<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2007 &#8212; The year&#8217;s movies</title>
	<atom:link href="http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655</link>
	<description>Everything and nothing</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:53:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1-beta</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Loki</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5338</link>
		<dc:creator>Loki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5338</guid>
		<description>There's a movie with Laurie AND Rickman in it?!


Holy crapcicle, GIVE IT TO ME.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a movie with Laurie AND Rickman in it?!</p>
<p>Holy crapcicle, GIVE IT TO ME.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dread Pirate Terje</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5335</link>
		<dc:creator>Dread Pirate Terje</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5335</guid>
		<description>And speaking of Rickman -- I watched Emma Thompson and Ang Lee's adaptation of Jane Austen's "Sense and Sensibility" again yesterday, and my gods if he isn't one of the awesomest romantic heroes ever. ^^

Of course, everything in that movie is completely eclipsed by Hugh Laurie's brilliant protrayal of the bitterly ironic Mr. Palmer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And speaking of Rickman &#8212; I watched Emma Thompson and Ang Lee&#8217;s adaptation of Jane Austen&#8217;s &#8220;Sense and Sensibility&#8221; again yesterday, and my gods if he isn&#8217;t one of the awesomest romantic heroes ever. ^^</p>
<p>Of course, everything in that movie is completely eclipsed by Hugh Laurie&#8217;s brilliant protrayal of the bitterly ironic Mr. Palmer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loki</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5332</link>
		<dc:creator>Loki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5332</guid>
		<description>Odd.

Dogma is okay. Highly overrated, but okay. Alan Rickman rocks in it, of course.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Odd.</p>
<p>Dogma is okay. Highly overrated, but okay. Alan Rickman rocks in it, of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amras Elensar</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5331</link>
		<dc:creator>Amras Elensar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5331</guid>
		<description>Either I've got a multiple personality disorder, or I've got an evil (somewhat spambot-looking) web-twin, 'cause I didn't write that comment.

I've never even seen "Dogma".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Either I&#8217;ve got a multiple personality disorder, or I&#8217;ve got an evil (somewhat spambot-looking) web-twin, &#8217;cause I didn&#8217;t write that comment.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve never even seen &#8220;Dogma&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amras Elensar</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5330</link>
		<dc:creator>Amras Elensar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5330</guid>
		<description>Dogma anything above a 2?  Ugh.  I hate that movie - it's a waste of celluloid and Linda Fiorentino.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dogma anything above a 2?  Ugh.  I hate that movie - it&#8217;s a waste of celluloid and Linda Fiorentino.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dread Pirate Terje</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5241</link>
		<dc:creator>Dread Pirate Terje</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5241</guid>
		<description>"So, 7.0s for any X-Men movies without awesome scenes where Magneto breaks out of his glass and plastic prison"

However, they're both (or at least X1) very close to 7.5, as they (again, at least X1) surprised me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;So, 7.0s for any X-Men movies without awesome scenes where Magneto breaks out of his glass and plastic prison&#8221;</p>
<p>However, they&#8217;re both (or at least X1) very close to 7.5, as they (again, at least X1) surprised me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dread Pirate Terje</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5240</link>
		<dc:creator>Dread Pirate Terje</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5240</guid>
		<description>"Still, didn’t you initially give “Stardust” a 7,5 /10, or was that someone else entirely?"

I do believe I did. But then I got a little perspective, and bumped it a couple of points up.

"In what world is X3 as good as V for Vendetta?"
"X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!"

I know, I know; I have problems with the comparability or whatever the hell one should call it. Let's rethink this one: an 8.0 is about the same as a weak 5/6, which is semi-appropriate for V for Vendetta, but not for X3 or X1. A normal 5/6, though, is more in the area of a 8,5 (8,3something, actually; I remember doing the maths one time), which is what V for Vendetta ought to have. An 8.0 could have been okay, too, if it weren't for X1 and 3, which are both pretty standard 4/6 movies -- i.e. in the area of 7.0 -- and the need to distance V... a bit from these. So, 7.0s for any X-Men movies without awesome scenes where Magneto breaks out of his glass and plastic prison, and an 8.5 for the Wachowski brothers flick without all the technobabble.

"Or, no matter the mood, Van Helsing a mere 3? It’s at least a 5, even on a bad day."

Ignore this one; I'd normally agree that Van Helsing is in the area of a 5 (somewhat above, in fact), as it is a fun little movie, but I was extremely annoyed and irrational on the day that I watched it, and I didn't really want to. So it got a 3. Which says more about me than the movie, really, but there it is.

"I find it interesting that Dogma was worth an 8 in March and a 7 in December."

Yeah, well, you know, the initial fascination wears off after a while. What's even funnier, though, is that I gave it a 9.0 or something the first time around. But it isn't all that brilliant, really.

"Also, DareDevil 2.5? Have you COMPLETELY taken leave of your senses? It’s not a great movie, sure, but it’s surely more or less on par with, say, X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!"

Meh. It didn't really do anything for me. I might possibly bump it to a 4 if I ever decide to watch it again (which is doubtful), but then again, maybe not.

Also, please notice that the list is incomplete. I forgot to enter Starship Troopers into my movie log, so it isn't on here. Will rectify that shortly, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Still, didn’t you initially give “Stardust” a 7,5 /10, or was that someone else entirely?&#8221;</p>
<p>I do believe I did. But then I got a little perspective, and bumped it a couple of points up.</p>
<p>&#8220;In what world is X3 as good as V for Vendetta?&#8221;<br />
&#8220;X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!&#8221;</p>
<p>I know, I know; I have problems with the comparability or whatever the hell one should call it. Let&#8217;s rethink this one: an 8.0 is about the same as a weak 5/6, which is semi-appropriate for V for Vendetta, but not for X3 or X1. A normal 5/6, though, is more in the area of a 8,5 (8,3something, actually; I remember doing the maths one time), which is what V for Vendetta ought to have. An 8.0 could have been okay, too, if it weren&#8217;t for X1 and 3, which are both pretty standard 4/6 movies &#8212; i.e. in the area of 7.0 &#8212; and the need to distance V&#8230; a bit from these. So, 7.0s for any X-Men movies without awesome scenes where Magneto breaks out of his glass and plastic prison, and an 8.5 for the Wachowski brothers flick without all the technobabble.</p>
<p>&#8220;Or, no matter the mood, Van Helsing a mere 3? It’s at least a 5, even on a bad day.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ignore this one; I&#8217;d normally agree that Van Helsing is in the area of a 5 (somewhat above, in fact), as it is a fun little movie, but I was extremely annoyed and irrational on the day that I watched it, and I didn&#8217;t really want to. So it got a 3. Which says more about me than the movie, really, but there it is.</p>
<p>&#8220;I find it interesting that Dogma was worth an 8 in March and a 7 in December.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yeah, well, you know, the initial fascination wears off after a while. What&#8217;s even funnier, though, is that I gave it a 9.0 or something the first time around. But it isn&#8217;t all that brilliant, really.</p>
<p>&#8220;Also, DareDevil 2.5? Have you COMPLETELY taken leave of your senses? It’s not a great movie, sure, but it’s surely more or less on par with, say, X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!&#8221;</p>
<p>Meh. It didn&#8217;t really do anything for me. I might possibly bump it to a 4 if I ever decide to watch it again (which is doubtful), but then again, maybe not.</p>
<p>Also, please notice that the list is incomplete. I forgot to enter Starship Troopers into my movie log, so it isn&#8217;t on here. Will rectify that shortly, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loki</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5236</link>
		<dc:creator>Loki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5236</guid>
		<description>Also, DareDevil 2.5? Have you COMPLETELY taken leave of your senses? It's not a great movie, sure, but it's surely more or less on par with, say, X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, DareDevil 2.5? Have you COMPLETELY taken leave of your senses? It&#8217;s not a great movie, sure, but it&#8217;s surely more or less on par with, say, X-men 1. Which you gave a bleeding 8!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loki</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5235</link>
		<dc:creator>Loki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:07:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5235</guid>
		<description>There is some weirdness here, by the way. In what world is X3 as good as V for Vendetta? Or, no matter the mood, Van Helsing a mere 3? It's at least a 5, even on a bad day.  I mean, there's a lot in here I disagree with, but those two just hurt the eyes.


I find it interesting that Dogma was worth an 8 in March and a 7 in December. (I agree with the latter, for the record)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is some weirdness here, by the way. In what world is X3 as good as V for Vendetta? Or, no matter the mood, Van Helsing a mere 3? It&#8217;s at least a 5, even on a bad day.  I mean, there&#8217;s a lot in here I disagree with, but those two just hurt the eyes.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that Dogma was worth an 8 in March and a 7 in December. (I agree with the latter, for the record)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amras Elensar</title>
		<link>http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5234</link>
		<dc:creator>Amras Elensar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://natsecorma.net/terje/archives/655#comment-5234</guid>
		<description>Can't do anything but agree with Loki, here. Still, didn't you initially give "Stardust" a 7,5 /10, or was that someone else entirely?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can&#8217;t do anything but agree with Loki, here. Still, didn&#8217;t you initially give &#8220;Stardust&#8221; a 7,5 /10, or was that someone else entirely?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
