Page 1 of 1

Upcoming Nightwatch Screenings

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:54 pm
by Kimberly

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:52 pm
by Chris Slack
Wow thanks, I have registered for two tickets :)

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:51 am
by Kimberly
It's not just Seattle...

I'm going to the Sacto one, if you click on view all locations... it even has screenings in Canada...

And yer welcome! I can't wait to see this...

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:27 pm
by I am 138
It's a cool flick. Hopefully you'll get the suped up subs that Latte was denied.

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:58 am
by shawn
Saw in in SF last week and fucking hated it. Way over rated. Gay.

Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:46 pm
by I am 138
I saw it without hype and enjoyed it. I wouldn't say it will revolutionize the horror film, it's just very stylish (but part of that was the subs). Kinda like a Russian Volcano High, though not quite as visually extreme.

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:04 pm
by Latte Thunder
shawn wrote:Saw in in SF last week and fucking hated it. Way over rated. Gay.

I can certainly see where anyone would be disappointed with it. I was definitely guilty of perpetuating the hype when I first posted my gushing thread about it here. The plot is very unclear and it's all flash over substance, but I still like the scope of the imagination that was put into it.

I haven't seen the American release. What's the deal with the subs? They're getting a lot of chatter since it was released. Can subtitles really be that impressive?

Also, I made mention in my original post about rumors of a longer cut that was supposed to clear up a lot of the loose ends left by the initial DVD release. Well consider that rumor confirmed. A friend of mine has a DVD of it that is without subtitles but substantially longer than my 114 minute cut. I can't say if it clears anything up, but there IS a longer version of the movie available.

I also managed to bag a Russian boot of the sequel Day Watch. I haven't had a chance to sit down with it, but I'm not sure it would do me any good anyway since there aren't any subs for it and none floating around the internet yet. So more on that when I know more.

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:49 pm
by shawn
Latte Thunder wrote:I can certainly see where anyone would be disappointed with it. I was definitely guilty of perpetuating the hype when I first posted my gushing thread about it here. The plot is very unclear and it's all flash over substance, but I still like the scope of the imagination that was put into it.

I haven't seen the American release. What's the deal with the subs? They're getting a lot of chatter since it was released. Can subtitles really be that impressive?

Also, I made mention in my original post about rumors of a longer cut that was supposed to clear up a lot of the loose ends left by the initial DVD release. Well consider that rumor confirmed. A friend of mine has a DVD of it that is without subtitles but substantially longer than my 114 minute cut. I can't say if it clears anything up, but there IS a longer version of the movie available.

I also managed to bag a Russian boot of the sequel Day Watch. I haven't had a chance to sit down with it, but I'm not sure it would do me any good anyway since there aren't any subs for it and none floating around the internet yet. So more on that when I know more.


Longer??? Man, it was too long to begin with, it needed to be an hour shorter. See The Descent instead.

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:05 pm
by I am 138
shawn wrote:Longer??? Man, it was too long to begin with, it needed to be an hour shorter. See The Descent instead.


Weren't you the guy that loved Brotherhood of the Wolf? I understand they're different stylistically, but both films have a lot of the same flaws. Why did you prefer one of the other so much?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:14 pm
by Kimberly
I really liked it. It was like Lord of the Rings meets Star Wars but with Vampires and other supernatural kinda folks. The subtitles reminded me of when I read the book House of Leaves...

I asked afterwards (as we were asked to fill out comment cards) which cut of the film we watched... the original version or the tightened up version. It was the tightened up version... Honestly, I didn't think it was long at all and would like to see the longer version. I felt like this movie was more of a build up... if anything... to Day Watch.

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:26 am
by shawn
I am 138 wrote:Weren't you the guy that loved Brotherhood of the Wolf? I understand they're different stylistically, but both films have a lot of the same flaws. Why did you prefer one of the other so much?


Sacrilege! How dare you compare the Masterpiece of Brotherhood Of The Wolf to this Russian mess. No comparison. For one, I actually gave a shat what happened to the characters in Brotherhood. Yes both films are a mix of different genres but Brotherhood works better. Gans is a better director. I could go on, but have shit to do. I'll leave it with I'm right and you are clueless. -shawn

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:52 pm
by I am 138
shawn wrote: I'll leave it with I'm right and you are clueless.


Fair enough.

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:57 pm
by Latte Thunder
shawn wrote:Longer??? Man, it was too long to begin with, it needed to be an hour shorter. See The Descent instead.

See, I really liked it, but I would have liked the story to be clearer anyway. But there's actually a correction to make. The longer cut I mentioned above actually turned out to be an unsubbed version of Day Watch. So there's still no longer cut.

Anyway, also saw The Descent a couple of weeks ago. Thought it was pretty good but there's been a lot of gushing about it and I think I need to give it a second look because I really thought it qualified as a pretty good monster movie but didn't do much else for me.

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:24 pm
by Kimberly
Latte Thunder wrote:Anyway, also saw The Descent a couple of weeks ago. Thought it was pretty good but there's been a lot of gushing about it and I think I need to give it a second look because I really thought it qualified as a pretty good monster movie but didn't do much else for me.


The Descent is a totally different movie... it's like apples and oranges

Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:25 pm
by shawn
Kimberly wrote:The Descent is a totally different movie... it's like apples and oranges


I wasn't comparing them or anything. Just stating that The Descent was a thousand times more entertaining than the irritating and tedious Nightwatch... The Descent was just good fun.

Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:42 pm
by Remo D
I also liked THE DESCENT, for the record.

Caught up with NIGHT WATCH now that it's finally playing in my area. Not bad--reasonably enjoyable, wouldn't complain about watching the follow-up. But I've been promised "the final battle between good and evil" HOW many times over the past forty years? I'll still give this the nod over something like UNDERWORLD or a MATRIX sequel--sure, there's CGI, but it's not black leather and hovering bullets [I]ad nauseum[I] and there are some nicely effective moments (one great jump, too).

I'm still not sure what to make of the subtitles, though. Okay, unless you speak the language, they're a necessary evil, but when you put yourself in their hands, you're trusting their translation to begin with. We know a dubbed film isn't "the same" as the real thing, and subtitles are superior to dubbing in most cases, but even a subtitled film isn't "the same," and when the subs get stylized to such a degree (moving, changing colors, etc.), how hard would it be to get it confused with the technique of the film--to credit it to the director--to let it affect your overall review? This is a new area to explore, to be sure... what say you?

Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:17 pm
by I am 138
Remo, I actually first read that the director DID the subs for the theatrical release to English speaking countries. Don't know if it's true or not. In which case, you make a very vaild point.

I enjoyed MOST of the subs, because I felt the often conveyed the tone of what was being said in a way the standard text doesn't.