Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Really, there was no thread for this?

One of, if not the best film of 2007 of no thread in little old KMC to honour and discuss it?

Great film. Oscar caliber performances.

Refresh my memory..........

Who was in it?

I can see why you'd forget; no silly little guns or aliens an that in the films. Grown up stuff. Keira Knightley, James McAvoy, Vanessa Redgrave.

Originally posted by exanda kane
I can see why you'd forget; no silly little guns or aliens an that in the films. Grown up stuff. Keira Knightley, James McAvoy, Vanessa Redgrave.

Admit it, you never watched it, just heard the critics are raving about it so you jumped on the bandwagon to come off as some sort of connoisseur (yet again).

I'm watching it tomorrow.

Nice, took you a while to get to grips with the keyboard I reckon.

For your information, and displeasure I hope, it turns out that the entire love story is a fabrication of the fanciful girl Byrony, after they both die. So all you watch doesn't actually happen, Vanessa Redgrave just wants to atone for a terrible mistake she made as a child. Also, reserve a few laughs for the opening, a nice little letter involving words not allowed at KMC.

Oh sorry, was I supposed to use spoiler tags. Well, I guess I just didn't think it was neccesary considering you left your trousers hanging by your ankles in a pose Ron Manager (a la Fast Show) would simply say "Enduring image."

Great film, yet again.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Nice, took you a while to get to grips with the keyboard I reckon.

For your information, and displeasure I hope, it turns out that the entire love story is a fabrication of the fanciful girl Byrony, after they both die. So all you watch doesn't actually happen, Vanessa Redgrave just wants to atone for a terrible mistake she made as a child. Also, reserve a few laughs for the opening, a nice little letter involving words not allowed at KMC.

Oh sorry, was I supposed to use spoiler tags. Well, I guess I just didn't think it was neccesary considering you left your trousers hanging by your ankles in a pose Ron Manager (a la Fast Show) would simply say "Enduring image."

Great film, yet again.

Grips with the keyboard... yeah, how does that have any bearing here?

I already read the synopsis and spoilers online, seems you did the same, hence your fabricated insight into the film.

Never watched that show, sorry.

Of course you're saying it's a great film (yet again), have to be part of the gaggle. I'll let you know how good it was Sunday.

I won't be seeing it in the theaters, as I have to REALLY, REALLY want to see a movie to go to the theaters.

But I think James McAvoy is a fantastic actor with a lot of success in his future.

Hey, I'd love to say I did spend time reading the spoilers for a British heritage film, but really, as a connoisseur-of-films-you-haven't-yet-dragged-the-old-shellsuit-out-to-the-cinema-to-see, I must admit, I'm clean. I loved the film, even the funky little score, the choir at Dunkirk and that photo of Dover, stapled together with bunches of other memories.

Not much need to validate myself much further. Fact that you have a chip on your shoulder and have even spilled the beans on your own pre-viewing habits is enough for a little giggle from me (and a giggle from him).

But please, go on, indulge us all.

Originally posted by Devil King
I won't be seeing it in the theaters, as I have to REALLY, REALLY want to see a movie to go to the theaters.

But I think James McAvoy is a fantastic actor with a lot of success in his future.
I tried to download it, but I repetitively got one of those 'camera in threature' versions, which I refuse to watch. Maybe I'll give it one more try before I spend the $20.00.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Hey, I'd love to say I did spend time reading the spoilers for a British heritage film, but really, as a connoisseur-of-films-you-haven't-yet-dragged-the-old-shellsuit-out-to-the-cinema-to-see, I must admit, I'm clean. I loved the film, even the funky little score, the choir at Dunkirk and that photo of Dover, stapled together with bunches of other memories.

Not much need to validate myself much further. Fact that you have a chip on your shoulder and have even spilled the beans on your own pre-viewing habits is enough for a little giggle from me (and a giggle from him).

But please, go on, indulge us all.

What's there to indulge? I said I haven't seen it yet; not pretending to love it or hate it. I'll let you know on Sunday.

Is there something wrong with reading up on a film you haven't seen yet and are uncertain about? Wait, that's right, you're the connoisseur first class.

On the backfoot already?

Jesus, no substance, no style either, you're a regular Jim Davidson you.

Originally posted by exanda kane
On the backfoot already?

Jesus, no substance, no style either, you're a regular Jim Davidson you.

If tossing out nifty British slang terms at inappropriate times in lieu of addressing points makes a winner, then you're certainly a winner.

Aha! Knowing me, knowing you.

Seems I'm a connosieur in all respects then, which is nice in all fairness. Get over yourself and go and see the fiilm, as I have made clear, it's pretty fantastic, including the mention of good old Southend-on-sea by the cockney officer. Good old cockneys. 'Ave it.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Aha! Knowing me, knowing you.

Seems I'm a connosieur in all respects then, which is nice in all fairness. Get over yourself and go and see the fiilm, as I have made clear, it's pretty fantastic, including the mention of good old Southend-on-sea by the cockney officer. Good old cockneys. 'Ave it.

More self-indulgent babble from you while dodging points, who would have guessed.

I have repetitively said I'm going to watch it tomorrow, as it seems genuinely a good film, from what I read, which part of that can't you grasp? I'll let you know how it went, cheers.

Hey! Wait a minute sonny jim.

Course it's self indulgent; I was 100% brand-spanking right and you seem to be accepting that fact, albeit slowly. The chip on your shoulder probably stings, I don't know why it got there, but similarily, I don't mind milking the opportunity and caining the effin hell out of you.

Backfoot jerky for you. Prime rib for me!

Originally posted by exanda kane
Hey! Wait a minute sonny jim.

Course it's self indulgent; I was 100% brand-spanking right and you seem to be accepting that fact, albeit slowly. The chip on your shoulder probably stings, I don't know why it got there, but similarily, I don't mind milking the opportunity and caining the effin hell out of you.

Backfoot jerky for you. Prime rib for me!

More twist, to bad you're not crafty enough to pull it off though...

I never doubted that the film is great, as the majority of critics agree it's great and from what I read it does seem so; that is besides the point of you being right though. As those aren't really your own thoughts and views, but just parroting and posturing, you peacock. Which was my original point.

As usual, you bite nothing but the fat.

Originally posted by Robtard
I tried to download it, but I repetitively got one of those 'camera in threature' versions, which I refuse to watch. Maybe I'll give it one more try before I spend the $20.00.

It isn't even the money, it's the grimey, nasty, sitting on top of someone else, listening to them all chew on their food like a herd of cattle in an amphitheater part. Movie theaters are just nasty places. On top of the fact that if I don't want to see it, I just fall asleep, which is the same thing I do to make long car trips tolerable.

Originally posted by Devil King
It isn't even the money, it's the grimey, nasty, sitting on top of someone else, listening to them all chew on their food like a herd of cattle in an amphitheater part. Movie theaters are just nasty places. On top of the fact that if I don't want to see it, I just fall asleep, which is the same thing I do to make long car trips tolerable.

that sucks donkey d!ck

Originally posted by Devil King
It isn't even the money, it's the grimey, nasty, sitting on top of someone else, listening to them all chew on their food like a herd of cattle in an amphitheater part. Movie theaters are just nasty places. On top of the fact that if I don't want to see it, I just fall asleep, which is the same thing I do to make long car trips tolerable.

S'why independant cinemas have plush red velvet seats and enough middle class people to build a bureacratic empire out of.

Exanda, your attitude is becoming absolutely appalling lately. I'm giving you a formal warning for your aggressive attitude. That's two strikes you are on now; a third is a ban.

Calm down and play nice.

And yes, you should have used spoiler tags. Don't do that again either.

And Robtard- best to stay clear of him.

Please kiddo, let it lie, you're being incredibly petty about the whole situation, plus you've just fulfilled the long lost purpose of my wandering, dangling, entanglish last sentence. Typical knee-jerk reaction again. What you gotta do is let that shizzle fizzle out. Relax. Now pay attention!

For ze record: I had not said how many times I had seen Atonement. Twice, two times, one-two is the number of times I have seen ze film. Of course, I did say I didn't need to validate myself further, but I guess you really are proud. Did I mention petty?

Seconly, yeah, I know you haven't seen the film. I believe this has been mentioned. However, the fact you ain't seen it does seem to be lending itself to this giant chippe on ze shouldergh. Fair enough. Again, accept that I thought this film was great because I seen the effer. What you think of my taste is another story, but that's your opinion.

Thirdly, the soapbox is welded to my feet! It just ain't coming off. In an almost marginally related link, you appear to have soap bubbles frothing from ze mouth! That's right! You simply aren't reading the situation well enough and, although my scientific knowledge lessens over the years, this is causing you to spout all kinds of irrelevant, for lack of a better word points (although I don't like to invite the comparison between my solid factual information and your points).

That should settle it. I seen film. You ain't (but will (apparently?)).

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Exanda, your attitude is becoming absolutely appalling lately. I'm giving you a formal warning for your aggressive attitude. That's two strikes you are on now; a third is a ban.

Calm down and play nice.

And yes, you should have used spoiler tags. Don't do that again either.

And Robtard- best to stay clear of him.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Ushmeister.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Please kiddo, let it lie, you're being incredibly petty about the whole situation, plus you've just fulfilled the long lost purpose of my wandering, dangling, entanglish last sentence. Typical knee-jerk reaction again. What you gotta do is let that shizzle fizzle out. Relax. Now pay attention!

For ze record: I had not said how many times I had seen Atonement. Twice, two times, one-two is the number of times I have seen ze film. Of course, I did say I didn't need to validate myself further, but I guess you really are proud. Did I mention petty?

Seconly, yeah, I know you haven't seen the film. I believe this has been mentioned. However, the fact you ain't seen it does seem to be lending itself to this giant chippe on ze shouldergh. Fair enough. Again, accept that I thought this film was great because I seen the effer. What you think of my taste is another story, but that's your opinion.

Thirdly, the soapbox is welded to my feet! It just ain't coming off. In an almost marginally related link, you appear to have soap bubbles frothing from ze mouth! That's right! You simply aren't reading the situation well enough and, although my scientific knowledge lessens over the years, this is causing you to spout all kinds of irrelevant, for lack of a better word points (although I don't like to invite the comparison between my solid factual information and your points).

That should settle it. I seen film. You ain't (but will (apparently?)).

You have not said how many times you've seen the film, yet you've seen it twice? Fail.

The rest is just more of the typical posturing self-indulgent garbage, which can be seen in any and all of your post; it gets old.

Ohkay, ohkay, not really geting the situation are we Padfooty? Clarification before accusation is a nice ground rule, not in your case, but each to his own. Twice, two times and finally two effin times the film has been seen by my very eyes. Let me indulge myself, more than anyone.

First time.

Went on the recommendation of the woman, with the woman so to speak, who likes Pride and Prejudice (and all the bloody effin TV adaptions that have gone on over the years) to see the next film by Mr.Wright, not Ian, sadly (Btw, she likes the Colin Firth one better, but James whatisname was good in Spooks and that Dougray Scott film, Enigma).

Second timeth!

Last night, hence the rousing of a much deserved (did I mention it was good?) Atonement thread, I watched it for a second time; UEA campus , 7:30pm, crap seats an' that.

Hit me Tard!

Oh, I forgot to mention - google the last performance, bound to be still on the web. Those details. Be nice to see you realise how full of Jim Davidson jokes you really are.

Easy now lad, A+B would generally equal little sleep and a posting time somewhere around the 1am mark, plus alot of the old Leffe.

I'm not as proud as you, therefore, sure, "you got me pardner", that was unconsistent; I hold me 'ands up, I am guilty of little sleep and fatigue.

Cornered though? Come on, you can't be that optimistic surely? Only one up you have had is one of little relevance to the overall point of yours.

Which brings us, 3,2,1, back into the room.

Yes, what was your argument again? I hadn't seen the film I made a thread about, celebrating it? Wrong on all accounts.

You were right about my little error though, I'll give you that. How scrutinous of you, no doubt you were as soon as you realised you had little to stand on. Really, in conclusion, one little game won, you've lost the whole effin war.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Easy now lad, A+B would generally equal little sleep and a posting time somewhere around the 1am mark, plus alot of the old Leffe.

I'm not as proud as you, therefore, sure, "you got me pardner", that was unconsistent; I hold me 'ands up, I am guilty of little sleep and fatigue.

Cornered though? Come on, you can't be that optimistic surely? Only one up you have had is one of little relevance to the overall point of yours.

Which brings us, 3,2,1, back into the room.

Yes, what was your argument again? I hadn't seen the film I made a thread about, celebrating it? Wrong on all accounts.

You were right about my little error though, I'll give you that. How scrutinous of you, no doubt you were as soon as you realised you had little to stand on. Really, in conclusion, one little game won, you've lost the whole effin war.

Oh, the "I was tired" excuse, how quaint. Please just STFU, you can continue your charade of being better than others tomorrow.

That's it?

On a serious note: Y'know mate, it is 1:18am here in Mother Britain, take that into consideration, especially when you think of the truck drivers stuck in the snow drifts, the paddies trying to get em out before Countdown comes on, the small dog, wandering, wandering, wandering, leaving impressions upon the snow. Think of the child, without a daddy, who Santa Claus forgot.

Course, no one likes to listen to reason (albeit illogical reason) when they are too proud and more importantly, wrong. But I'd have thought with such an endearing camarade as yourself, you'd at least indulge me some more.

Originally posted by cruel jedi
that sucks donkey d!ck


Not really. But it's the same justification I have for not going to theme parks.

Wow this thread sure turned into a shitstorm of ****.

Hmm, not that often that people so blatantly ignore a moderator. Unfortunately just pretending I didn't say anything is an extremely bad idea.

So that's a ban for exanda and a final warning to robtard for continuing this pointless argument that is clogging the thread.

I might have to go see this movie.

I studied the book for A level English literature and it completely ruined it for me. The whole having to go through it and annotate every single sentence made me never want to read a McEwan novel again, I'll wait till this is out on dvd. Even then, I'll have essay questions rolling around in my mind, such as 'Was the atonement in the novel for Briony or Lola' and all that shit.

Frankly I don't think anything kills decent literature quicker than having to study it at school.

Agreed.

I saw the movie, very well made, fine performances, but a bit boring, I'm glad I didn't read the book. I was very disappointed with the outcome of the story . . . The fact that the whole second half of the story was fabricated for her book was a cop out ending. She may have well just waken up and said . . . "It was all just a dream." Lame. Very well made movie, but dissappointing. It was bad enough I had gone to see a chick flick, then they pull that???

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Frankly I don't think anything kills decent literature quicker than having to study it at school.

Too true. And sorry for clogging ze thread.

I think it's great when you can rediscover great literature you were forced to read back in the day, why even Shakespeare gets a look in. I recently read The Importance of Being Earnest again with the carrot rather than the stick effect; enjoyable to say the least. Maybe Ian McEwan deserves another chance.

I do enjoy McEwan's work, particularly Amsterdam. However, after having been subjected to re reads of Atonement every week, for two hours, over the course of a year - I don't think I'll be reading that particular novel for a while.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I do enjoy McEwan's work, particularly Amsterdam. However, after having been subjected to re reads of Atonement every week, for two hours, over the course of a year - I don't think I'll be reading that particular novel for a while.

A while?? Why not 'ever?' Tell me you don't plan on reading it again.

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
A while?? Why not 'ever?' Tell me you don't plan on reading it again.

Yeah, I'll probably re read it at some stage.

I'll have to wait till it comes out on video. Keira Knightley grates my nerves

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Yeah, I'll probably re read it at some stage.

Why?

Because I'm interested in literature, I re read novels a fair bit, usually to gain a critical understanding of them. This novel though, I'd be re reading solely for pleasure; at my own pace.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Because I'm interested in literature, I re read novels a fair bit, usually to gain a critical understanding of them. This novel though, I'd be re reading solely for pleasure; at my own pace.

Woudn't it be more worth your time to explore a different book rather than read the same books over and over? It's like the reason I got rid of my movie collection. I'd seen all my movies so many times, it got to the point that I'd rather just sell them off and make a bit of pocket change. Some I kept of course, but it's rare I watch a movie more than twice because I can spend that time watching a movie I haven't seen.

On another note, I'm really into those Patrick O'Brian sea farring novels. Have you read any of them?

Sorry to sound like an arse (again) and say the obvious, but Worth is all subjective, as you probably well know. Surely it's worth reading the (contemporary) classics in the depth they deserve, but there I go again, that worth is my personal opinion.

Perhaps this veering off to the bookishness section too much?

That was a worthy statement.

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
Woudn't it be more worth your time to explore a different book rather than read the same books over and over? It's like the reason I got rid of my movie collection. I'd seen all my movies so many times, it got to the point that I'd rather just sell them off and make a bit of pocket change. Some I kept of course, but it's rare I watch a movie more than twice because I can spend that time watching a movie I haven't seen.

On another note, I'm really into those Patrick O'Brian sea farring novels. Have you read any of them?

Obviously, I'll read 'new' novels as well. I won't solely read McEwan. I'm just one of those people that have to read a book twice, to fully appreciate it, there's lots of us about. I don't feel right judging a book solely on the first read.

I'm massively into literature, hence why I'm doing a degree in it, and I think it's important to have full understanding of every type of classic, not just the Bronte sisters and a lot of Russian names.

I didn't think this film was very good. Aspects of the filmmaking itself were admirable and some of the performances were above par I suppose, but other than that I don't think "Atonement" deserved any of the praise it has received. And as for the ending, I had similar feelings as Tired Hiker.

I was very dissapointed in this movie.incredibly boring.I had to leave after the first 30 minutes.

Gorilla.

I liked this movie a lot.

Especially the scene with Vanessa Redgrave.

Never heard of it before reading this thread... :P
whats the story line...?