Posted Wed May 26, 2004 11:36 am GMT by Wada
I bought Shade yesterday on its release date. I bought my copy at Best Buy. It was okay - Rounders was still better. Shade reminded me of Pulp Fiction. But the twists were not nearly as big as they were in Pulp Fiction. Also I think the twists were more predictable in Shade. I wish they showed more card tricks in the actual movie rather than just in the beginning introduction and the ending credits. Although the card tricks were extremely amazing!
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Wed May 26, 2004 9:47 pm GMT by Teekan
Wada | Quote: | | I wish they showed more card tricks in the actual movie rather than just in the beginning introduction and the ending credits. Although the card tricks were extremely amazing! |
They do, go to the Special Features and they have a special on the people who did the card tricks.
Those card tricks were amazing though, best part in the movie.
Yeh peep the special features out.
Rounders was definately better, because it's about Hold em mostly
Posted Wed May 26, 2004 11:00 pm GMT by Wada
I know about the special features....thats why I said I wish they had shown more card tricks "in the actual movie" itself 
Posted Thu May 27, 2004 5:57 pm GMT by Teekan
Oh yeh, Opps 
Sorry, I was all puffed out when I wrote it.
Note to self, don't puff anymore before I write it.
Posted Fri May 28, 2004 11:18 am GMT by cayouche
Anyone in Canada seen this for sale/rent somewhere??
Posted Fri May 28, 2004 12:52 pm GMT by Always_Bored
| cayouche wrote: | | Anyone in Canada seen this for sale/rent somewhere?? |
amazon.ca has it.
chapters.ca has it for 2 dollars more.
Im sure HMV or any other mayjor movie store will have it or can order it for you if you dont want to order it online.
Posted Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:48 pm GMT by Guest
I rented it the other day at the local Blockbuster, I was pretty disapointed in the movie overal. I didn't like the "rules" they played by, i.e. non-table stakes.
Posted Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:50 pm GMT by Peerless
| Anonymous wrote: | | I rented it the other day at the local Blockbuster, I was pretty disapointed in the movie overal. I didn't like the "rules" they played by, i.e. non-table stakes. |
Whoops, that was my post I thought I was logged in.
Posted Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:45 pm GMT by redd38
| Anonymous wrote: | | I rented it the other day at the local Blockbuster, I was pretty disapointed in the movie overal. I didn't like the "rules" they played by, i.e. non-table stakes. |
yeah me too, they could have made it much better if they didn't focus the movie around the fact they weren't playing table stakes
Posted Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:08 pm GMT by Heiserman
i thought it was a solid flick, stallone and melanie griffith are the two weirdest looking people ever...how much plastic surgery do you think shes had? it does have the single best line ever though
"I've only had four girlfriends in my life, and they were all tens!"
(jamie foxx flips over 4 of a kind 10's)
"Yea, well i guess they were all f*cking a guy named jack!"
(other guy flips over 4 of a kind J's)
- david
Posted Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:26 am GMT by pathomps
I thought this movie was below average. If I was 15 it would probaly be cool and maybe even spark an interest in playing cards, but overall, not very good.
Posted Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:18 pm GMT by Heiserman
biggest problem with this moving was the casting...jaime foxx, stallone, and the guy who played the cop were all really poor choices for their roles...
- david
Posted Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:40 pm GMT by offsuitk
the opening credits and that four Js versus four 10s were the highlights of the movie. on the whole it was actually pretty bad.
Posted Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:21 am GMT by Guest
SPOLIERS
I liked it. I didn't by the ace up your sleeve machine, some of that stuff, but Townsend was great in it - very believable. Gabriel Byrne is always OK. The table stakes thing didn't bother me, because it was part of the setup, the whole time - both of those games were CON home games designed to clean one or two people out, so why have table stakes?
I give it a C, for having some cool atmosphere and an awright plot in general . . . I liked the many layers of double cross, etc.
ALSO - I watched Intacto immediatley afterword. Now THAT is some hard core gambling.
Posted Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:51 am GMT by JohnnyCache
that was me. I hate my work computer. . . and my home computer.
Posted Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:38 am GMT by cayouche
If you don't hope for a great movie, then you won't be disappointed. I told myself, "this movie's gonna suck so bad..." before watching it... and hey, it wasn't that bad.  The movie altogether was too predictable, but hey, it was poker so it was still interesting.
C+ (I've seen movies a lot worst that than)
Posted Fri Jun 25, 2004 2:07 pm GMT by Nate PT
This was without a doubt one of the worst movie's I have ever seen. It was a wanted to be like oceans 11 or Rounders, but it just plain sucked.
Posted Sun Jun 27, 2004 9:59 am GMT by JohnnyCache
I'm not going to deffend Shade as a good piece of cinema, that's for sure - although I do stick with my statement that some of the individual performances were good, and I did like seeing the magic castle and the cardwork in it. . . I think I might have gotten more enjoyment out of the making of stuff then the movie.
Posted Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:13 pm GMT by suprastyxx
so who knows how to do any of those card moves from the movie? ive been doing research and trying to learn for the past couple days...
Andrew
Posted Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:41 am GMT by JohnnyCache
I'm getting a feeling that they're really, really hard.
Posted Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:29 pm GMT by jwrussell
Just saw the movie. Not bad, not great, but fun. Enjoyed the card tricks, for sure. Even used the screen by screen for that damn Fan the cards and they turn into a royal flush and STILL couldn't see what the hell was going on.
I do wish the extras had featured a dictionary fo the damn card tricks though:
Finally figured out what dealing seconds was.
Want to know what the "Double Duke" is...
etc.
Same with Rounders, in the scene at the first card room Mike and Worm are in Mike makes a comment that Worm has "become a real magician" or something and rattles off like 5 card trick names. I still have no idea what half of them are.
Posted Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:45 am GMT by saper88aa
The overhand run up,the double duke..etc Cant remeber them.Have to watch the movie later on.The Overhand run up is when you take the bottom card on the deck and shuffle it to the top of the deck,or i think it is.Correct me if i'm wrong.
Posted Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:27 pm GMT by suprastyxx
yea i have been doing alot of reading lately and practicing sleight of hand stuff. its pretty cool once you learn how to do it effectively because you realize that magicians are just sneaky bastards and get things by the people who are watching. i never realized how simple changing a card from one to another with the wave of a hand was. its all about presentation though.
Andrew
|
|
