the ceremony. We had one of our best friends perform the ceremony which meant so much to us. It was so special saying our own self written vows and “crossing our hearts” to love each other rather than saying “I do”.

According to The Wedding Chicks, “Lynnette and Jame’s wedding was loosely based on our favorite Pixar movie ‘Up!’ Some fun items that they included was picnic baskets, grape soda, a painted mailbox and a few balloons!”  I surely hope that they find the same kind of love that Carl and Ellie had for each other.  Check out some other great wedding photos below!


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #378

10 08 2010

Have you seen the trailer for “The Switch?”  Looks kind of ehh, right?  Typical late summer fare that will have to pass for entertainment (at least for those of us not fortunate enough to have an independent theater).  Just so we are all on the same page for the rest of the post, I’ll embed the trailer below.

The poster to the left doesn’t really make you want to see it much either.  The gasp on Jennifer Aniston’s face and the pretentious-looking sniffle that Jason Bateman is doing sure doesn’t tell you much about the movie.  But look closer…

Did you notice the pedigree of the movie?  It’s from the people who brought us “Juno” and “Little Miss Sunshine.”  Does that add to your anticipation at all?  It shouldn’t, given the murky relationship between “The Switch” and the two Best Picture nominees.  I probably wouldn’t have thought twice about the reference given that Jason Bateman was in “Juno,” but The Los Angeles Times did some investigating:

The studio’s marketing wizards are plugging “The Switch” as being the movie “From the people who brought you ‘Juno’ and ‘Little Miss Sunshine.’ ” But who are these “people”? The film’s directors, Josh Gordon and Will Speck, had nothing to do with either of those films. Nor did the film’s screenwriter, Allan Loeb. The film’s producers, Ron Yerxa and Albert Berger, were producers of “Little Miss Sunshine” but had no involvement at all with “Juno.”

It turns out that those “people” are the people at Mandate Pictures, the production company that was involved with both “Juno” and “Little Miss Sunshine,” as well as such films as “Whip It,” “Drag Me to Hell” and the “Harold and Kumar” series. I’m sure all the folks at Mandate are really nice people, but it feels like a big stretch to use such a tenuous connection to lure us into the theater to see a film whose writers and filmmakers had nothing to do with “Juno” or “Little Miss Sunshine.”

Do you feel cheated at all?  If you were really going to spend $10 to see this movie because you could mention it in the same sentence with “Little Miss Sunshine,” you ought to up your cinema smarts.  I don’t ever use poster connections to tell me what movies to see, largely because I will have figured out what movies my favorite filmmakers have chosen to involve themselves in.  I especially could care less for romantic comedies and mindless action movies, both of which are genres whose success is driven mainly be stars, not directors.  Sorry, David Frankel, I saw “Marley & Me” because I love dogs and Owen Wilson, NOT because you directed “The Devil Wears Prada.”  Meryl Streep is the reason that movie is good.

Fun little closing note: there is one movie that could have used “from the man who brought you ‘Little Miss Sunshine'” on its poster.  That movie?  “Toy Story 3.”  Clearly it didn’t need to tout that name to make any money.


Comments : 7 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #377

9 08 2010

Is it really going to come down to estrogen vs. testosterone at the theater this weekend?  It’s “The Expendables” vs. “Eat Pray Love” for the box office title (with “Scott Pilgrim vs. The World” looking to appeal to both sides), but some people seem to think it’s a battle of the sexes.  Just look at this over the top fan-made “The Expendables” trailer.

Over at the Los Angeles Times, Steven Zeitchik sizes up the weekend duel:

… a rare experiment will take place next weekend when the testosterone-heavy exploits of Sylvester Stallone’s “The Expendables” goes up against the journey of female discovery that is Julia Roberts’ “Eat Pray Love.”  It’s as close to a laboratory environment as you can get, since the two films’ subject matter and intended audience couldn’t sit on further ends of the gender spectrum. “The Expendables” contains few romantic interludes, while “Eat Pray Love” doesn’t feature many mercenary gunfights. Julia Roberts is interested in discovering a foreign country. Sylvester Stallone wants to blow one up.

Other factors, meanwhile, are controlled for. Both are mid-budget studio films coming out in the dog days of August. Both were made with the goal of pleasing crowds more than critics. Both pictures are driven by one huge-name star accompanied by a host of smaller ones. And the two are going head-to-head with very little competition. (“Inception” should have finally lost some steam; the more modest “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” is the only other wide opener.) The film that wins the weekend should provide one gender with bragging rights and settle the box-office question (a point made amusingly in the below fan trailer for “The Expendables,” which implores men to turn out for the film next weekend to take back the mantle for all of masculinity).

… But we’ve heard for so long that movies can succeed by aiming at one group or another, and certainly can succeed if they lock down one gender. But according to the pitched battle between “The Expendables” and “Eat Pray Love,” that isn’t entirely true. One gender does hold an edge when it comes to determining a film’s fate. Women get more excited about movies, and they’re more willing to see movies that don’t specifically target them. Men, for their part, are more lukewarm and less flexible.

He also talks a little bit about how gender affect moviegoing:

There are plenty of theories about which gender is drawn more to the movies, and how they make their decisions about going to them. For a number of years it was all about the young males, then, after “Twilight” and “Sex and The City,” all about groups of women, we were told.

According to the MPAA’s research, when it comes to overall attendance, the genders are actually about even. In 2009, the organization found that the moviegoing audience in this country was 52% female and 48% male, pretty much reflective of the breakdown among the U.S. population as a whole, which is 51% female and 49% male. (Women did purchase tickets at a higher rate (55%-45%), but that’s a purse-strings statistic more than a filmgoing one. )

But it may not be that simple. With nearly every other form of entertainment (sports, books, you name it) one gender takes the lead in determining which products are successes and which are consigned to failure. Movies should, all things being equal, follow the same pattern.

It’s almost impossible to get a real-world snapshot of the battle of the sexes at the box office — most movies appeal at least a little bit to both genders — and there are usually other movies crowding theaters in a given weekend anyway.

The article made me think about how my gender affects my moviegoing.  Yes, I am a guy, and I’d much rather see an action movie than a romantic comedy – although I’m much more flexible since I am a “movie person.”  I’ll never see any of the “Twilight” movies or a “Sex and the City” movie on my own volition.

But do I feel defensive about my gender?  Unlike the fake trailer suggests, I don’t think that the box office “belongs” to men.  Julia Roberts is hardly a threat to manliness.  As much as I hate to say it, there is a place for movies like “Twilight.”  Everyone needs a movie.  If you have 30 screens at a theater, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t have something to appeal to any person who stops by the theater.  That means showing indies and foreign films, whatever it takes.

So in this weekend’s box office clash, I’m on team “Scott Pilgrim,” mostly because Sylvester Stallone needs to stop trying to be cool.  Heck, I’m still on team “Inception.”  Wouldn’t it be dreamy if it returned to the top?


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #376

8 08 2010

Yesterday I talked about what makes me happy, but today you get what makes me mad.  I saw “Inception” again yesterday – that makes three, for those of you keeping score at home.

I happened to catch wind of an article this week from The New York Magazine (some of you might remember David Edelstein’s scathing review that was the first among the backlashing critics) that bashed Ellen Page’s character in “Inception.” Here’s Emma Rosenblum talking about what she calls the “asexual chic.”

Poor Ellen Page. While most everyone else in “Inception” looks ripped out of a fashion-magazine spread, she has to traipse around in Christopher Nolan’s version of graduate-student chic — ill-fitting corduroys, ratty jackets, and scuffed, oddly pointy motorcycle boots. When Page first shows up as a brilliant architecture student, dressed in baggy pants and, strangely, a neckerchief, she looks not only childish, but of a different movie altogether than Leonardo DiCaprio, who slinks through “Inception” in GQ-worthy custom three-piece suits.

… According to our very informal survey of grad students (er, our friends), neckerchiefs are not currently a staple of the PhD crowd, and yet she dons one in every single scene. She looks like a cross between a boy scout and the Swedish Chef. Perhaps this is just another Nolan subconscious trick — Page’s character is stuck dreaming about her youth spent as a boy sailor? Regardless, there are better ways to signify that Page is smart and not the female character whom DiCaprio wants to sleep with than sticking her in unattractive, earth-tone duds. Like, say, giving her a pair of glasses.

While I respect differing opinions, I have to say that baseless arguments like these make me mad.  She ignorantly reinforces the very gender stereotypes that she appears to deplore in the final sentence.  By saying that she’s asexual unless she dresses well, isn’t that saying that if she spiffed up, she would be sexual and thus an object of lust for Cobb?  Not to mention that in the process, she also implies that anyone with glasses is doomed to never have a guy look at her.

Page’s Ariadne is not supposed to fit in with Cobb’s team.  She’s new to the art of shared dreaming, and she’s added to the dream team that enters Fischer’s mind at the last minute.  Excuse her if in the real world she hasn’t had the time to buff up her wardrobe.  She stands out among them as a novice because of her actions; the clothes just complement what we observe about her.  If she dressed too nicely, that might read as her having a sense of confidence which isn’t present.

And she’s a college student, for goodness sake!  How many elegantly dressed college students could you round up on a campus nowadays?  It would send up a bigger red flag if she was dressed really nicely.  The “very informal survey” may not have found some of her accessories commonplace, but far less common would be your designer outfits and formalwear.

Since Rosenblum brought up the point, yes, her clothes aren’t meant to make her look like an object of lust to Cobb.  Yet she misses the more important point: Ariadne isn’t supposed to be an object of lust to US, the audience.  If we are fawning over how good Ellen Page looks, it would undoubtedly distract us from the movie’s labyrinthian plot.  The costume designer knows best how to use clothing to send a message to us, and they sent the right one with Ariadne.  If Rosenblum can’t handle that, there are plenty of Hollywood movies with models acting that should be “beautiful” enough for her.


Comments : 6 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #375

7 08 2010

As if a divinely sent sign after a melancholy morning, I discovered I was tagged in the “Happy 101” meme sweeping the blogosphere by fellow teen blogger Dan the Man.  Thanks, homes.

I have a bunch of time today to watch movies (although I will be finishing up summer reading and doing college application work too), and I was planning on watching some heavier stuff.  But after this morning, I needed a cheer-up movie or, at the very least, something that wasn’t going to be a huge downer.  So as I’m writing, I am watching “Almost Famous” for only the second time, a movie that I love and is raising my spirits some.

But in the spirit of the meme, here are ten movies that I’ve watched on TV recently fora good smile:

  1. Father of the Bride
  2. Mrs. Doubtfire
  3. The Little Rascals
  4. Amelie
  5. My Big Fat Greek Wedding
  6. Shrek 2
  7. Knocked Up
  8. Baby Mama
  9. Wanted
  10. Role Models

Sorry, but I’ll pass on tagging because everyone I read has pretty much been taken care of – and it’s really late.  My mind is tired after a third viewing of “Inception.”

Oh, and here’s the nifty little graphic thing that I should probably include.


Comments : 4 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #374

6 08 2010

A few days ago, Aiden R of “Cut the Crap Movie Reviews” asked what movie posters lurked in my closet when he humbly declined to accept my gift of posters.  Rather than reply in a comment, here’s a list of all the fire hazards I’ve picked up from movie theaters over the past couple of years. (NOTE: This isn’t counting the giant roll of posters from the ’90s I mentioned in Random Factoid #145.)

  • Changeling
  • Australia
  • Doubt
  • Yes Man
  • Marley and Me
  • Valkyrie
  • Angels and Demons
  • The Taking of Pelham 123
  • (500) Days of Summer
  • Whip It
  • A Serious Man
  • Invictus
  • Robin Hood
  • Get Him to the Greek
  • The A-Team
  • Knight and Day
  • Salt

“Toy Story 3” and “Scott Pilgrim vs. The World” are hanging up on my wall.  Of those in the closet, “(500) Days of Summer” probably had the longest tenure on the bulletin board.


Comments : 5 Comments »
Tags: ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #373

5 08 2010

I’ve left out a pretty significant part of my summer experience on the blog.  Sure, I’ve seen plenty of movies, but there’s something much more important going on at my house.

At the end of June, my dog (a miniature schnauzer) had six adorable little puppies.  So my family has been very busy taking care of them, spending much of our day – and night – making sure that they get enough food, that they have fresh paper, and what not.

Cinematic connection – I promise.  I’m a huge sucker for dog movies, and so is America ($144 million for “Marley & Me” doesn’t lie).  Even though I know that the dog will always die at the end, I still watch and usually cry, given that the movie is good enough.

I know why it is that we love these movies.  Dogs teach us so many lessons, such as how to be unconditionally faithful to someone. (I’ve been watching “Mad Men” recently and everyone on that show could watch a few dog movies.)  They also teach us responsibility and how to take care of someone (something everyone in “Precious” could have used).  And they also teach us that life is temporary, so we must appreciate it while it lasts.

That being said, I am going to enjoy these puppies for the three weeks until they go to their permanent homes.


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #372

4 08 2010

Today’s 31BBBB (courtesy of Anomalous Material) assignment was to promote a blog post.  But rather than promote a blog post, I’m just going to promote my whole site.  I launched a Facebook fan page a week ago, and I was planning on plugging it with a giant post.  Unfortunately, I haven’t written that post yet, and I really can’t wait any longer to promote it.

So click on the link below to be taken to my Facebook page.  Become a fan and get updates as I deem them appropriate!  (I’m still working on setting up the mechanics of the thing, but be patient please because I’m working on it.)

And speaking of Facebook, please tell me I’m not the only one who can’t wait for “The Social Network” to come out?  I’m OBSESSED with the new trailer; I listen to the cover of “Creep” all the time now.


Comments : 3 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #371

3 08 2010

What’s better than seeing a movie in the theater?  Easy.  Seeing two movies in one day at the theater!  The art of the double feature is one that I have acquired over the past two years (although I haven’t been polishing it at all this summer).

And to clarify, I am not talking about the art known as theater-hopping or movie-hopping, which is a form of cheating and stealing.  Not to be a prude, but I respect the people who make movies enough not to cheat them out of much deserved profits (providing that the movie doesn’t stink.)

So here’s what I’ve learned from my double features and how to plan the perfect one.

  1. The movies have to be pretty close in quality.  If one movie is really good, the other has to be great as well.  And if one movie is bad … you need to see a good movie.  If they aren’t pretty evenly matched, the day gets pretty lopsided, and you leave with a bitter taste in your mouth from it all.
  2. Plan for the first movie you see to be worse than the second.  You want to end the day on a high note.
  3. Pick genres that mix.  Action and comedy go well together; drama and comedy sometimes don’t.  Think of how you will feel after each movie you want to see and what would be appropriate to follow it up with.

Way back in Random Factoid #25, I talked about my first double feature:

The first time I ever saw two movies in the same day at a theater was July 18, 2008.  Recognize that date?  It’s the day cinema was changed forever with the release of “The Dark Knight.”  Was that one of the two movies that I saw?  Of course not.  I saw “Wanted,” which was pretty tight, and “Hancock,” which was good at first but then became just plain dumb.

So here are my other double features, in chronological order, and how I either did or didn’t apply my own rules.

  • November 26, 2008: “Four Christmases” followed by “Changeling.”  I really wanted to see both of these, and it’s a really strange combo.  Yet it worked because the much heavier “Changeling” came last.  I wouldn’t have wanted to see anything afterwards had I seen it first.
  • April 17, 2009: “I Love You, Man” and “State of Play.”  I loved the first movie, man.  Not quite as big on the second one.  Kind of the same as “Changeling,” I probably wouldn’t have been excited to see something else after “State of Play” because it wasn’t that good.  A movie like “I Love You, Man” makes me want to see another movie.
  • July 21, 2009: “Cheri” and “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.”  I saw one movie in the morning and the other at night, so not your traditional double feature.  But it was a pretty dismal one because “Cheri” was a snoozefest, and I was seeing “Harry Potter” for the third time that week, which I found out was just too much.
  • November 14, 2009: “The Men Who Stare at Goats” and “I Am Love.”  Honestly, neither movie was good, so no lessons to be learned here.  “I Am Love” was a film festival event, and I had no idea what to expect.
  • November 21, 2009: “Couples Retreat” and “2012.”  Comedy followed by action is pretty solid.  “2012” is so long that you leave wanting to go home and take a nap, not wanting to see another movie.  So it really couldn’t have worked the other way around.
  • December 18, 2009: “Avatar” and “Up in the Air.”  A true exception.  Seeing two Best Picture nominees, and deserving ones at that, for the first time in one day is incredible.  Having my eyes treated by “Avatar” in the morning and then my brain treated by “Up in the Air” at night was absolutely perfect.
  • December 27, 2009: “Up in the Air” and “Sherlock Holmes.”  The downward slide made this double feature one to forget.  I should have known that you can’t top “Up in the Air.”
  • February 26, 2010: “Shutter Island” and “Crazy Heart.”  Both were very, very good, although in very different ways.  “Shutter Island” is such a crazy adventure that it definitely makes you want to see something else, whereas “Crazy Heart” leaves you with a more mellow content.

(P.S. – This is my “list post” for Anomalous Material‘s 31DBBB, as it can be conveniently abbreviated.)


Comments : 6 Comments »
Tags: ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #370

2 08 2010

One only has to see “(500) Days of Summer” to know that great things can begin in an elevator.

As a kick-off to their “31 Days to Build a Better Blog” series, Anomalous Material inspired all participants (which include yours truly) to write an elevator pitch for their site.  According to a quote on Wikipedia which they so kindly posted, an elevator pitch is “an overview of an idea for a product, service, or project. The name reflects the fact that an elevator pitch can be delivered in the time span of an elevator ride (for example, thirty seconds or 100-150 words).”

They suggest several practical uses for this pitch, but I have an entirely different (and potentially unique) one: it will help me talk about it in college interviews and applications.

You can do either a long pitch or a shorter one.  The abridged version is meant to get bluntly to the point of what your blog is about.  So here’s my short pitch: “Marshall and the Movies is about me sharing my obsession with movies with everyone who will listen.”

Here’s my longer pitch: “I’ve always been the movie guy, and I’m trying to use all my knowledge for good.  Whether it’s alerting people to good movies or steering them clear of bad ones, sharing my moviegoing experiences, or just writing thought-provoking pieces about the Oscars or whatever pops into my mind, Marshall and the Movies is a blog about those two things but written for you.”

Be honest – would you visit my site if I came up to you and told you that in an elevator?


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #369

1 08 2010

Have you ever demanded it?

The new system of getting little-known movies to theaters everywhere requires viewer participation at a new high. They have to go to the site Eventful and literally demand to get the movie played in their town. The only movie worth noting that has been released through this strategy is last fall’s horror surprise “Paranormal Activity.”

But the real question is how much of the success of that campaign was the movie and how much was the strategy. I’m more inclined to think it was the movie, or rather the trailer, which spooked YouTube audiences and became a phenomenon. Before you knew it, everyone was buzzing about the movie, mostly because of the audience reactions shown in the trailer.

Even I myself hailed the strategy as a winner back in October, but it’s getting a real test now. Did you know there’s a “Grease” sing-along that plays only in the towns that demand it? I’m pretty sure that endeavor has been a pretty big misfire. Sure, the last thing someone wants to pay $10 to see nowadays is something they can watch for free on ABC Family, but do the woes of “Grease” spell the doom of demanding?

What do you think? Will there be another “Paranormal Activity” to remind us that the demanding works? Or is the success merely an anomaly and demanding is headed the way of the dinosaur and the VHS?


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #368

31 07 2010

One year ago today, I ran Random Factoid #3.  That seems like a long time ago, at least for me.  Back then, the factoids were all about me, me, me, and not the movies.  Here’s some of what I wrote:

My theater of choice is the Edwards Greenway Grand Palace 24 in Houston, Texas. It opened in 1999, and I frequent it because it is close to my house and it is always clean. The theater is now owned by the Regal Entertainment Group, which thankfully offers a rewards program for frequent guests called the Regal Crown Club. Points are awarded for each dollar spent on tickets and concessions, with occasional bonuses thrown in every once in a while. My family got the card in late 2004, and as of this posting, we have accumulated 2,156 points. And I have only been to the theater a handful of times in the past year.

I figured now would be as good a time as ever to unveil how many points I have now with a year of blogging under my belt.

I have … 2,647 points, a whopping 491 points more than this time last year.  That includes some bonus points thrown in there, but that’s at least several hundred dollars spent on the movies.  It’s a costly habit we have, isn’t it?


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #367

30 07 2010

Christopher Nolan inspired me to a personal first today during my second viewing of “Inception.”  I took notes during the movie.

That’s right.  I took notes.

As I’ve been saying for the past two weeks, I’ve been hesitant to embrace a theory until I had seen the movie again.  I find myself still a little befuddled as to how everything happens, but what happened was definitely a lot clearer.  It was clear enough, in fact, that I was able to formulate my own theory as to what could be happening in the movie.  I’m not sure if it’s entirely valid, yet it’s a theory nonetheless.  I’ll throw it after a jump so an unsuspecting visitor doesn’t find that they’ve had the ending of the summer’s most talked about movie ruined for them.

So needless to say, THERE WILL BE SPOILERS after the cut.

Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : 6 Comments »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

« Previous Entries Next Entries »