The RPG Duelling League
Social Forums => General Chat => Topic started by: Captain K. on December 21, 2007, 03:27:27 AM
-
This topic is for talking about any movies you've seen recently, either at the theater or on DVD/TV.
====================
Dragon Wars - Very generic story, with very good special effects. Worth the buck I paid to see it.
-
Golden Compass - I think we missed the first 15 minutes, and maybe that mattered a bit, but the movie was pretty terrible. The script I think borrowed too literally from the book, because it just didn't work on screen at some points. And the pacing was more or less terrible. This made for an experience more amusing than anything else, but disappointing, on the whole.
-
Sweeny Todd: Just about what you'd expect, given all the parties involved. Nothing amazingly groundbreaking, but has some great moments. Solid movie overall.
-
Went on a small War Movie Marathon not long ago, here are the films I saw.
Merry Christmas
Children of Men
Letters From Iwojima
Flags of Our Fathers
Saving Private Ryan
I gotta say, not one of these movies disappointed. All of them were fabulous. My favourite of those was Merry Christmas. Just the fact that it was based on a true story made watching it all the more unbelievable.
-
Watch Children of Men. I fucking told you.
-
The Bourne Ultimatum: Meh, it was okay. Good enough action, Bourne was cool, but it felt like an epilogue; the things at risk were MacGuffins (Take down the bad guys we've never met before! Expose the new super-secret CIA program of doom!), with nothing I actually cared about at risk. Still fun, just not much to it even as an action movie.
On another note, I haven't watched it yet, but I picked up Blade Runner: The Final Cut yesterday. That I'm looking forward to.
-
Why do you mix being so good in with failing so much Shale? I dunno, I think you are heading towards condemning yourself to a long course of shock treatment to complete your good taste.
-
It's not like I paid for Bourne.
-
I meant it is good that you like Blade Runner. On the other hand you like Shining Force.
Bourne is alright, it is just fluff at the end of the day. I paid to watch it out of support for movies with pistol whipping.
-
So, what exactly is different about this version of Blade Runner?
-
It costs a lot more.
-
It's a directors cut actually made by Ridley Scott personally, instead of constructed from his notes. It was also completely remastered, which, from the reviews, makes a lot more difference.
-
Alvin and the Chipmunks:
Watched this because my mom wanted to see it, she's been screwed out of a few movies within the past two years, and god damn it, it's basically Christmas.
It was...... well, I suspected it'd be awful, but for a children's movie, this holds up pretty well. I was worried it'd try to be more than it was, but it didn't. Probably not worth seeing in theaters unless you have children, though.
-
The Golden Compass: If you made a movie using the Cliff's Notes from a book as a script, this is what it would look like. Everything is there, but there is just no reason to care. Still worth watching if you've read the book (which you should!) but just too rushed and mechanical. On the other hand, the bear fight was pretty cool.
The Bourne Ultimatum: Very nice. Good, satisfying plot for a movie, sufficiently complex to be interesting, but not to the extent that it becomes difficult to follow. Has one of the best fight scenes I've seen in a long while. I'm sure the fight choreographer is not hurting for work. Interesting ending, too, like a watered-down version of The Constant Gardener.
-
Doesn't it also come with the original theatrical cut and a making of DVD in the mix Shale? I know there is a pack going around with that down here in Aus anyway.
-
Depends on the version you get. There's a two-disc one with the new cut and documentary, a four-disc set with the new cut, documentary, extra disc of bonus stuff and both older versions of the movie, and a five-disc super deluxe version with even more bonus material and a metal case. I got the two-disc one because it was a present and I wasn't about to complain that people weren't spending enough money on me.
Edit: It seems the five-disc release also has the workprint of the move, which could be really damned cool if you're into that sort of thing.
-
Is anything regarding the story notably different, is what I'm wondering. Feel free to bombard me with spoilers. I'm unlikely to actually buy it since I already own the (previous) director's cut edition of the movie.
-
I haven't watched it yet, but there's a Wikipedia summary here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_%28versions%29#The_Final_Cut_.282007.29).
Most of it seems to be cleaning up errors in editing or continuity - removing all traces of the sixth replicant that was originally in the script, fixing out-of-sync audio, that kind of thing. The biggest story change looks like it's the unicorn dream, which uses a different version of the dream sequence itself but also shows Deckard to be awake when he experiences it (makes it more of a vision than a dream, then?) - definitely more fuel for the "Deckard's a replicant" viewpoint.
-
IIRC this is how it went down.
Yeah the director was big on the Deckard is a replicant stuff. Other people disagree. The non-replicant camp won out on the editting of the theatrical release, so the original one plays like that. Director's cut twists it more towards Deckard as replicant side of things.
-
The Golden Compass.
Worst book-to-movie adaptation I've ever seen, easily. Probably not really in the running for worst movie in general, but it still sucked. It sucked hard.
-
Worst book-to-movie adaptation I've ever seen, easily.
Now -that- is damning criticism.
Without spoiling, could you elaborate on how the movie bungled things so badly?
-
Golden Compass- I'll agree that it was okay, but nowhere near the book. My gut reaction was that the book was too non-formulaic to fit easily into a book (unlike say HP), which meant that it took a long time to get the movie going and meant a lot of mehish explanation. Also meant that they didn't have enough time to really make most non-Lyra characters seem all that complete. I do think it started to get decent at the end...and then they ended abruptly. Had issues as a stand-alone movie, so if they do decide to make the second and third, I'd be more interested in those.
-
Worst book-to-movie adaptation I've ever seen, easily.
Now -that- is damning criticism.
Without spoiling, could you elaborate on how the movie bungled things so badly?
A reliance on hamfisted exposition, extremely awkward pacing in the first half, a really awfully written script, and a massively underdeveloped supporting cast are the biggest problems. There's also the big idiotic battle the movie sticks in at the end in an attempt to create a new dramatic climax to replace the actual ending of the book. Which was apparently not testing well because it wasn't happy and cheery enough.
And on a purely subjective note, I didn't like the choice of casting Ian McKellen as the voice of Iorek. He's just too old, I think. I always imagined Iorek sounding and seeming much younger.
-
The problem with the Golden Compass adaption, the thing that the movie absolutely lacks compared to the book is good old fashioned intrigue. Unfortunately, the book is the kind of story that builds intrigue slowly and subtly, organically if you will, with little touches here and there that hint at a dark undercurrent, and that doesn't translate well when you're thoroughly rushing a movie just to fit in all the factual details of the plot. The movie proceeds at such a breakneck pace that you never are given the chance to sit back and think about the larger iplications of what's going on.
The book approaches things you don't know but are obviously important by leaving oblique hints, little inconsistencies that nag at you as time progresses and you become more comfortable with the narrative world. This kind of thing is difficult at best to try to accomplish in a short amount of time, and it's a shame but not a big surprise that the movie can't deliver on it.
-
Well, my brother insisted we watch Bubba Ho-Tep, so we did. Despite being billed as a Bruce Campbell Evil Dead-ish comedy, it really wasn't very funny. I correctly pegged it as a short story adaptation while watching it.
So Elvis, living but geriatric, meets JFK, also living, also old, but now black, in his nursing home, and they team up to fight an evil mummy in a cowboy suit. With a wheelchair-mounted flamethrower.
Okay, the premise is funny. But all that stuff only happens in the last 20 minutes or so, the bulk of the movie is permeated with a less than subtle message about the state of care for the elderly, or lack thereof, in modern America. Really quite a downer.
I'm still trying to decide if it was good or not. Will probably have to read the story now, at least.
-
National Treasure: Book of Secrets
If you can suspend disbelief, including the ability to take Nicholas Cage seriously, you will like this movie just fine.
If you can't, for the love of god do not see it.
-
Big things in little china- Okay. Funny at points but I had trouble paying attention to the story. It did pick up later on, Kurt Russell was awesome.
Clue- Was Clue. Just had random pantyshots this time.
-
I Am Legend. Decent, but too short. The plot is pretty awesome but I don't feel that it's fully explored. It seemed like we were rushing through plot at points. I like Will Smith but I don't understand the acclaim for this performance. He was alright, but not earth shattering. I always thought his interactions with the other characters in his movies was his strength, and he doesn't have that here.
-
Big Trouble in Little China - Fun, funny, totally impossible to take seriously. So, exactly what it was trying for. Kurt Russell was great.
Sweeny Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - Good movie, and from what my uncle (a big fan of the play) said, a solid adaptation. Loved the style, and the casting was dead-on. It's also very, very, very bloody, far more so than I understand any staging of the play has been. I lost my appetite for the last forty-five minutes or so. Other than that, good movie!
-
Big Trouble in Little China: ...what Shale said.
Planet of the Apes: No, not the remake. I finally got a chance to see the original...well, not the whole thing since I started watching it somewhere in the middle, but still saw a majority of the movie, instead of merely the last half hour like I'd always see (and last saw when I was...god, 10?)
...yeah, easy to see why that movie's a classic. Yeah, I know, a bit pathetic I haven't seen this til now, but whatever.
-
Watched Superbad today. Awesome. Needed more McLovin and also some epilogues too though. Michael Cera is seriously gonna be typecast until he's like, 30 though.
-
Watched Sin City again due to not wanting to sleep... still fucking awesome.
New stuff
National Treasure 2- The Treasure Hunt itself was pretty cool, although the puzzles all seemed a hell of a lot easier to figure out (they make a reason why no one found it before despite the ease.) However, the bad guy sucked...
One minute he's ordering his men to shoot to kill at Gates, the next minute he's working with Gate's and saving his life, despite the treasure being found, the next minute he's holding a knife to someone's throat, and then he goes on a rant about how he just wants his families names to live on. Not to mention he wants Gates to do the work for him, but umm... bullets can kill people, especially when they're driving cars.
Other than that it was pretty cool, even ignoring the fact that Gates can get away from the CIA/SS/FBI etc. in a car.
Saw Alien vs Predator 2 the same day. I know AvP plot is going to be chessy, but regardless, I still enjoyed the first one. This one fucking sucked. That's all that can be said about it. Despite the "cool" special effects that they kept having predator use, the movie looked low budget. Then instead of plot, storyline, good fights, etc. they throw in about 15 random people to just die instantly. The movie was already shortish (90 minutes?) and yet they have so little plot that they need to waste 20 minutes killing random people. Also, WE GET IT ALIENS POP OUT OF STOMACHS! We don't need to see every damn alien baby born. Speaking of alien babies, they now reach full size in a matter of hours, which makes no sense at all. Now some real spoiler stuff that pissed me off.
1. Colonel guy is like "What the hell are those." Well who the fuck cares what they are, we're nuking the city!
2. Some aliens kill someone, and instantly chase whoever saw it and tried to run. Some aliens kill someone, and let spectators run and hide (if they are a main character of course.) Main character clauses like this normally don't bother me, but this movie took it to an extreme. Such as mains being in sewers and living, main getting stabbed by boss alien and living (everyone else takes it through the heart), main having alien staring down at him and not doing anything, and probably more I missed.
3. Who turns around and gets punched in the face by a guy running at full speed? How the fuck do you now hear him coming, especially when he and his friends are loud assholes.
4. Helicopter flies away from nuke... okay that works, even though I think nukes cause a largescale EMP that woulda knocked the thing out of the sky? I could be wrong there. However, the explosion catches up with them and causes them to crash. Wouldn't the fallout from a nuke extend waaayyy beyond the explosion... or have nukes changed since I last checked? In other words... all the people who survive at the end should die a horrible death!
5. Alien spawn from a predator looks like a predator kinda, why doesn't it work that way with humans?
That works for now.Fuck this movie.
-
I finally saw No Country for Old Men. It was extremely good. Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem) is the most compelling on-screen villain I've seen in as long as I can remember right now. If I were Bardem, I would spend the next few years just driving around Texas scaring the ever-loving shit out of people.
-
I am Legend - Watched from the second row in the cinema due to new retarded seating booking bullshit that can fuck right the hell off.
Movie was alright though. It wants to be a cross between Children of Men (setting established through shot, it fails at it though by bludgeoning you with it 10 minutes later) and Land of the Dead (The main plot of Land of the Dead without actually saying it. Seriously why have a leader of the zombies and it not have a point? Why have the zombies grow more intelligent than previously thought and not comment on it? Or were we supposed to assume they were always capable of using tools and laying traps? If so, this was poorly expanded upon). It is worse than Children of Men (Hollywood ending, automatic loss there, take a cue from Man on Fire, write one and then drop it in spite of focus groups), but probably better than Land of the Dead which is only alright and only for people into zombie movies really.
Prooobably not worth normal ticket price, worth going to it for that price with friends though. Would be worth tightarse Tuesday ticket prices.
Edit - Oh yeah, buy Apple computers and Ford motor vehicles are so good that they come out of an apocalypse in MINT condition. It wasn't I, Robot level, more Transformers which is kind of acceptable but still annoys me.
We were going to go to the 9:00 session, but it was sold out, so we went to the 8:30 one. The movie started at 9:00. Cinemas have failed to do Cinema their rightful duty. Half an hour of advertisments is unacceptable. Half an hour of them from 2 fucking metres from the screen is torture. Especially when they have one for Cloverfield. That almost made me throw up and I don't get motion sickness. Seats should not be that close to the fucking screen and people need to get over "action" camera work and flail the fucking things all over the place. That isn't even a great way of pretending to be amateur footage. You should have people randomly filming only from the neck down or on a slight angle and have people point the camera at their feet while it is running. As opposed to putting the camera in a gyroscope and hitting record. Fuck Blair Witch Project.
I will try and see No Country For Old Men soon.
-
Did you ever read the book, Gref? You should try it sometime.
I am Legend, I mean, I dunno about No Country For Old Men.
-
I Am Legend was a better book. The movie was a bit too happy.
I've seen a lot of movies recently. Do I feel like commenting on them all? Eh, sure.
The Mist - Wow. What a "fuck you" ending. The movie was pretty decent all things considered. The short story was much, much happier (wow...who would have guess), ending at the point where the group goes into the car to leave to places unknown. In the movie...well...
[The group rides out to David's home to find his wife dead and house destroyed. The group continues until the car runs out of gas, at which point, David uses the 4 bullets left in the gun to kill his would-be new girlfriend (Amanda), son (Billy), kickass old lady (Irene) and average old man (Dan). Literally 1 minute later, a military tank and a truck filled with survivors follow behind, the way he had been coming. The Mist starts to fall back, and a bunch of the monsters start dying as the military starts killing them. Also included on the truck is a woman who left solo at the start of the movie, who walked in the opposite direction that the car drove. Poor bastard drove the wrong way the whole time
As a random note, I got a massive applause started when Mrs. Carmody was shot by Ollie the awesome mentally slow grocery manager. She got shot, I started clapping, and the entire audience (nearly packed house), starting joining me. Best part of the fucking movie. Really, really succeeded in making a vile villain that made me prefer the extra-dimensional beasts to her.
So I generally liked it overall, but wow, what a depressing ending.
Enchanted - Pretty awesome. The music was fantastic (That's How She Knows for Godlike) and the movie itself was pretty funny. Hell, they even made fun of the movie being so generally cheesy and easy to read, which I never thought Disney would do. Just overall cool. I laughed at the cheesiness and thoroughly enjoyed it a lot. Best Disney movie in ages.
National Treasure 2 - Ugh. Ok, I thought the first one was decent enough. Not great, but it wasn't sucky. But the second one...it was a long, boring adventure. Most of the puzzles, as mentioned, were pretty boring and self-explanatory (very little thought necessary in them). Also...hell, Mep covered it well. The villain was idiotic.
Oh you guys will all die here! *seconds later* I WILL SACRIFICE MYSELF BECAUSE I LOVE YOU!!!
Just...boring. It felt like they didn't try to explain things either at points, and just jumped into things without giving some meaninful background. For example, it never explains how the villain, well...
Gets out of jail from the first movie. He just kind of appears.
So yeah, not exactly the best movie I've seen in a while.
Transformers - Hah. I liked this. The Transformer stuff was minor, all things considered, but I think it stayed pretty true to the theme of the cartoon - the humanity was the focus of the show, and how it responded to the Transformers on Earth. Anyway, good action scenes, and the human characters were all well-done (basically split into the nerd and his hot girlfriend and the military group). Very good - the movie was also pretty good about making some awesome random references to the cartoon itself, which made me giggle with glee.
Mmm..could have sworn I saw more than that. Probably just can't remember them. Those are all the recent ones (2007 or so).
-
We need us some actual spoiler tags.
-
Have not read I am Legend, heard it is very good and lots more bleak.
-
Also a hell of a lot more symbolic, I think. The movie does a good job of twisting that symbolism into something meaningful and happier, but the book just does a better job of that, I feel.
-
Speaking of Symbology, had someone who hadn't seen it before watch Boondock Saints the other week. It is nice to see someone's reaction to it for the first time cause it is a film of pure class.
-
Stop typing and watch No Country, Grefter.
-
No Country For Old Men - I came out of this all "Fuck yeah this is awesome kick arse in my head" listening to people around me saying the ending was silly and didn't make sense "That is how movies are these days they don't know when to end it so they just stop abruptly".
They missed the point. The point of the movie is in the title, it is all about No Country For Old Men, not Guy Shoots People For Cocaine Money. Tommy Lee Jones is the lead character freaking noobs.
-
Juno- Probably one of the most likable entries in this particular genre... it also seemed to focus oddly on the adult characters over the highschoolers. It was weird. Best when it wasn't pretending to be Napoleon Dynamite/Superbad though. Enjoyable overall, definitely places above both of those in my book.
-
More movies!
Sweeny Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - Damn straight this was awesome. Fantastic and flawless transition from the theatre to the screen. Johnny Depp also has an excellent voice, which surprised me a bit. The singing was great (though sometimes hard to understand - the enunciation was the weakest part, but still above par overall), the music itself was fitting, every costume was eerily fitting...amazing. Everyone should see this. A bit bloody, but great nonetheless.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer - It's about time for my yearly rewatching of the series, so I figured I should watch the original movie. Delightfully campy. Acting is pretty good for an older movie, and overall was enjoyable.
-
Apparently forgot to mention it! I saw The Orphanage last week.
Solid movie all around that understood the basic elements of horror quite well. Might have been a little better as a thriller rather than horror, but it had some severely shocking moments. It was fairly minimalist as horror goes, relying more on atmosphere than SHOCK moments (not that they weren't there, but here was literally just a handful in the whole movie).
7/10-ish, I think.
-
The Navidson Record - Quite good, manages to be both a great horror movie and a good relationship drama at the same time. Could have done without the escape part, that started ripping off Poltergeist a bit much (to say nothing of the Blair Witch stuff everywhere), but otherwise very solid.
-
Let's see here...
Cloverfield - Vaguely bad. Worse than I was expecting/hoping for, certainly, not nearly as bad as Mahnola Dargis's NY Times review made it out to be. I think the director must have wronged her personally in the past, or something.
There Will Be Blood - I wanted to like this so much! Daniel Day Lewis is an extremely rad actor, and the kid who played his son is talented beyond his scant years. Much of the movie is visually/aurally stunning. That's... pretty much all the good things I can say about it, though. Too many plotlines that really didn't interact in interesting ways, and the movie didn't seem able to choose between them. I liked the final scene, but the one right before it with D-Day Lewis and his son really just should have been cut. It... hmm. Was less than the sum of its parts, I felt. The worst aspect of it was almost certainly Paul Dano. The guy just did not have the chops for the big sermon scenes, and the idea that he could at any point have stood up to D-Day was pretty laughable. Horrible miscasting there, I thought.
Juno - Another movie I wanted/expected to like more than I did. The good first, though. Ellen Page has quite a bit of talent and I look forward to seeing her in films in the future. Michael Cera is as brilliant as always, for all that I worry that he's just going to be typecast forever. That would suck, because he seems skilled enough to do a fair bit more if he was pushed to do it. The whole Jason Bateman part of the movie was really excellent, I thought; his relationship with Juno was pitch-perfect in its vaguely creepy sadness. J.K. Simmons and Alison Janney were awesome, as they always are.
Yeah, that's actually quite a bit of good, isn't it? Unfortunately, I thought the writing was pretty dreadful. I might honestly punch the screenwriter in the eye if I ever met her. Bleh bleh bleh. Every single character was so self-consciously hip even when it made no sense for them to be so. The script seemed to hold everyone's acting back, which is a shame. Ah well.
-
Oh, yeah, and I had a Best Buy gift certificate so I bought the Bladerunner Final Cut. Bladerunner is excellent as always. Been a long-ass time since I had seen it.
-
Let's see here...
Cloverfield - Vaguely bad. Worse than I was expecting/hoping for, certainly, not nearly as bad as Mahnola Dargis's NY Times review made it out to be. I think the director must have wronged her personally in the past, or something.
Haven't seen the movie myself, but I will say that Mahnola Dargis is kind of an asshole in general. She doesn't like much of anything.
-
People thought that was going to be good? It gives me Blair Witch vibes.
-
Juno: Good. Not "greatest movie in the past year," like I've heard some people hype it, but it was enjoyable. Everyone in the cast did an excellent job. I do have to second Strago's misgivings about the script, though. It is self-consciously hip far too often, and succeeds with the serious moments much more often than the comedic ones.
-
Blade Runner: The Final Cut - it's the director's cut, with the technical kinks mostly ironed out and an absolutely gorgeous restoration on the video and sound. Still a classic, and worth buying again if you've got any kind of a decent setup to watch it on.
-
Untraceable.
Avoiding spoilers, basically about a guy who kills people with live video streaming on the web. Well, once enough people visit site then the person dies, so yeah go general public.
Not a bad movie, but had a couple of serious issues. (Might be spoilerish, although not really. Better safe than sorry though.)
1. A guy basically finds out who the killer is, and then gets sidetracked by some girl he's never met, which obviously leads to bad stuff for him. I just don't buy random girl being more important than A. your job and B. catching the killer.
2. Chick checks for a guy in her car. Then gets in. He's hiding in her back seat. GOOD FUCKING JOB CHECKING!. Like when you specifically check your fucking car and don't find someone, you fail. Not to mention that beforehand she was on a payphone on a bridge with a psycho around and she puts her gun away, puts her hood on (gg perif) and doesn't look around, hence letting him hide into her car.
Aside from the two epic moments of human failure there it wasn't an awful movie, although I question if 15 million people in the U.S. alone would really watch someone get killed live.
-
Smells like cashing in OMG ANONUMYOS media propaganda.
-
Rambo: Everything I could have wanted from a Rambo movie, and yet, I was left wanting more. Still awesome though.
-
Rambo: Kicks ass.
-
Blade II: Had the DVD lying around for years, figured I might as well watch it sometime. Basic overdone summer-action-flick, but it surprised me by having Ron Perlman and Danny John-Jules in it, so that was good.
-
The Great Debators: It was about some debators that were great.
The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters. Hyping this once again since it's out on DVD. Pure awesomeness for gamers to watch. Even my wife sat through it, and she hates gaming. Lots of good DVD extras as well.
-
They Live: Was all out of bubblegum. Haven't watched it in a while, was on TV. Niceness.
-
No Country For Old Men: Freaking awesome, and, at its most basic level, exactly what it says on the tin. At another, similarly basic level, probably the best Western since Tombstone at least. Didn't think the Coen brothers had one of those in them, but I'm not complaining.
-
Be Kind, Rewind: Entertaining, though a bit slow with a wonky as hell beginning. Loved it for what it was.
-
Vantage Point: Like Baccano! except much more coherent. Oddly better then I thought it would be. Saw the "Big" twist coming though.
-
Jumper: More or less summer movie fodder, probably released in winter because it's not actually a good summer movie. Enjoyable enough for what it is, could have used some actual time spent on the backstory though.
The Illusionist: Meh. Didn't do anything bad, but also didn't try to excel at anything. I kinda wish they hadn't included the little montage at the end, just jumped straight to the last scene and ended it on an utter "WTF" moment.
-
Man, I still wish that Jumper was about Ogmo. (http://"http://www.gamemakergames.com/?a=view&id=907")
-
Semi-Pro: Typical Will Ferrel, had it's moments but was fairly pointless most of the time. The preview for his new where he lives at home and gets a step brother was awesome though!
-
About a Boy: Very British, very good. Hugh Grant gets to play an overgrown man-child (in other words, himself), and decimate all the idiots around him (everyone, from his point of view) with the best sort of dry, sarcastic wit. He is not a nice dude, but it's oh so entertaining. Even if he does inevitably soften up, it's believably gradual and does not impede the movie's sense of humor in the slightest. Good script, good cast, all anglophiles should be clubbed into viewing it.
Conan the Barbarian: Woo. Now, this was fun. Doesn't waste dialogue when it doesn't need it (could the scene where his mother dies really have been improved by words?), which is coincidentally the best way to use Arnold Schwarzeneger in a movie. James Earl Jones definitely makes an impact as the charismatic demogogue despite not actually having that many scenes in which to shine. Movie does a good job of building its setting as a barren wilderness where Kill Or Be Killed is the golden rule (despite setting not being its primary concern), and everything else flows naturally from that. Also, the soundtrack fits it note-perfect from beginning to end. (There is additionally a badass swordgirl; it says something that this was the last good point that occurred to me, doesn't it?) Really have no complaints about this one. Definitely one of the best action movies around.
I'm aware that the sequels are dreadful (I vaguely recall seeing Conan the Destroyer sometime as a kid), but I'm probably going to watch them anyway. Hopefully there will at least be unintentional comic relief. Seriously, following up this gorefest with a PG sequel? That can't work out well.
Superbad: Had its moments. The relentlessly sexual humor is not exactly my style (I wanted to smack Seth after about five minutes), but the cast plays it well--no shock since Michael Cera's in it. McLovin is awesome just for being McLovin. Also...Worst. Cops. Ever. Jesus, Chief Wiggum looks competent in comparison. So yeah, not something I need to see again, but kinda fun. American Pie, but not a horrible failure? Yeah, that works.
Transformers: I was prepared for a certain level of badness here. I mean, it's a Michael Bay movie. I was not, however, prepared for what I truly believe to be some of the most offensively bad dialogue ever put on film. Let me reiterate: I didn't expect the movie to be ]good at anything but giant robots beating the crap out of each other. I could've dealt with bland dialogue! But no, the writer had to try and be clever. There's a fine line between clever and stupid, and Transformers shits all over it. LOL teenagers are horny, asinine pop culture references that wouldn't have been funny three years ago, strained attempts to make us care about the half-dimensional human characters, ARGH. It's like the product of an eighth-grader setting out to write what he's sure will be a totally spot-on satire of human stupidity. It just winds up wallowing in it instead.
This movie needed to not have human beings in it. At all. It needed to be two hours of giant robots beating the crap out of each other. Seriously, could we be expected to care about anything else here? But it burns an hour setting up the obligatory teenage male lead as the ultimate Awkward Underdog you must identify with or die, the stupid government officials which can't be trusted to do anything right at all, oh no, when push comes to shove you have to depend on the ethnically representative group of photogenic youngsters and does anyone actually think world-class hackers look like that? Dear god. What did John Turturro do to deserve that? Who's blackmailing him? Ugh.
The robots were badass. I admit this and I enjoyed the hot mech-on-mech action! It's just that the other 75% of the movie made me feel as though I were being struck in the forehead with a sledgehammer, only without the entertainment value.
-
Cid it's a movie, obviously EVERYONE that doesn't have a penis has to be hot, world class hackers included!
Anywho.
Indiana Jones and Lost Ark or something: Sucks. Older movie fight scenes blow, the plot blows, the dialogue blows, and the ending blows. Wish I wouldn't have wasted time watching this because it will be in the back of my mind come new Indiana Jones time.
-
Wow, I'm not sure I've seen that negative a reaction to Raiders of the Lost Ark before. It may not be the best movie of all time, but... damn, man. The opening is a classic, and the scene where Indy shoots the random swordsman is love. Agreed about the ending sucking, though. Random deus ex machina (literally) crap. Kinda scary when you're 8 though!
-
NAZI FACE MELTING. Raiders is no Last Crusade, but it is still freaking awesome. It is Harrison Ford beating up Nazis who do random stupid things because they are Nazis.
El Cid, agreed on Transformers on pretty much every point. Needs more bashing over pointless BLARGH STOP THE MARKETTING SHILLING. It wasn't offensively bad I, Robot style (or even I am Legend sadly, but I am Legend was an alright movie anyway), but it was still kind of everpresent.
Needs more Megatron hype and disappointed fangirlishness over Star Scream.
-
Cid it's a movie, obviously EVERYONE that doesn't have a penis has to be hot, world class hackers included!
I disagree. This may be because I prefer movies that don't seem like they were made by an acne-scarred virgin hyped up on Pixie Sticks. It might also be because most of the stars Hollywood thinks are supposed to be attractive just make me yawn and go "Eh, another squinty blonde," but I'm odd like that.
Indiana Jones and Lost Ark or something: Sucks. Older movie fight scenes blow, the plot blows, the dialogue blows, and the ending blows. Wish I wouldn't have wasted time watching this because it will be in the back of my mind come new Indiana Jones time.
I...am almost at a loss for words here. Congratulations, you have totally invalidated any future opinions you have about movies! "Older fight scenes blow?" Yeah, because real fight scenes need to be made entirely from frenetic quick-cuts that make it impossible to tell what the fuck is going on, just like in the fine action movies we get today.
-
Also, seconding the notion that Last Crusade > other Indy movies, though Raiders remains excellent. I'm kinda surprised Chapin didn't rag on the one thing that's noticeably aged: the special effects. The Nazi face melting definitely looks less impressive these days, for all that it did indeed freak me out when I was eight.
-
Last Crusade > Raiders and Temple doesn't mean either one is bad, just that Last Crusade freaking rules.
-
Eh, never got that excited about Last Crusade. Enjoyed both of the first two.
-
Yeah, because real fight scenes need to be made entirely from frenetic quick-cuts that make it impossible to tell what the fuck is going on, just like in the fine action movies we get today.
Just for the record, while the merits of modern fight scenes are up for debate, the fight scenes in Raiders are indeed decidedly not much. I'd certainly defend some modern action movies as far superior though. Kill Bill comes to mind. I can see not liking the style just fine, but you could reasonably watch a movie for it even so. Watching Raiders for its fight scenes would just get a big "... what" from me though. They're not what the movie is about.
-
Raiders had fight scenes? I remember... some scenes that LOOKED like fight scenes but that quickly subverted into something else. Though obviously that ties back into fight scenes not being the point of the movie at all.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhCJnOFZvHc
This was in Raiders right? It isn't much of a fight scene but it doesn't subvert anything and I can't really call it anything but.
-
Vantage Point: Story of a presidential assassination told from 8 different perspectives. Not bad, but they kind of cheat at the end and start showing other perspectives, which kind of ruins the point of it all.
Spiderwick Chronicles: Not as good as I was expecting. They have that stupid kid actor from August Rush playing twins, both of which are obnoxious. Go rent A Series of Unfortunate Events instead.
-
Saw three movies today (granted, one of them was partially last night).
Tell No One (Ne Le Dis A Personne)
French Film Noir from 2007. Good, and certainly had the best plot of the three movies I saw, but somehow it wasn't as gripping as I expected it to be. My parrents liked it more out of the movies they saw today, though (and I can see why--least graphic, the French was actually understandable unlike some French films I've watched, and strong plot as I mentioned). Probably the weakest cinematography of the three (which is to say, above average, just the competition is ridiculous).
Sin City
Seen it before; still good, and certainly worth rewatching.
Blood Simple
Incredibly good cinematography, which is to say I'm tempted to put it above Sin City in that category, and stuff isn't supposed to beat Sin City in cinematography. Really had a way of making my skin tingle, as if I could feel what the characters were touching, or at least join in their anticipation of touch (which carries better over the screen, of course). The audio was also incredibly well-done to go along with this. That said, there are issues with the storytelling, in that I kind of missed the main character's motivation for a good half hour in the middle (it became obvious later, but still). Beyond that, has a lot of scenes that I can only really describe as being Kill Bill esque (long, no dialogue, but intense).
-
I haven't started watching it yet, but this is a general announcement for the Discworld nuts that The Colour Of Magic aired on BBC over Easter weekend and is now available through shadier means. Sean Astin as Twoflower, Tim Curry as the Archchancellor, Jeremy Irons as Vetinari, Christopher Lee as Death. If it's anywhere near as faithful as Hogfather, this should be all kinds of badass.
-
I'm almost through it. It is pretty serious awesome. Correction: Tim Curry plays Tymun.
-
Tim Curry would have been a sexy Vetinari and it is a little sad he wasn't saved for that.
Death... worked really well as mostly CGI in Hogfather though. Wonder how it will work out.
-
Jeremy Irons IS Vetinari. They got the look down so well it's not even funny. Some of the mannerisms aren't quite congruent though, but the voice is good.
-
Drillbit Taylor - You know, I knew it was a bad idea to wander into a theater when I was in the mood for a stupid movie, and this just proved me right. Only redeeming feature was getting to see an X-Box 360 used for it's true purpose: busting skulls as a melee weapon. >_>
-
21- Wasn't bad, wasn't great. The changes they made from the book worked, but I wish they would have done something to spice up the movie a bit... for what the movie was based on, it just seemed a bit bland. Still enjoyed it though.
-
Gattaca- still really shitty. Had the misfortune to listen to this while I was studying in the other room. What a waste of Uma Thurman.
-
Oh jesus, you too super? I was forced to watch that during Biology and thoroughly hated it :F
-
Across the Universe: Awesome, awesome, awesome. Story is fluff, acting is musical acting so not very good but absolutely nobody cares, but every single Beatles cover was excellent in and of itself, and the visuals that went along with them were usually very well animated, well acted, or just outright cool. Also, Eddie Izzard plain-speaking "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite" while the most random ass hallucinogen-inspired visuals spaz out like a man having a seizure.
Only thing that would have made it better would have been Maxwell's Silver Hammer somewhere in there. I was expecting it the entire time since one of the characters was named Maxwell, but I suspect that might have just been intended as a cute reference more than anything else.
-
Gattaca tries to be a modern social commentary on genetic enchanements but it just ends up being Meeplina running around a slightly futurestic world with a plot that would make Justin wretch. I love the nazi element of judging people based on DNA, surely that makes an interesting story! *Flush*
-
Eh, it's a cheap plot, but its got style. The swimming scene at the end is pretty powerful in spite of its anvil-esque bluntness and Jude Law had just the right level of snarky cynicism. Mostly just a case of strong acting salvaging a plot too anvilicious for its own good (I tend to feel the same about... White Oleander, I believe it is).
-
Gattaca- still really shitty. Had the misfortune to listen to this while I was studying in the other room. What a waste of Uma Thurman.
You make it sound like there was value to Uma Thurman in the first place. Otherwise, seconding CK.
---
So, my rental activity lately has been pursuing two trends: shitty 80's fantasy movies, and Coen brothers revisited. The former first--yes, I knew these were going to be bad, yes I watched them anyway:
Conan the Destroyer: Ugh. Remember those generic eighties sword and sworcery flicks that dearly wanted to be Conan the Barbarian but lacked the ambition to do anything but ape its visuals? This is one of them. I can appreciate the hilarity of having Wilt Chamberlain cast as the bodyguard of a virginal princess, but the amusement factor doesn't last for two hours and that's about all the movie has going for it. Somehow even the music (largely carried over from the first movie) and the Spanish vistas fail to inspire. Whether due to the PG rating (the original was rated R) or due to total lack of creativity on the part of the writers/director, it doesn't aim to be anything but a kiddie-friendly knock-off and has trouble entertaining even as that. Also, two words: Grace Jones. Need I say more?
Miller from Repo Man is in it too, but just as a wiener sidekick ("lol greed" pretty much sums up the character's contribution to the movie). Also, total waste of Ursa from Superman II.
Red Sonja: Still generic! But at least it has the decency to be PG-13. A cut above Conan the Destroyer--not that this says a lot, but hey, Brigitte Nielsen's pretty and looks good swinging a sword around, so that's something. Bonus points for the villain being a predatory lesbian. Minus points for Karate Kid to the Xtreme. Bonus points again for total lack of Grace Jones. It balances out to being totally average filler, I think. The Ennio Morricone theme was nice, at least.
The Beastmaster: Hah. It'd been so long since I saw this that I forgot how messed up some aspects of it were. The first scene sees the villain magically transporting the unborn hero from his mother's womb into the body of a cow. Zuh? Anyway, total cheese that benefits a little from being aware of it. A little. It's still bad, but watchably so. Also, at the climax of the movie Rip Torn is undone by a ferret and subsequently burned alive. I think we can all agree that this needs to happen in more movies. I also must have only seen it on network TV before, because there were boobies in this version. Shock!
On to good movies now:
Barton Fink: Still awesome in its own right and definitely one of the better movies made about making movies. Its atmosphere of creeping despair and dementia is perfectly embodied in the Hotel Earle, and John Goodman's last scene is just one of those awesome "Holy shit" moments from beginning to end. "Look upon me! I will show you the life of the mind!" Shivers, man. Did the hallway need to be on the fire there? I guess not. But it did look fucking cool.
Miller's Crossing: Oddly less impressed with it this time around. Knowing where it's going makes you pay more attention to the structure, and I was already skeptical about how quickly Jon Polito's character comes to trust Gabriel Byrne's. Still good, though, especially the scenes from which the movie draws its name. Also, Albert Finney marching down the street with a tommy gun and taking out like six dudes to the tune of "O Danny Boy" = gold.
The Hudsucker Proxy: The Hud is dead. Long live the Hud! Tim Robbins pretty much makes the movie. He is hypnotically dumb, without being unlikable for it. Not a lot of substance to this one; it's just fun and sometimes that's enough.
-
Barton Fink hype is something I greatly approve of. And speaking of movies about writing movies: now watch Adaptation, unless you already have, in which case watch it again.
Rewatched The Fifth Element for the first time since it was out in theaters. More fun than I figured it would be. Chris Tucker need to get about three-fourths of his screentime cut, other than that it was perfectly good at what it was trying to be.
-
Nooo! Ruby Rod steals the movie. Only good acting job Chris Tucker has ever done.
Also, props to Beastmaster. One of my favorite movies (not objectively good, just entertaining).
-
Nooo! Ruby Rod steals the movie. Only good acting job Chris Tucker has ever done.
Also, props to Beastmaster. One of my favorite movies (not objectively good, just entertaining).
That pretty much sums it up, yeah.
Can't agree about Fifth Element, though. Chris Tucker was annoying and I wanted him to go away. (Not that I liked anything about the movie, really).
Also, Shale: I own Adaptation, so yeah. While we're on the tangent, really old showbiz movies that deserve hype: Sunset Boulevard, All About Eve (fucking genius script), Sweet Smell of Success.
-
...how can you NOT like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
-
...how can you NOT like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
-
...how can you NOT like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
-
...how can you NOT like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
-
Goddammit, people. It's noisy and dumb and fails to entertain me even on the level of intentional cheese, that's how.
-
Clearly you have some kind of lactose intolerance, then.
-
HEY. That's vile slander. Last I heard, only one of us owned Big Trouble in Little China, dude. (Hint: it's not you).
-
El Cid, not only do I now believe you have no taste, but I hate you as a person.
-
Next you will be saying Big Lebowski isn't good or something like that.
In other news, I half expect to see El Cid has just watched Lady Hawke and Legend within half a month. Lay off the lame 80's fantasy dude, it will rot your brain. (Or watch them and laugh)
-
Next you will be saying Big Lebowski isn't good or something like that.
I should kill you for even suggesting this, but it would require effort (going to Australia and so on).
Seriously though, I remain baffled at Fifth Element hype. You knock one trashy movie and the whole board come down on you. Sad times.
In other news, I half expect to see El Cid has just watched Lady Hawke and Legend within half a month. Lay off the lame 80's fantasy dude, it will rot your brain. (Or watch them and laugh)
Nah, I was just tracking down stuff I hadn't watched since like the 80's. I've already seen Ladyhawke too many times in the recent past (my brother seems to think any movie with Rutger Hauer is automatically cool). Though, the wacky Alan Parsons soundtrack remains hilariously inappropriate (meanwhile, Legend has to make due with just one song by the singer from Yes).
-
DOA something or other: it sucked. Also, korean subtitles.
-
...how can you NOT like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
Yeah I was a bit late, but needed to be done regardless.
Umm been visiting home with a lack of anything to do, but watch free movies on HBO, On Demand, etc. Seen these all before, but yeah.
Rush Hour 2- Not as good as the first, mildly amusing though.
Tuxedo- Yes, some channel had a Jackie Chan Marathon. Umm, kinda fails action wise for a Jackie Chan movie, and JLH isn't hot enough to save the movie herself.
Biodome- Still fucking awesome
Overboard- Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn (1987). This movie is fucking awesome. Had seen parts of it, but never the whole thing straight through. Despite being an off the wall random romantic comedy or something, it still kicked ass.
Hostage- Entertaining action. However, why do bad guys fuck with Bruce Willis or Harrison Ford? If you mess with their families, their friends, or even the town they live in, they will crush you.
-
There is a directors cut or something of Legend that uses the original more fitting (lame) fantasy score that was released in the US version according to Wiki (I had to look it up to clarify something in my head). Also come to DL Con 3 and kill me there.
-
...how can you like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
Even more late than Mep, but fixed.
I mean, uh. There's worse. I can see finding it average, an amusing diversion of an action movie. <_< But at best there is nothing hypable about the movie. It's not especially notable in the annals of action movies, and it's certainly not getting any points for anything remotely serious. This is probably the first time I've ever seen it hyped as anything more than a 2-3 -star affair, despite actually paying attention to the movie scene back when it came out.
Granted, I can't get into a debate about it because I don't really remember any details any more, but I can see El Cid's reaction more than the rest of yours, from what little I do remember.
-
Stardust - Good stuff, as good as or better than the book on balance because the story's uncluttered enough to work as a movie. Aesthetics drew me in very well, casting was solid, good writing. Plus it has Robert De Niro, and Jesus Christ his scenes were hilarious.
Librarian: Quest For The Spear - B-movie fluff, and fine at it. It is to Indiana Jones as Read or Die is to James Bond.
-
...how can you like the Fifth Element? Seriously, man. >_>
Even more late than Mep, but fixed.
I mean, uh. There's worse. I can see finding it average, an amusing diversion of an action movie. <_< But at best there is nothing hypable about the movie. It's not especially notable in the annals of action movies, and it's certainly not getting any points for anything remotely serious. This is probably the first time I've ever seen it hyped as anything more than a 2-3 -star affair, despite actually paying attention to the movie scene back when it came out.
Granted, I can't get into a debate about it because I don't really remember any details any more, but I can see El Cid's reaction more than the rest of yours, from what little I do remember.
It was a sci-fi, action, fantasy, drama, romance, comedy. It is the only movie of that kind ever!
In reality, it was just a quirky movie that didn't really completely kick ass in one category, but it all seemed to work perfectly. As I've said before, a good movie is one that keeps my mind from wandering during the movie. This one did that and still manages to do it. Logic need not apply!
-
Librarian: Quest For The Spear - B-movie fluff, and fine at it. It is to Indiana Jones as Read or Die is to James Bond.
Whoa, someone else whose seen a Librarian movie. Can't remember which one I saw. I'm pretty sure it was King Solomon's Mines though.
-
I've seen the first one. It was worth watching simply because at one point, Bob fucking Newheart kicks a guy's ass and then loudly shouts "Does anyone else want some of this?"
-
I've seen that. Kind of lame.
-
The Forbidden Kingdom: Maybe it was the theater I was in, but I could barely understand the dialogue. Movie needed subtitles badly. So I made up my own story for it:
SPOILARZ
Son Goku is kicking all of these stormtroopers asses up in the sky, because he is badass. Ralph Macchio is dreaming about this and wishing he could wail like Goku. Then Ralph Macchio watches the opening credits and gets pumped up! But he gets his ass kicked by the kids from Joe Piscopo's karate school.
So Ralph Macchio goes to the old Chinese dude's pawn shop. He wants to buy this staff, but the old dude only wants to sell him DJ Quack Quack. So he goes and befriends Joe Piscopo's kids and they go shoot the old man. Staff get!
Then Ralph Macchio falls off a building and into ancient China. No, I actually didn't make that part up.
He meets Shun Di from Virtua Fighter, who proceeds to make his own combo video on some stormtroopers. Then they go to a bar, where they fight some more stormtroopers. But they have to run because Ralph Macchio sucks ass at fighting. They get saved by Mileena from Mortal Kombat.
Shun Di talks about how the evil ruler Vegita is very evil. He is so evil! Vegita statuses Goku because Goku didn't take a stone-blocking accessory.
They all decide to go kick Vegita's butt and steal his wine. Maybe just steal his wine. The wine seems to be important.
So Ralph Macchio, Shun Di, and Mileena go riding together. Ralph Macchio wants to learn to fight, but Shun Di doesn't have any cars to wax. So he makes Ralph Macchio cut his lawn instead.
Then a dude in white steals the staff. It turns out to be Lei-Fei from Virtua Fighter. He and Shun Di fight to see who is a more broken character, but the fight ends when Ralph Macchio grabs the staff dramatically!
So they all go riding across a desert together. Mileena talks about how she was dropped down a well like a baby from Texas. Lei-Fei tells her that revenge is badong. Then Lei-Fei gives Shun Di a golden shower. Also not making that up.
Vegita is so evil! He kills a messenger who interrupts his busy schedule of brushing the cheeks of women. Then he tells a stormtrooper to go get that chick Sheeva from Mortal Kombat, because she's kind of hot.
The group makes it to Vegita's castle, but they stop, because they figure being in sight of the bad guy's castle is the safest place to train. Sheeva shows up and kicks their asses. She also rolls a natural 20 with her bow.
Ralph Macchio takes the staff and gives it to Vegita. But he has to fight Sheeva first, and loses like usual. Then all the monks from Big Trouble in Little China show up and start kicking all the stormtrooper's asses. Lei-Fei fights Vegita, and loses because he forgets that iron spears are really sharp! Shirt-ripper! Shun Di drinks some good wine and gives Sheeva a bad hair day. Mileena throws her Sai at Vegita, but he just Gallic Guns her into the next county.
Ralph Macchio hits the statue of Goku, who then comes back to life and wails on Vegita like a ninja guitar. Vegita is thrown into a pit of fire that he made earlier, because he always wanted a pit of fire in his castle.
Then God shows up and blows Ralph Macchio. Once again, not making that up.
Ralph Macchio goes back home and beats up the kids from Joe Piscopo's karate school, which proves that Lei-Fei was wrong. Revenge is gnodab! He also meets Mileena, who now has a bad hair weave and some crappy designer-wannabe jeans.
THE END.
-
This is the best plot in the history of the universe.
-
This is the best plot in the history of the universe.
QFT
-
I'm waiting for someone else to see the movie and realize I made very little of that up.
-
He didn't, honestly.
-
Iron Man
Maybe not the best superhero movie ever made, but right now I honestly can't think of a better one. Complete awesomeness. The best thing about it is the believability. You don't see a scene and think "that's bullshit". They present it in a way to make everything realistic.
Also, be sure to stay until after the credits for more awesomeness.
Saw previews for the Incredible Hulk (looks bad), Spirit (done in the same art style as Sin City), and a new M. Night Shamalamadingdong movie called The Happening (which hopefully has Rerun in it).
-
You would think everyone would know to stay through after comic book movie credits by now, they all freaking do that.
-
Iron Man
Maybe not the best superhero movie ever made, but right now I honestly can't think of a better one. Complete awesomeness. The best thing about it is the believability. You don't see a scene and think "that's bullshit". They present it in a way to make everything realistic.
Also, be sure to stay until after the credits for more awesomeness.
Mostly seconded, though I'd put it below Batman Begins and X2. Don't really know anything about Iron Man from the comics, so I can't comment on what references were included/ left out (beyond "Call us S.H.I.E.L.D.," which was cool) but the movie is consistently fun. I especially liked seeing him fine-tune the suit after he gets back to the U.S., because I always enjoy watching the creative process at work, though seeing the suit in action was also pretty badass. Especially that "Oh shit, I didn't sign up for this" expression on all the mooks he mows down. And Robert Downey Jr.'s pretty good throughout. Goes from arrogant, spoiled brat to...well, still cocky wunderkind, but one with a mission (one that actually makes good on parallels to real life, even. Tony Stark vs. the military-industrial complex, go).
My only real gripe about it is that Jeff Bridges flat out inhales the scenery near the end of the movie. Very un-Dude.
Aaaand, I didn't stick around through the credits. What'd I miss?
Preview for Indy 4 before the movie, also (shut up, I hadn't seen it before). Looks promising.
-
IRON MAN SPOILERS (comic to movie etc.)
His origin is very faithful to the comic, substituting Afghanistan for the Korean War. Don't read a whole lot of the comic myself, but most everything I saw was faithful. The only major change is his archenemy. In the comics, he was called The Mandarin and was a Chinese warlord with 10 magic (actually alien technology) rings of ass-kicking. For the movie he became a random terrorist leader from a group called The Ten Rings. Worked well enough for the realistic feel of the movie.
The after-credits scene is Tony walking into his house and Nick Fury is there wanting him to join the Avengers. Nick Fury is played by Samuel Jackson, so apparently they're going with Ultimate Avengers.
END SPOILERS
-
MINOR SPOILERS, NOT REALLY IMPORTANT
1. Ironman/Tony Stark had better casting than anyone in any super hero movie to date. Stark just wouldn't work with anyone else that I can think of, whereas almost any other superhero would work with a different actor. Rhodes was solid, "The Dude" played a good bad guy. Gwen... meh I wish they'd a just picked someone younger instead of trying to make her look 10 years younger than she is, but she did okay.
2. In terms of plot/character development/flow/etc. this movie once again raped any other superhero movie. It also used humor properly and awesomenly... unlike say... Spider-Man, whose humor was pathetic, uncalled for, and not funny.
3. ONLY downsides were A. No Supervillain to fight. I like seeing villains that can actually duke it out with the heroes. His enemy at the end wasn't bad, but coulda been cooler. B. When he crashes in his original armor... how the fuck does he survive when his armor is raped? Also, how doe she survive when he slams into the wall while testing his new armor. Obviously they were both done to look cool (and be funny) but still... probably shoulda toned those down a little bit to make them look survivable if nothing else.
So yeah. Awesome casting, awesome plot, and awesome action. Only very minor issues with this movie that don't really take away from it at all. Probably my favorite superhero movie to date. Avengers movie would kick ass too obviously.
-
Eh, other than Mandarin, Iron Man mostly fights industrial feebs like Iron Monger in his own comic, so that's pretty par for the course. He does the supervillains in Avengers.
-
Eh, other than Mandarin, Iron Man mostly fights industrial feebs like Iron Monger in his own comic, so that's pretty par for the course. He does the supervillains in Avengers.
Yeah, I was trying to think of a good supervillain for him to fight. It'd be fun if he took on that Russian super team, but Russia isn't really a fun enemy in movies anymore. (Vanguard, that Russian Iron Man, Ursa Major, and that chick.)
-
Iron Man. Good. Didn't really feel like a superhero movie...in that it felt more like a Bond movie. Swanky main character who drinks heavily, gambles, and gets with lots of women. Has lots of gadgets. (All of this completely fits with Iron Man's comic continuity, of course, just usually when watcing a comic movie you get reminded that it's set in a comic universe, which wasn't a problem for Iron Man so much). So...as a bond movie, it was pretty good--not as good as Casino Royale I'm thinking, but still better than most.
Gwen... meh I wish they'd a just picked someone younger instead of trying to make her look 10 years younger than she is, but she did okay.
I thought that was intentional. At the start of the movie he has sex with the blond 20-something bimbo. Gwen comes off looking 30-something and more responsible by comparison standing next to that girl, but still looking good enough that it's believable when he starts hitting on her.
-
Iron Man: Solid awesomeness all the way through. Loved the casting, the suits were realized perfectly, and they set up the sequels as well as I could hope for. Great writing established Stark as a character really well....honestly, other than the fact that the middle would probably get a bit boring on rewatches, I'm having a hard time thinking of flaws. The post-credits scene was gold.
INHERENTLY SPOILERY SPECULATION:
I'd really like to know how they're going to handle the Avengers. The obvious route is to go with the classic roster of Iron Man, Captain America, etc. (and I know Downey's in the new Hulk movie, so Banner is presumably in), but now that Marvel Studios is its own entity, I wonder if they can do crossovers with the existing franchises.
-
Missed going to Iron Man today with my friends by about 3 minutes, so bleh...
Instead, watched something else:
Juno.
I was thinking it would be similar to Napoleon Dynamite (which is one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life), but it wasn't. Really good writing, with solid character interaction. Very believable and deep as well. Ellen Page is a good actress, and every other character played their roles really well. A good comedy-drama movie with plenty of good moral fibre for those a bit ethically constipated and just fabulously done overall. Really impressed with it.
-
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay:
Less clever humor and more gross out humor than the first, but still funny. Neil Patrick Harris again makes the movie. Rob Cordrey is awesome. There's an excellent Goonies reference in it too.
-
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull:
Utterly ridiculous, but it's Indy so who the hell cares. Lots of fun set-pieces, especially the rainforest chase, and the callbacks to Raiders are great. Shia...Shai...whatshisname is pretty good, I guess. It's no Last Crusade, but it easily competes with Temple of Doom.
-
What Shale said. It was a fun action film with good direction, just don't take it seriously >_>;
-
A History of Violence: Oh my god. This movie is so... bad. I was cracking up all the way through. Plot is trite, action sequences are 5 minutes of silence and DRAMATIC CLOSE UPZ followed by 30 seconds of the main character killing people. Sex scenes were trite, random rape scene was laughably bad in... almost every way, and oh dear god the first 30 minutes of the movie were terrible. Thank you for establishing how much of a good guy this murderer is, movie. Because we're supposed to care about your trite plot and poorly conceived characters.
Worth watching for a laugh, probably, though.
-
What???? History of violence is sick. I don't really understand how you could think it was that horrible
-
Was it trying to be serious? If it was then chances are Zenny will laugh at it.
-
If you call uninspired action sequences mixed with 90 minutes of trite, poorly rendered plot "sick," then yes, the movie was sick.
-
hahah.... to each his own man....to each his own
-
To each his own man? What are you some kind of man train hater?
-
I meant, we all have our opinions....so dont be dumb
-
He's a communist, he can't help it.
-
Alternately? Sex.
EDIT: I mean...
Fuck, I'm not sure what I meant.
-
You said one thing but you meant your mother? Whoops.
-
dont ever talk about my mother
-
Easy there, champ. Nobody's talking about your mother.
-
I was talking to Zenny, yes. >_>
-
my bad, just edgy....sorry, not having the best of days
-
Back on the actual topic of movies!
Indy 4: Fun stuff. Not Raiders/Last Crusade level good, but what is? At times I wonder if the only thing making me not go "Wow, awesome" is me being twenty years older than I was when I saw the original movies (not to mention completely fucking jaded,) but...eh. It was a tad sillier than it had to be, and you can guess the villain deaths a loooong way off if you've seen one of these movies before (poetic justice what?) I don't have any major issues with the movie, though. It was entertaining, had some good nods to the previous installments (Denholm Elliot portrait in the school = classy), and Harrison Ford, shockingly, still kicks ass. Though I'd hope they don't try and press their luck to see how long that lasts (pretty sure Spielberg knows better, at least). All in all, I'd expected a lot worse from an attempt to resurrect a franchise after nineteen years. Good show, gentlemen.
And Shia Lebouf is, thankfully, not annoying. I wanted to hit him for being such a spaz in Transformers, but I think it's clear now that I can hold that against Michael Bay instead (since, y'know, everything about Transformers that wasn't giant robots hitting each other was painfully bad. Also, Michael Bay is a dick). Kid actually wound up being pretty affable, and I can't say I'd really object if they continued making Indy-style movies with him (which seems to be their intent).
Also, Cate Blanchett as a commie swordgirl = love.
Prince Caspian: Eye candy. Not a lot more to it, but it's a diverting couple hours of fluff. I will say, and not always to the movie's credit, that the emphasis on epic battles is even more lopsided than it was in the first movie. I realllly get the feeling they're making extra effort to ensure that the body count stacks up against the Lord of the Rings movies, which is kinda sad for being so obvious. Of course, people who actually remember the damn book (I don't; read it in elementary school) tell me this is pretty much what Prince Caspian the novel was about in the first place, but there was certainly a fair amount of filler in the film. How many examples did we really need of the title character endangering his entire cause by being an emo wanker? In the movie's defense, it does have the most badass rodents ever. So there's that.
Seems to lack momentum at the box office, which is vaguely sad just because it makes a Voyage of the Dawn Treader adaptation less likely and that's the one I'd really like to see a movie made of (it's the next book in the series). "Expedition to the edge of the world" is so much more my style than "Epic clash of good and evil."
Older stuff!
No Country for Old Men: People have talked about this already and I see little cause to disagree with them. So yeah, good movie.
Sunshine: The ostensible premise is that the sun is dying (for reasons never specified) and Earth's only hope is a handful of internationally representative astronauts sent to restart it with a gigantic nuclear bomb. This probably makes it sound really bad. Fortunately, what it's actually about is what happens when you cram eight strangers in an enclosed space and cast them adrift in the void for years on end. Because it's by Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, 28 Days/Weeks Later) and the man knows psychodrama, so when the crew inevitably starts to fall apart it's incremental and believable. Helps that the cast is generally excellent--Cilian Murphy not playing a creepy psychopath for once. Wow. (He's basically the main character--lack of big-name actors probably did a lot to sink Sunshine in the theaters). It's also worth noting that the movie has a pretty firm grasp on the mechanics of space travel as well its obstacles in spite of the basic setup being pretty crazy.
Movie threatens to turn into stock thriller material near the end, but damned if the culprit (who for the sake of spoilers I'll just call The Incredible Melting Man) isn't genuinely creepy, in part due to direction that never gives you a clear look at the bastard but suggests a whole helluva lot of ickiness. Good flick despite a couple hiccups, and it did not deserve the horrible fate it suffered at the box office. Go watch it, people. (I'll be very disappointed if I don't at least get Grefter to pick this up).
Even older stuff!
Flash Gordon: You know I had to watch this at some point just because of the Queen soundtrack. I regretted doing so immediately after the opening credits, of course, but I can't say I didn't know what I was in for. Phenomenally bad movie. I even had trouble laughing at it most of the time. It's just...the set design...oh god, my eyes! There is no possible way it could be more obviously a product of the late seventies (it came out in 1980, so close enough). All the concentrated bad taste of the disco era is poured into bringing the world of Mongo to a shambling, hideous, impossibly gaudy semblance of life: everything is draped in retina-searing primary colors or chintzy gold cloth and the costumes are so ludicrously outlandish that even a latter-day George Lucas would turn his nose up at them. It is, in short, the most aggressively ugly movie I've ever seen.
As for the cast, try imagining the bully from The Karate Kid saving the universe. Doesn't work, does it? Granted, the villain's crack troops are easily outwitted by a freaking travel agent, so it's not like he was up against much. Worst. Mooks. Ever. And I'm aware that there's a lot of competition for that title. Our hero also spends the first third of the movie running around in a t-shirt with his own name it. Maybe they were worried we'd forget who he was or something, I dunno. Special effects are bad even for the time and everything is coated in crimson and gold oh god my eyes. Fantastically awful from beginning to end. It wasn't trying to be serious and I didn't attempt to take it seriously, but it still hurt. Ming's daughter was unspeakably sexy, though, despite the movie's loathsome excuse for a wardrobe. I'll give the movie credit for that, at least.
In short, Snow needs to watch this immediately. "Camp overload" does not do it justice.
-
Anyone seen the new Rambo movie? Is it any good
-
The general consensus from everybody I've known that's seen it has been positive. It's extremely bloody, apparently. I've never seen it myself.
Edit-Oh, and I also saw Indy 4 a few days ago. Good fun, though I can't compare it to the trilogy since I never watched any of them except for a few scattered bits here and there of The Last Crusade.
-
Before Vacation, I saw Indy 4. Fun stuff and all that. Liked it more than Temple of Doom (the one movie of the series I just can't seem to sit through, since...I dunno...something about dealing with some cult is less appealing than Ancient Biblical Artifacts expeditions against Nazis in the Middle East.), but less than Raiders and Last Crusade, but still fun stuff. Generally worked the Indiana Jones feel of fun action scenes and random tossed in humor to remind you not to take the movie entirely seriously, was clearly reusing material from previous movies but kind of knew it was so just rode it out, added a new angle to things to make it enjoyable, etc. Its Indiana Jones goodness, in any event.
Saw Iron Man last night. Solid movie through and through. Neat how it was less a super hero movie and more "Guy invents something, now he wants to perfect it only to see if he can...and then decides to make use of it for the good of others." Mind, don't know Iron Man much, so not sure if that's what the point of his story is, but still generally enjoyable nonetheless.
-
Seems to lack momentum at the box office, which is vaguely sad just because it makes a Voyage of the Dawn Treader adaptation less likely and that's the one I'd really like to see a movie made of (it's the next book in the series). "Expedition to the edge of the world" is so much more my style than "Epic clash of good and evil."
After what we've seen so far, do you really think they wouldn't try to wedge an epic battle between good and evil into it?
-
Seems to lack momentum at the box office, which is vaguely sad just because it makes a Voyage of the Dawn Treader adaptation less likely and that's the one I'd really like to see a movie made of (it's the next book in the series). "Expedition to the edge of the world" is so much more my style than "Epic clash of good and evil."
After what we've seen so far, do you really think they wouldn't try to wedge an epic battle between good and evil into it?
Hey, I can dream, right?
-
Ocean's Thirteen. Nowhere near as good as the first one, but still fun, and at least it was trying to be a caper movie and not a logic puzzle, unlike certain sequels which shall remain nameless. Main problem was the lack of tension - once you make the incredibly obvious leap of logic about the FBI agent, there's no possibility that any of their gambits are going to fail. Also, Eddie Izzard needed more screentime.
-
Indiana Jones and the Very Long Title: Much better than I expected. Not as good as the first two (shut up, I liked Temple of Doom), but better than Last Crusade. Even Shia was good.
Prince Caspian. First half was very weak. Second half picked up nicely though. Liked the fight scenes. Also, Eddie Izzard needed more screentime.
-
Transformers: See what everybody else said back when it came out, basically. Giant robots smashing shit up = good, everything else = shut up and get back to the smashing of shit. Loved the nods to the cartoons, especially Barricade's design and pretty much everything Peter Cullen said. Subplot with the hackers was phenomenally useless. Also, Eddie Izzard needed more screentime.
-
Went to see Wanted with some friends. Not really my type of movie. Which probably explains why I really didn't like it. Full 3 page rant below. Spoilers included. You have been warned. I'm guessing I'm viewing this movie in the wrong light, but yeah. Posting due to demand:
Wanted: A bad movie
Those of you that know me pretty much know that I bitch a lot. I have my reasons for doing so. Depressed, annoyed, just needing to vent to name a few. And after watching “Wanted” I’ve got another great reason to bitch. I can basically describe my feelings over this in one word: Ass. The movie was ass, the story was ass, the characters were ass, almost every thing sucked utter ass. Now, I’m probably one of the few standing alone on this point of view, but alas, I have frustrations that need to be said so I know that next movie about a league of mystical shitty assassins I will not watch.
How bad is this movie? Well, to give you a relative idea, I rate AvP:R pretty much BELOW the bottom of the barrel (that movie was also shit, please don’t see it). Now, after AvP:R came War. Wanted is right above those two. So it’s probably scrapping the bottom of the barrel or so. And no, that’s not a compliment. Everything about this movie from start to finish was just a giant mess. They head in one direction, which is completely opposite from what the movie was supposed to be. I don’t admit to have great taste in movies, but this was just so unbelievably stupid that it’s incredible.
So let’s start. Premise of the movie (spoilers ahead!) if you don’t know, the main character, Wesley is a regular ordinary person with problems that causes him to shake violent and that ‘he can’t seem to care about anything’. One day his father is assassinated and he is recruited into a league of assassins to avenge said father. Oh of course, he gets trained and is assigned to differing missions supposedly chosen by the “threads of fate”. Now here’s the BIG plot twist of the movie. Are you ready for it? Are you? Because it will totally BLOW your mind. Spoilers of course if you couldn’t tell.
Are you really ready? Well, here it is.
It turns out that the man who Wesley thought initially killed his father is ACTUALLY his father. Not ONLY that! But the machine that is supposed to produce the targets deemed to be too chaotic to live in the world actually is controlled by Sloan, the headmaster (I guess you can call him that) of the fraternity. So in other words, he gets to decide who to kill and makes a profit off of it. Wesley’s dad learnt about this and was subsequently hunted by Sloan.
Now! Where have I heard something similar to that before? Oh right! Star Wars. I’m pretty sure he even says “I am your father” at some point in the movie too. What a twist~ Aside from that, it also looks way too similar and is giving me bad vibes like War. SURPRISE SECRET IDENTITY. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE DEEP CAUSE WESLEY JUST COMMITED PATRICIDE.
There are a lot of things wrong with this. To begin, Wesley’s father made plans to destroy the fraternity. But I’m guessing that he didn’t because the fraternity reached Wesley before him. Well, why didn’t he destroy the fraternity sometime when Wesley was away on a mission? Furthermore, if he was supposed to be protecting Wesley, why is he randomly shooting bullets at Fox, knowing that Wesley could be caught by a stray bullet? Oh right, I suppose curving bullets will save Wesley. Except, you know, he can still walk into the said path of the curving bullet. Try walking into a path of a thrown curve ball. I am fairly certain it can still hit you. So this tactic never made any sense at all. Next, he never ever tries to contact Wesley. He never even quickly says to Wesley anytime before his death that there are problems and troubles afoot. Sure, he might be constantly hunted and Fox was always around him. But what about that guy who saves Wesley after he falls off from the suspended train? That guy’s not even hunted like Wesley’s dad. So what’s the excuse here? Couldn’t he write him a message? MSN him? Nope, had to keep his mouth shut because this is supposed to be a BIG DRAMATIC TWIST (that makes no sense). Then he even has the FUCKING nerve to shoot that traceable to his son. WHY DIDN’T HE LEAVE A MESSAGE INSIDE THE FUCKING BULLET? ARGHELKLASAFS
Okay, moving on. Many things in the story continue to crash and burn. Like why is it that nobody except Wesley ever questions these “threads of fate”? Fox has her story sure. What about everyone else? I highly doubt something like that happened to every member of that fraternity. Not only that, but I also highly doubt Fox shared that memory with everyone around her. Next, why is it that the mice Wesley sends into compound not kill anyone? So the explosives are strong enough to destroy the complex made of concrete and steel but not strong enough to kill a human? Um…what? Next, why did Fox even bother telling him that he did kill his own father, when it would have been much easier to lie and then kill Wesley?
Then, there’s the entire showdown after the mice explode. Here’s this fraternity of assassins. And yet NO ONE can even hit him with a bullet. Or curving bullets of doom. Bullshit. Then in the grand final showdown where six people with guns (Gunsmith and Fox included) all point at Wesley and Wesley explains that Sloan was also selected by the threads before he started manufacturing his own for profit is the most retarded dialogue, followed by the most retarded action ever.
Sloan’s quote bottom line: “Believe in the code, then kill yourselves (but not me cause I’m the real pussy of this movie). Or follow me and we can build our own empire”. Yet no one questions Sloan. What, we can’t compromise? Considering the fact that you fucken dragged everyone here, I think you need to stand with Wesley dude. Then of course, Gunsmith says, “Fuck the code”. Which also leads me to say, “No Gunsmith, you are the demons”. So no one in this story outside of Wesley can think out of the box. Its either we all die together or kiss Sloan’s ass. Not let’s try to rebuild this fraternity for what it is or anything of that sort. The amount of sheer stupidity in that moment made me want to cut myself. The ONLY character whose action even makes any sense? Fox. Who proceeds to shoot everyone in the head including herself (minus Sloan). And yes, this makes sense because for her, she believes that maybe somewhere along the line, she could be a killer of somebody else’s parents (and probably already have done so). Of course, if NONE of them decided to kill each other, they could find other ways of atoning which I propose is the better action, but regardless, Fox’s action makes sense. Everyone else in that room needs to headdesk themselves since their brain is obviously not working.
FINALLY! In the final portion of the movie, Sloan ends up falling the same trap as one of his previous agents and is killed by Wesley. This scene is also retarded because you know, for all that Sloan was a genius at manipulating everyone and even had a backup plan against Wesley during the previous showdown, I am supposed to believe he falls for the same trick that one of his other agents died to.
…give me a FUCKING break. These characters are all retarded. I haven’t even gone to the biggest asshole of the movie because there are so many holes in the plot to rip. In terms of asshole, Sloan was one but he was supposed to be. Who else was retarded AND an asshole? Wesley.
Wesley in general is not likable. In the beginning, he was a wuss. Plain and simple. Then he was over eager and needed to get some sense knocked into him. Finally, he’s reckless beyond all hell. Then in the end, he is vengeful and nothing comes out of that vengeance. He seeks revenge, but there is not a tale afterwards, which leads to another complaint. Some of Wesley’s not-so-smart moments include after watching one of his friends in the fraternity die to his recklessness, he immediately sets off to the same reckless action right afterwards. Around halfway through the movie I wanted to throttle Wesley because he was basically unlikable to a very large degree. I cannot familiarize myself with an wussspazreckless dick. And so when he does kill his father and tragedy happens, I cannot give half a rat’s ass about what happens afterwards.
Finally, the action scenes. Some of them are way too over the top. Most notably is the one in the showdown where he is literally jumping and grabbing dropped guns in midair along with the slow down effects playing repeatedly. MATRIX BIG BRAWL VIBES. This film is certainly winning in originality at this point
A couple of other ones (although I guess not really action scenes) is where he smacks his best friend with the keyboard and leaves the message FUCK YOU in slow motion. Yeah Fuck you too Wanted. I understand this was supposed to be a funny moment, but it made me roll my eyes since if this was the best they could come up with humour, we have problems.
The problem with this movie is that it tries to take itself way too seriously. It presents all this philosophical stuff such as “Is life really set in fate?” and “Who are each of us to decide, how we live?” But then admist all this, we get loads of plotholes, asshole characters and too many things that doesn’t fly together. If you’re aiming for a serious plot, do that. Make things more coherent with better transitions. If you’re aiming for a comic style humor admist the action, please do not fill your explosions with philosophical questions. And if you’re aiming for a serious plot, make your characters more believable and less of an asshole so people can care about them. This movie was a spiraling trainwreck that basically got worse and worse as it kept moving.
-
Indiana Jones: some great moments combine with some poor plot decisions to form a solid, '80sesque action flick. A worthy waste of an evening.
-
Get Smart: I wasn't going to see this, for one because I had never seen the original show and for two because I was afraid that Steve Carell would just play Michael Scott playing a spy. It was pretty funny. Well worth my friend-who-bribed-me's money.
-
Kung Fu Panda: I too can do amazing feats of kung fu when there is food involved.
Hancock: I liked it, but the plot was kind of all over the place. Very strange movie - not really sure how to classify it.
Wanted: Completely ridiculous, but fun. Unlike Tide, I don't think the movie took itself seriously at all. Especially liked when Wesley shoots the Repairman in the head, sticks his gun through the bullethole in said head, and proceeds to shoot everyone else with a dead guy stuck on the end of his gun.
-
Hellboy II: Not as good as Hellboy, but still good. Great style, lots of laugh-out-loud moments, more great style, good characters. Wish del Toro had given Hellboy and Abe more to work with than romance subplots.
-
Untraceable - Watched this on the plane. It was horrible heavy handed anti-internet neutrality propaganda. "He is a supporter of Net Neutrality, wanting the right to publish anything at all on the internet. All the filth in the world free for everyone to see!!!111" errrrr what.
I have been holding that in for days now and it is good to finally fucking say it. Such stupid retarded bullshit and not even that good as a piece of torture porn.
-
Batman:
God fucking damn it quit cutting away from the Joker and Dent. No, I don't care what Batman's doing. Him smashing dudes was cool the first time, but I'm much more interested in the Joker talking and waving a knife around menacingly, or Dent just generally being crazy.
-
Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) has a cameo. So cool.
-
Echoing Rob on Batman, actually. The Joker is awesome in that movie.
-
R.I.P. Heath Ledger
The other residents and I are going to see that Sunday afternoon. Looking forward to it.
-
Thirding what Rob says.
Damn, the Joker was amazing. Everything else though was kind of meh.
-
Well.
Just got back from Batman: The Dark Knight. It was everything I was expecting it to be and more. And yes, The Joker was simply amazing.
-
The Dark Knight: Awesome, awesome movie with a few noticeable flaws, one of which is what Rob said. Really, at some point you're just going to accept that Batman's kicking everybody's ass, and the details of who gets kicked how and in what order don't matter. Ledger was amazing, but so was Aaron Eckhart, and it's a shame he's going to get so overshadowed. Great performances.
-
Dark Knight: See above, blah blah. Bruce Wayne really has to stop with the one liners about how he is Batman, etc. etc.
-
Dark Knight: I agree with what everyone's said, pretty much. Ledger's performance is definitely one of the best I've ever seen. Ever. I thought Eckhart was solid until the end of the movie, at which point his performance sort of fell apart into emoting and suffering, but eh. Hard to do anything else with that role, the way it's written. Also I thought Gary Oldman was really fantastic. Excellent, subtle, honest performance.
-
Dark Knight: Good, but not great movie. Definite script and directing problems, but I will defend to the death that Heath Ledger is the best Joker. Goddamnit it was too soon to lose him. Aaron Eckhart is also suitably awesome. Fourthing or Fifthing Rob, not sure what we're on.
-
Dark Knight:
Ok, fine. If they want to give Ledger an award I'll accept that he actually earned it and it's not just because he's a corpse.
Eckhart and Oldman also had very well-done roles.
-
Dark Knight: Good, but not great movie. Definite script and directing problems, but I will defend to the death that Heath Ledger is the best Joker. Goddamnit it was too soon to lose him. Aaron Eckhart is also suitably awesome. Fourthing or Fifthing Rob, not sure what we're on.
Scripting was one of my problems too, actually. People seem too wordy. I mean, I talk like that. But I'm not a 20-year police veteran, I'm a Law student. Dent and Alfred, yes, I would see them talk like that. But everyone talks like that. Except the Joker. Kinda.
-
The Joker still talks like that, his rhythm is just different and his babble more psychotic and well done.
-
Everything already said about the Dark Knight, ample agreement and such, Heath Ledger was epic, blah blah blah.
-
Dark Knight: Awesome. Thought Eckhart outdid Ledger, he was just fucking flawless till the very end. Great movie, well acted. Pacing could've used work.
-
The Dark Knight - Yeah, what everyone else said, but with the note that I didn't care about the pacing at all. The acting was freaking perfect overall, and I generally enjoyed it[as did my uncle.
-
Dark Knight- Decent movie, but not great by any means.
Plenty of Spoilers
The bad
Pacing- Thought the movie was going to end about 3 different times, but it kept on going. Climaxes get old after a while.
Casting- Bale is meh, anyone could play this Batman though. Rachel was FUCKING AWFUL. Thank God she died. I was indifferent towards Maggie until this, now I hate her.
Plot- 1. Batman is now apparently a fucking superhero who can jump 30 feet down and smash cars without a scratch or fall off buildings and land on his back. Five men with guns are also no problem, but I'll be damned if he has to fight a dog or two.
2. Joker knew EVERYTIME that Batman would find him. He was ready at that apartment, despite having NO FUCKING WAY OF KNOWING BATMAN WOULD FIND HIM with some retarded fingerprint via bullethole technology. He was also well prepared at the very end, when once again Batman used a technology that Joker didn't even know existed to find him. Not to mention the pathetically fail cops throughout the entire movie.
3. It switched between wanting to be a Superhero Movie and not be one. I honestly liked it more when it wasn't being a superhero movie, but it really failed to pick. Batman kept switching from Godlike ass kicking immortal to normal human.
4. Joker's monologue about wanting to kill people with "plans." He had a plan for everything in this movie. Orly?
5. Rachel's letter- As if she didn't fail enough, her letter was stupid. OMG I want to marry Dent, but if Batman goes away I'm yours. These two had almost NO interaction in the last 2 movies other than a few "moments." So let's see. Childhood friends, Bruce is gone for 7 years. Bruce comes back and they argue a lot. She comes around at the end, but says she can't be with Batman. She then hooks up with Dent for however long, but is still willing to ditch him for Bruce. Explain why the hell she still loves him?
The Good
Action- Overall the fighting was pretty solid, minus the ridiculous car chase, but most car chases fail to make any sense so I'll let that slide.
Joker- I don't know if it was Heath or the scripting. Either way, this Joker was a lot better. The magic trick with the pencil was the best thing any Comic Book villain has done. Period.
Twoface- Also awesome. Batman was the third main character behind Dent and Joker, which is fine by me. Hell, the only bad thing about these two owning so hard is that the next villains will fail.
Gordon/Alfred/Fox- All 3 continue to be awesome, with some solid casting for the less important characters.
Plot- 1. When the movie stayed out of superhero mode it made an awesome movie. Batman actually having to face some pretty sick decisions was pure win, and Joker creating a lot of sick scenarios was also win.
2. Dent turning bad. Usually good guy to bad, or bad guy to good swings are done poorly. This wasn't. I could actually buy Dent acting how he acted.
So yeah. Good movie, but not in my Top 25. Doubt I'll watch it again. Overall, the first one was better in every way except the villains. Without those two, this would have been a bad movie. Finally, let's face it, no way in hell would it have beat Spider-Man 2 or 3 (forget which broke all the records) if Heath had not died. It sucks, but him dying easily added the 6 million dollars needed to break all the records.
-
I tried to input your code as a batch file and it didn't load. What format should it be? Or are you some kind of Linux commie?
(If it was spoilers, that doesn't happen on the new forums >_>)
-
No spoiler code. But more importantly...
IT'S FUCKING BATMAN. Harvey Dent became Two-Face like SIXTY FUCKING YEARS AGO. Hey, guess what? Norman Osborne dies in Spider-Man!
-
Yeah... notice how none of my issues are the fact that the movie deviates from the comics. This happens in every non-original movie out there. The issues stem from the fact that aside from an awesome overall theme, the movie wasn't well written. The epic casting (aside from Batman and especially Rachel) is what saves the movie.
-
Dark Knight: Good stuff. Doesn't beat Iron Man for movie of the summer, but still very solid. Harvey Dent was especially good. Outstanding ending to the movie.
I don't think Ledger was better than his predecessors (Romero/Nicholson/Hamill), just different. Seems like everyone who gets that role kicks ass with it. Joker=best fictional character ever? Discuss.
-
X-Files: I Want To Believe - Can be summed up thusly: If you watched the show with any degree of regularity prior to Season 7, and preferred the non-mytharc episodes, you'll probably like this. The movie does play like an extended episode, and knowledge of the series is necessary in order to have any enjoyment at all. Although both Mulder and Scully act like dicks.
-
Hellboy 2 -
Good, very much in the same way the first was, but also kinda lacking that extra bit of excitement or intrigue to really make it great, again like the first. The trolls and assorted monsters are more reminiscent of Pan's Labyrinth than Hellboy 1, which is very cool.
-
Finally saw Dark Knight. Honestly, I need to disagree with Rob. As much ass as the Joker kicked, as good as Harvey Dent and his fall was, it needed Batman there to balance them out and complete the story. And while there are some holes in the plot (mostly around the magical omnipresent explosives) I honestly don't see being prepared for someone with a knack for showing up in the worst place at the worst time regardless of having any reason to expect him is one of them.
That said, yeah. Batman clearly the least compelling of the trio, which says a lot since I loved the dialemmas he kept on having handed to him. And Dent probably stole the show with one of the few belivable and compelling falls from grace I've seen. More importantly, this movie actually had a feeling of loss to it, a feeling that the people around Batman could actually die, which none of the other movies in this genre have managed to evoke recently. So, I feel pretty comfortable in saying it's the best movie I've seen this summer, and pretty cleanly blows Iron Man out of the water.
-
Dark Knight. Was crying by the end, ergo good movie overall.
(SPOILERS)
4. Joker's monologue about wanting to kill people with "plans." He had a plan for everything in this movie. Orly?
Joker lied in order to manipulate Harvey.
2. Joker knew EVERYTIME that Batman would find him. He was ready at that apartment, despite having NO FUCKING WAY OF KNOWING BATMAN WOULD FIND HIM with some retarded fingerprint via bullethole technology.
Except not really since all that was waiting for him was a bunch of hostages without a guard.
Though, really, whenever Joker is doing some large-scale terrorism he seems to expect he'll be found. Seems reasonable.
No, the things that really bothered me about the movie, when Batman declared which person of the two he was going to save, I swear I heard him say Rachel, yet he showed up with Dent. Now, I could see this being a Joker Joke "I told you them backwards", but nobody ever references that afterwards, even when it would have comforted Dent to say "I thought I was coming for Rachel". The other thing that bothered me was when the clowns were the hostages; why doesn't Batman radio this to the cops and tell them, instead of running around punching SWAT people?
-
Eh, for the first thing, I'm pretty sure Batman told Gordon to go to the place Rachel was being held, and that's probably what you heard. Though, I admittedly made the same mistake so maybe not.
I agree with your second complaint but let that go on the grounds that it made for a better action scene in what is at its core an action movie. I mean, Batman has 1984 eyes and he can't radio the police? Or radio Fox to radio the police? Whatever, Batman punching out SWAT team members was cool looking.
-
The Rachel/Dent locations were indeed switched. I caught that also, but the movie doesn't mention it, other than Batman looking really pissed off when he sees he's rescuing Dent.
-
The Rachel/Dent locations were indeed switched. I caught that also, but the movie doesn't mention it, other than Batman looking really pissed off when he sees he's rescuing Dent.
Indeed. Batman pretty clearly said he was going for Rachel when he and the cops split. I just assumed it was the Joker giving bad info to fuck with people, because that's what he does.
-
The Joker lied to fuck with them all. Shock.
The movie was awesome, Heath Ledger was every bit as good as I expected, that was the performance and style I was expecting from him. Perfectly lived up to my high expectations. Great stuff.
-
Watching random movies on Hulu to pass time at work.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind- Awesome. Jim Carrey is great and definitely underrated as a dramatic actor. Kate Winslet is amazing. Just a very well done movie all around.
The Secret of NIMH- Haven't watched this since I was really little. Still remarkably entertaining. Mrs. Brisby is cool, and I was actually surprised to find Shannen Doherty played one of the kids. Was also surprised to learn the movie was made in 1982. Looks like classic Disney era, honestly.
-
The Mummy: Tomb of Fou Lu - good action flick, probably would have stood out more in a summer with fewer megablockbusters. The new Evie is better than the old.
-
Behind on this, but oh well.
The Dark Knight - Pretty awesome in pretty much every regard. Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart were both absolutely fantastic. Batman himself wasn't as compelling a character as he was in Begins, but given how incredibly awesome the other two major characters were I am willing to make the trade. Definitely a better movie than Begins, and than almost any other movie of that style I can name. The old-fashioned action was merely decent, but the psychological action which dominated the later stages of the movie was superb, and the character work was excellent by movie standards. Caine, Oldman, and Freeman all played their secondary characters masterfully, to boot. Really, my only significant complaint about the movie is the lack of any strong presence of female characters (although Rachael was better in this movie than Begins, and what they did with her was shocking, and helped fuel the darkness of the latter bits).
Also the movie served as proof you can do darkness without falling into a swamp of pretentious emo. Major props for that.
Kung Fu Panda - Wasn't as funny as it should have been (Jack Black + panda that can do kung fu? C'mon!), and I can't say I really cared for some of the message (Panda surpasses his comrades not through hard work but through some hand-waviness over his love of food). Other than that an okay children's movie.
-
The Rachel/Dent locations were indeed switched. I caught that also, but the movie doesn't mention it, other than Batman looking really pissed off when he sees he's rescuing Dent.
I was thrown by this too and had to have the Internet set me straight, but for what it's worth, the movie does indeed confirm that the locations were switched. It's in the last big scene with Dent; he tells Gordon something along the lines of "This is $ADDRESS, which you should know since it's where Rachel died." The name of the address he gives is the opposite from what the Joker claims in the interrogation room.
-
I saw Dark Knight for the first time last week, and I feel like it'd seem more sincere if I said everything NEB just said but with different wording, but we're gonna have to take the risk of seeming insincere just this once. Every point he makes, I second. Especially the hype on Ledger's performance and the last bit. You know the one.
Also the movie served as proof you can do darkness without falling into a swamp of pretentious emo. Major props for that.
Yeah, that one. (I liked the swamp imagery.)
I will say that I liked Bale when he was given a chance to do anything; various social occasions early on in the movie come to mind, when he got a chance to act like a billionaire instead of a hero for a while. Yeah, he's upstaged by the villains, but I don't think anything could be done about that without giving him more screentime to himself, and there wasn't really the time for that. He easily remains the best Batman for me.
It's seeming like more and more comic book adaptations are breaking out of their niche position and being made into seriously good movies lately. Oddly, when it comes to film, superhero comics have been treated recently with far more respect and seriousness than graphic novels, which have also enjoyed a period of mass-film adaptation except that they're all kinda being made into one-dimensional dark-gritty-omg flicks. I mean, Sin City? 300? The Spirit, which I saw a preview for and which looks hilariously, uproariously bad? Don't get me wrong, I actually enjoyed the first two, but they weren't exactly deep experiences. I guess I just thought it was weird that a Batman movie could seem mature and be taken fairly seriously and enjoyed on a higher level while the graphic novel stuff seems cartoony and goofy in comparison; isn't it vaguely supposed to be the other way around? I guess it's to the director's credit that he managed it.
I still have a little hope for Watchmen, unlike Grefter (you can shear away a lot of what made Watchmen good and still come up with a pretty decent movie, is my thinking), so maybe that'll be a counterexample.
-
To be fair, there isn't really much to the 300 graphic novel. There was tons of room for interpretation and they took it. I don't think it made it a bad movie.
-
Not really bad - just shallow. I agree that it is weird for the deepest, most character-driven comic adaptations lately are the ones about superheroes, but I'm not complaining.
And yeah,The Spirit looks like shit. I'm not sure yet if it's so-bad-it's-hilarious shit or the regular kind, though.
-
Dude, if you were going to 300 expecting a deep movie, then you're doing it wrong.
-
Ten years ago I'd say the same about Batman, though.
Edit: Fun fact - the first hit on Wikipedia for "you're doing it wrong" (without quotes...What? I was wondering where the phrase started.) is the page Congressional response to the NSA warrantless surveillance program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_response_to_the_NSA_warrantless_surveillance_program).
-
I don't even mean for the type of movie it is. The comic itself has very little substance to it, despite the gritty feel. And the commercials for it didn't make it seem like anything other than the all style no substance movie it was. You could go in HOPING for a meatier movie, but... expecting it is a little much.
The only thing I liked about The Spirit trailer is how they pulled off the old, exhaggerated running style.
-
I'm not saying it was a surprise, just that it takes a lot of effort and talent to make a movie like The Dark Knight and it's kind of surprising that it's superhero comics that tend to get the treatment instead of the more "mature" works in the medium (not necessarily 300 in particular, but then I haven't seen the movie or read the comic so hell if I know how how much room they had there).
-
Eh, I will just reiterate my universal hype for the Joker. The Joker character has a history of bringing out mind boggling solid -anything- when he is used.
300 was a pretty text book copy of the comic, which is fine, it is a very shallow comic though. Same goes for Sin City on both counts.
This generally needs more hype for Hellboy and Road to Perdition.
My cynicism for Watchmen stems from the work done on League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and most of Moore's other works (V included even if I have positive things to say about the movie, the graphic novel is just bigger and better).
-
Nim's Island:
Pretty darn good movie. Actually, if it weren't for the magical animal friends who killed my suspension of disbelief, this would have been a very good movie. It had a nice parallelism to it, that, once the movie got into the meat of itself and dropped the weird direction quirks, worked out very well, I would say. All in all, if you have any young people in your family, watch this movie with them.
-
Hot Fuzz: Good times. This is how you do genre parody, people, and the hacks doing those Insert Genre Name Movies need to be locked in a room with this until they figure it out. Not as sharp as Shaun of the Dead, but definitely a lot of fun. Crowning moment of awesome = the Point Break reference's payoff near the end, though there were a lot of contenders ("Fuck off, grasshopper," the mine in general, flying kick granny in the face).
Also, mad props for excellent use of Dire Straits and Crazy World of Arthur Brown songs.
-
The thing I liked about Hot Fuzz is that it escalates. It doesn't start out as a straight up parody, it drops little bits of crazy in every little bit and it adds up.
-
Nim's Island
Highly enjoyable. Granted, several of the character archetypes seem to fit my taste very well: the badass little girl, the scientist interested in things that nobody else cares about, the writer afraid to go outside. Good stuff.
The deleted scenes were interesting, since they weren't so much deleted scenes as deleted characters. Good choices on the whole (since removing the characters made Nim seem more competent, and Alexandra seem more paranoid).
Have to agree with VSM about the animal friends ruining suspension of disbelief at times, though. Granted, the turtle and the lizard (Freddie) were perfectly fine. Selkie the sea lion was also generally fine--sea lions are pretty playful so most of the scenes work...with the exception of the one "Selkie, I choose you! Selkie, use your stink attack!" But whatever--as far as kid-style fanservice goes I'm sure that scene does the job splendidly. The pelican, Galilleo, however, is unforgiveable. I can forgive the "hey, that's my fish" scene because it's actually pretty funny, but subsequent scenes are even less believable and not especially funny.
-
Sweeny Todd
Hmm...
I certainly enjoyed it, though I get the feeling I would have gotten more enjoyment out of a movie with less blood (not that I really see a way of reducing the gore in the plotline). So...not really my style, though objectively certainly good at everything it did (excellent acting, good music, nice plot twists, excellent camera cuts). File under "Artistic", or something.
-
King of Kong:
Lives up to the hype. The amount of drama and politics surrounding the Donkey Kong high score is actually kinda alarming, but makes for an excellent movie.
-
Damn straight. Everyone here needs to watch King of Kong.
-
Speed Racer: In this movie, a guy driving a racecar makes the car jump 10 feet in the air so he can punch a man wearing a viking helmet directly in the face. Later, John Goodman wrestles a ninja. Remind me why the Wachowski brothers ever tried to do serious plotlines?
Edit: also, the most astonishing thing about the movie may be that Spritle and Chim-Chim, the eight-year-old kid brother and his monkey sidekick, weren't annoying. This is a major achievement in modern cinema.
-
The Illusionist - Did I forget to hype this? Yes I did. This was good and worth your time and money.
-
Hellboy 2: The Golden Shower: Good flick, lots of nice character interaction. Prince Nuada is bad-fucking-ass, despite being a poncy elf.
-
Burn After Reading: It is a Coen brothers movie. It is about extraordinarily stupid people. It is a Coen brothers movie about extraordinarily stupid people. You know what this means: it is awesome. J.K. Simmons is godlike as always. "At least we learned something. 'Don't do it again.' Whatever the fuck it is that we did."
Go see it.
-
The Simpsons Movie: Basically 85 minutes of one-off jokes, but mostly good one-off jokes, some of them very good. Worth paying for. Getting Albert Brooks as the villain was absolutely perfect, of course.
Vantage Point: Better than I was expecting it to be. Took me a while to buy into the concept (a terrorist attack told six times over in interconnected ten-minute shorts, leading into an extended ending-cum-chase-scene), but it was pretty engaging once it got rolling. Some of the plot twists were way too easy to guess (especially the one at the end of Dennis Quaid's chapter), and the writers liked ending the vignettes on cliffhangers a bit too much, but overall all of that's more or less excusable. Good plot, neat ending, mostly good acting - Sigourney Weaver in particular.
-
Knocked up: Very funny and I liked the relationship dynamics in it. Was worth watching.
-
Saw Max Payne. Kind of meh. Cinematography sucked. Too many flashing lights - it's like watching an episode of Japanese Seizure Monsters.
-
Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny
Bleh. Has some good moments, but mixed in with a lot of bathroom humor. The opening credits is two cartoon characters doing rocket-farts, and the maturity level dips that low several times throughout the movie.
School of Rock
I got about half an hour in; I'll probably watch the rest of it eventually.
-
Had you listened to Tenacious D before that? Exactly what the fuck were you expecting if not that?
-
Not completely a movie. But still awesome...
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. Badass incarnate.
Joss Whedon is still godly. Neil Patrick Harris and Nathan Fillion are also sexilicious.
-
Had you listened to Tenacious D before that? Exactly what the fuck were you expecting if not that?
No, I'd only seen clips of the movie; notably the opening clip with the kid Jack Black rebelling against his father. I figured "if they can keep that level of quality up throughout the movie, it will be awesome".
-
Wall*E: Good.
Not much else to say, actually, other than I apparently avoided spoilers very effectively despite watching previews and such.
Mama Mia: I think I may have a new favourite movie ever.
...Okay, so in fairness I just slammed "Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny" for appealing to people with the maturity of 12-year-old boys. You could probably argue that Mama Mia is the same kind of movie but appeals to people with the maturity of 12-year-old girls. Then again, 12-year-old girls have much better taste than 12-year-old boys, so nyah!
LotR, Two Towers, Extended Edition: Eh...watchable.
Stuff with Gollum was badass. Stuff with Eowyn kept my interest, I suppose. The rest felt kinda like filler. Overall this feels true to the spirit of the book >_>. In fairness, Saruman seemed lamer than he did in the books, though a fair few of the characters around Rohan seemed marginally more interesting than I remember; it balances.
-
Two Towers is definitely the weak link of the movies. What possessed them to remove Shelob and the confrontation with Saruman, I'll never understand. In the case of the former, Movie 3 didn't need the help; in the case of the latter... way to go, removing one of the better psychological battles in the books, and generally the climax of the "Book 3" (the Merry/Pippin/Aragorn half of Two Towers). Idiocy.
Anyway!
Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull - Solid enough Indy goodness, I guess. Ford's still got it, and his interaction with the kid was cool. Cate Blanchett's character was fun. There are a few issues that drag the movie down, though (uh, spoilers)
-Those damn ants. That was way over-the-line stupid. I couldn't decide if I was supposed to be scared or laughing, but rest assured I was neither.
-Mac's character. Didn't need to exist past the first 15 minutes. The movie seemed to have no idea whether he was a dirty, greedy traitor, or this guy for whom redemption was in reach, and he generally came off as muddled, right down to his final scene.
-The villain's fate. EXPLODED BY KNOWLEDGE what the fuck, that was worse than Raiders' ending. After all the buildup I was expecting something much more ironic and clever.
-The fact that it takes all of 15 minutes for Indy, his ex, and his son to patch up 20 years of estrangement, and get back together as a happy family. What the fuck. I know this isn't a character work, but c'mon.
But then I pretty much always have an issues like this with Indy movies. It lacks a scene as legendary as the boulder chase and "Indy shoots flashy swordsman" from Raiders, but aside from that it's really no better or worse than the others, delivering a modestly entertaining package, mostly carried by Ford's own charisma. (Note that I have not seen Temple of Doom.)
Get Smart - Was generally more satisfied with this than the above. Pretty funny, with no real glaring flaws that I can think of. There's pretty much all levels of humour here, from the rather clever to the puerile to the very silly. Most of the characters are well-acted enough for what they had to do. The Rock, in particular, was a pleasant surpirse. Above average, but not a movie I'll remember much about a month from now, though.
-
Quark of Catharsis: I had heard a lot of bad things about the film (it was too confusing, nothing got resolved, etc. etc.) and it's all bollocks. Anyone who thinks that either hasn't seen Casino Royale or hasn't seen it recently enough. Good film, I rather enjoyed it, unlike most of the Bond films. It turned Bond into a real character instead of the typical ball of dry witticism and charisma you get in most of the bond films.
-
Knocked up: Very funny and I liked the relationship dynamics in it. Was worth watching.
Riskily I may suggest, that you watch Something's Gotta Give with Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton. A lot more tempered in storyline presentation - less identifiable because of their ages, but something almost paralleled besides a spontaneous pregnancy that keeps the movie interesting. It's on TNT today. Watch it D: I don't think you'll miss anything besides her naked body full frontal.
-
Quark of Catharsis: I had heard a lot of bad things about the film (it was too confusing, nothing got resolved, etc. etc.) and it's all bollocks. Anyone who thinks that either hasn't seen Casino Royale or hasn't seen it recently enough. Good film, I rather enjoyed it, unlike most of the Bond films. It turned Bond into a real character instead of the typical ball of dry witticism and charisma you get in most of the bond films.
Because I'm lazy. I don't think I liked it as much as Casino Royale (we lack an adversary with as much innate sliminess as Le Chifre and Bond doesn't have as much chance to bounce off the ones that are here) but it's good.
-
Twilight: Fairly faithful to the book. The romance between Bella and Edward blossoms too quickly, but there's only so much you can cram into a couple of hours of movie. Casting overall is quite good, and the girl who plays Bella is quite competent in her role. The one casting flaw is Edward, who sucks (HA HA FUNNY VAMPIRE JOKE). He mumbles his lines so much that several important plot points get missed. Basically, if you liked the book, you'll like the movie. If you didn't like the book, the movie isn't going to do anything to change your mind.
Also, Alice is fucking KAWAIIIIIIIII!!!!!!! <3 <3 <3
-
Full Metal Jacket:
Awesome. Awesome awesome awesome.
-
Spent yesterday watching random geeky stuff. Most of it was TV (e.g. the Warren Ellis episode of Justice League, which was awesome) or things I'd seen before (Firefly, watch it you peons). Only new movie on the agenda was Return of the Living Dead, which was hilarious. Especially when a pair of hapless paramedics are crushed under what looks like a full-speed football team composed entirely of zombies.
-
Lots of movies recently.
Wall-E: I can't fault the quality of the film, but I didn't really enjoy it. It was rather depressing actually. The whole mission was so screwed up that returning to Earth seemed rather pointless at that time.
James Bond - Expand Your Vocabulary Edition: Dug it. Also, Bolivians have the best hats.
Casino Royale: Watched this after Quantum of Solace. I think QoS was a bit better, but this had the awesome chase scene with the bomber who flips off buildings like Spider-man.
Bolt: Really good and heartwarming. Especially liked the scenes with Mittens teaching Bolt to be a real dog. Bolivia makes another appearance as well. They must have a good PR agent.
-
Castlevania Series Named Bond Movie - This was good. Bolivians DO have the best hats. It is really quite good. I think I liked Casino Royale more because it had that awesome opening sequence (There hasn't been a movie where someone gets hit on a toilet that is bad. Boondock Saints is like the best movie ever made according to this standard and it is pretty close) and more pistol whipping. Still good action stuff, can see a bit more parallels to the Bourne style choreography, but it is more in line with the first movie of that trilogy so it is sliiiightly less fast action camera changes.
The more I think about it though, especially in this movie it is like someone has taken some basic notes from comic books and is using fast takes as establishing shots kind of like you do with comic panels, but aren't playing to the strengths of the medium or the style as much as they should. Comic books get away with it of course because they can be as slow or fast as appropriate, in a movie they have to be fast. They also are a complete and total waste of screen space having a single shot to establish something very minor for an action sequence, there is so little in the shot that matters.
This kind of makes me have an evil robot chubby for someone to say, make a movie using comic book style aesthetic in the same way that the video game XIII did with video games. Could be interesting. Could be epic fail, but I would be interested in it anyway.
-
Jeez, this topic has been dead all month? Lame.
Wallace & Gromit: A Matter of Loaf and Death - is Wallace & Gromit, therefore massive awesome. The ending bits in particular. (Tell me that wasn't a reference to the 1966 Batman movie. Go on, try.)
-
... wait, there's a new Wallace and Gromit out? Must watch.
-
... wait, there's a new Wallace and Gromit out? Must watch.
-
... wait, there's a new Wallace and Gromit out? WHY AM I NOT WATCHING THIS RIGHT NOW. MY LIFE IS MEANINGLESS.
-
Wallace and Gromit hype
I approve of this.
-
Randomly went to the movies yesterday, but the only thing that had a showtime close to when we arrived was Bedtime Stories. So we watched it. Actually it was pretty good. Much better than the trailers suggested. Good family movie.
Tropic Thunder: Good, but their Booty Sweat is a total ripoff of Booty Juice. Rusty Cundieff did that joke 15 years ago in Fear of a Black Hat.
-
Juno - sounds really pretentious (isn't Juno is some kind of awards ceremony?) Turned out to be about a pregnant teen with a sense of humor and a sarcasm streak. Highly enjoyable.
Kandahar - Pretty much a movie about the state of Afghanistan under the Taliban (released before Sept 11 2001, so of course very few people paid attention to it until then). It's basically 100% setting, which makes it not my kind of thing (I'm not very fond of LotR either, for instance). Did seem to be quite good at capturing local character in a very foreign cultural landscape, though.
-
Juno - sounds really pretentious (isn't Juno is some kind of awards ceremony?) Turned out to be about a pregnant teen with a sense of humor and a sarcasm streak. Highly enjoyable.
Also a city in Alaska. Never heard of an awards ceremony named Juno...
-
Juno - sounds really pretentious (isn't Juno is some kind of awards ceremony?) Turned out to be about a pregnant teen with a sense of humor and a sarcasm streak. Highly enjoyable.
Also a city in Alaska. Never heard of an awards ceremony named Juno...
*Checks*
Oh, apparently they're Canadian only.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_Awards
-
Juno - sounds really pretentious (isn't Juno is some kind of awards ceremony?) Turned out to be about a pregnant teen with a sense of humor and a sarcasm streak. Highly enjoyable.
Fuck that movie. Fuck it.
Anyway, I got pushed in to seeing that Benjamin Button movie. It's based off a 30-page Fitzgerald story, and the director decided to pad the movie to three hours. Did not particularly care for it.
-
Juno - sounds really pretentious (isn't Juno is some kind of awards ceremony?) Turned out to be about a pregnant teen with a sense of humor and a sarcasm streak. Highly enjoyable.
Also a city in Alaska. Never heard of an awards ceremony named Juno...
*Checks*
Oh, apparently they're Canadian only.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_Awards
None of you know anything Canadian...
Dunno what a tuque/toque is, dunno about the Juno's, Probably don't know what back bacon is either :(
The Juno awards are the Canadian equivalent of the Grammies. Only Canadian's are eligible.
Anyways, watched Death Race. I loved it, being a huge fan of the Twisted Metal games. I was waiting for Sweettooth or Axel to come out at some random point to pwn everyone the whole time, but alas, it was not meant to be. Good action, but what I thought was a bit of a predictable ending. But hey, it's an action film, that's normal.
-
MC is Canadian. I'm not surprised he's not completely in tune with music awards, though.
-
The Alaskan capital is Juneau.
Juno is the name of Jupiter's wife in Roman mythology.
-
The Day the Earth Stood Still: Good movie with an environmental message. Now excuse me while I go shoot a polar bear for dinner.
-
Saw a few movies with the girlfriend:
The Libertine: Yeah, no. Johnny Depp is a great actor, but this movie was really...painful. Slow, hard to follow...I understand it's a period film, but...yeesh. Definitely not worth the money to rent - should have spent it on something else.
To summarize: Johnny Depp is an asshole man-slut in the reign of King Charles II who is a famous playwright. He meets a shitty actress, teaches her how to act, and apparently decides he wants to give her syphyllis too (did I mention he has that? yeah) for the rest of their lives! Love at first sight! She leads him on and doesn't care to love him back, but he learns this on his deathbed at the end, after he puts on a very...risque play for King Charles II. Eventually, he does something nice for the king, then dies. It's several plot lines going on at once, and the only good parts are Johnny Depp's acting, the gratuitous sexual references (a dildo CAR), and boobs. So I guess it wasn't a complete waste, but it wasn't worth sitting through just for those.
Mamma Mia: Liked the musical way better, but that's just about a given. Anyway, good adaptation. A few oddities they added in/changed, but overall good.
-
Burn After Reading- Coen Brothers goodness. Starts slow, but gets good. Not great, not among their best works, but still entertaining. Brad Pitt steals the show by acting like a complete dork.
-
Resaw Men in Tights. Amusing even if a lot of the jokes have aged some.
-
Quantum of Solace:
Action sequences were okay, though had some cinematography issues in that it wasn't always clear that "this camera cut is where the character is looking" instead of "this camera cut is something happening concurrently". Not that the action was bad, just not especially standout. Plot was "don't think about it too deeply", though entertaining to joke about. Overall, okay but not great.
-
QoS - Decent but short of incredible. mc's pretty much right about the action scenes. Pretty solid generally, continues the trend of "Bond girls" who have more than paper-thin character worth, Daneil Craig is good, Judi Dench hype, etc. Also helped by the fact that, unlike El Cid, I found Greene much more compelling than Le Chiffre. That said, it still could have been much better; it's a little muddled in the direction it takes at times, suffering from a glut of stuff happening. Casino Royale was better, but this one was certainly worth seeing at least.
-
Yeah regarding camera stuff, see what I said above. It looks like they are trying to use fast takes to establish the surroundings better with fast input focusing on things that are going to play a part later to make them seem less like arse pulls. I think it is a technique that needs refinement but I can certainly see where they are coming from in trying to do it.
-
Charlie Wilson's War
Entertaining. Charlie Wilson was a no-name senator into hookers and blow (more or less), though he does seem to be surprisingly intelligent. Then somehow he becomes the driving force behind the USSR-Afghanistan conflict. Well-acted, well-scripted, likeable flawed characters.
-
Valkyrie: Saw this yesterday. It was pretty good. Crew of awesome British actors makes up for the presence of Tom Cruise.
-
Charlie Wilson's War
Entertaining. Charlie Wilson was a no-name senator into hookers and blow (more or less), though he does seem to be surprisingly intelligent. Then somehow he becomes the driving force behind the USSR-Afghanistan conflict. Well-acted, well-scripted, likeable flawed characters.
I remember seeing the previews for that movie, but never actually got around to watching it. I'll have to go pick it up sometime, I heard good things.
Watched The Princess Bride and Muppet Treasure Island recently again. I had forgotten how great both those movies are, even now as a near 20 year old university student.
-
12 Monkeys- Neat little movie. Kinda a shoot the shaggy dog, but the crazy performances had this weird blend of funny and slightly disturbing that worked.
-
Resident Evil Degeneration:
With some small spoilers, it's a movie of zombies with none of the other bullshit in the live action RE movies. Clarie Redfield, some fat senator, an indian girl, and a couple of swat guys pretty much do nothing the entire movie and a couple of them get eaten. Just when hope is all lost, Leon S. Kennedy shows up and fucks up everyone in the movie. Seriously, he kills like 90% of the zombies with just the handgun and saves the rest of the pussy supporting cast. He's even too badass enough to deny sex. There's a couple of hints who the cluprit is, then it's revieled to be the work of Crispen Freeman. I expected Welker to get his glorified 2 minute cameo just to kick Leon in the balls, sadly it's not the case.
-
Dark City: Hadn't watched this in like a decade, decided to give the director's cut a spin since apparently they have one now. First thing form the studio cut to get thrown out? The opening narration that makes it unnecessary for you to pay attention to the movie in order to know what's really going on (just like Bladerunner!) Yeah, Hollywood just doesn't get Alex Proyas. Anyway, fun little movie, if hard to take seriously at times due to the whole "Billy Corgan runs the world" thing (actually, this came out in 1998...Corgan seems to have lifted the Strangers' look wholesale for Machina-era Smashing Pumpkins aesthetics). Awesome design, at the least.
The Grand Illusion: Requisite random old movie that Cid watched this month. WWI, a couple French aviators are shot down and captured by the German army. First thing that happens to them in captivity? The German officer in charge (Erich von Froheim, score) invites them to lunch. That pretty much sets the tone of the movie. Dialogue between the French and German officers hinges a lot on the officer corps on both sides coming from the same class, being from a fading landed gentry and supposedly having more in common which each other than the enlisted soldiers from their own countries, etc. Good stuff, snapshot of two guys dealing with the end of an era, lots of solid humanistic material people on both sides are human and so on. Oh, and this came out in 1937. Naturally, the Nazis banned it posthaste once WWII broke out. The French, for several years after WWII, cut out large portions of the movie to make it seem less sympathetic towards the Germans. Figures.
-
Watched the whole Mummy trilogy over the weekend. Good pulpy fun.
-
Paul Blart: Mall Cop
Feel good movie of the decade~
-
Reading random Wikipedia articles at work today I ran into a few bad films that I wanted to share. One of these I am going to perform a test and see just how bad (and awesome) it is, the other is just fucked up like Zenny.
To be honest this is probably NSFW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/48_Hours_of_Hallucinatory_Sex)
This is mind boggling in ways I cannot even describe, so I will let the Wiki do the talking
The plot of the film centers around female sexologist who wishes to finance and produce a pornographic film. As the film progresses it is revealed that the doctor may have an ulterior goal in coaxing her actors into their drugged and sexually frenzied states. Ultimately the doctor persuades a man to dress in a ox costume and penetrate her vaginally while she is naked inside a wooden cow.
This is the Zenny movie.
The next one on the other hand sounds to bad it is the best horror movie ever made.
When private detective Jack Chandler (Richardson) tries to track down a teenage runaway (Linnea Quigley), he runs into a cult of Egyptian chainsaw-worshipping prostitutes led by "The Master" (Gunnar Hansen - Leatherface from the original The Texas Chain Saw Massacre).
That is the entire plot synopsis. I am going to watch this and find out exactly on the quality.
The movie is called Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_Chainsaw_Hookers). The UK version wasn't allowed to have the word Chainsaw in it, so it was released as Hollywood Hookers. This is pure genius.
Edit 2 - Oh yeah forgot to mention the reason for posting this preemptively, I would really like to be able to share this horrible experience with as many people as possible, so please look it up and try and enjoy it in all its glory sometime soon. And you know the first movie as well if you want to really go looking for that.
Edit - Oh yeah while I am at it I am going to watch Silent Night Deadly Night 2 which apparently has enough flashbacks in it to be bad enough to have seen the first one. This movie is better known on the internet for the infamous GARBAGE DAY! sequence.
-
I watched some movies this month.
Living in Oblivion
A pretty darn funny film I had to see for my class. This was about what goes into making a small independent film, and it's generally quite funny from start to finish. There were some fun editing tricks that I enjoyed, and in all, it was definitely worth watching. I don't really have anything in-depth to say about it, though.
Risky Business
I consider this movie to be a classic from its time period, and watching it again merely reminded me of why. Before Cruise was insane, he was really, really cool. I wonder if we were less uptight about language, if the "Sometimes you just gotta say 'What the fuck?'" sequences would have caught on more than the Old Time Rock-n-Roll sequence. Because, in my opinion, they were way more memorable.
In the Heat of the Night
Very well done movie that had some fantastic cinematography and mise-en-scene, and also some terrific performances by some of the actors, especially Rod Steiger, who won an Academy Award, in a rare display of good judgment from the Academy. Run-on-sentences aside, there were some aspects of the movie that I really didn't care for, namely the mystery itself, which, thankfully, was secondary in this movie. The mystery felt pretty weak, and only the "Rar. This guy is evil" presentation served as any real hint that he was the killer. It felt more-or-less weakly tied together, but the movie was still quite good.
Sin City
Very strong visuals here, and stories of badass dudes being badasses. The middle sequence with Micky Rourke was absolutely fantastic, and I'd say his character easily qualifies for "greatest badass of all time" consideration, because, really. My god. It was a little graphically violent for my tastes, but it made up for that some by having a suitable level of nudity for my tastes. Alexis Bledel has the bluest eyes in the world.
Ghostbusters
I remember watching this movie at least once when I was very, very young, and I should have kept my memories of the movie alone, because it really feels dated and choppy in this day and age. The movie's plot wasn't well put together at all, because the real conflicts or whatever of the movie don't show up on the scene very early at all. It feels like the POINT of the movie jumps around from place to place, and the ending is them driving off into the sunset after defeating the evil except.... ....when exactly did the evil whatsisface become the main plot of the movie? Performances felt really dated in an over-the-top 1980s sort of way, where I think everything in the decade was done to excess.
Still, the movie retains some of its good points, and the look of pure, unfiltered GLEE on the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man's face as he rampages through the city gets me every time, and is well worth watching the movie for by itself. I honestly would not be surprised if that joke was much of the whole point of the movie, because I consider it that good of a visual. Nevertheless, this is solidly in the bottom half of the 10 movies I've seen this year.
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
Thankfully, this movie is on the list, so Ghostbusters can feel good about itself. I watched this because a friend told me
A character in this movie has a fetish you probably have
Which was an interesting enough review to let me give it a look, but this was another movie that really felt pointless. I get the drama, but some of the dialogue just made me cringe, particularly the scene with Peter Gallagher and the potted plant. Between that trainwreck and the "FUCK ME YOUR MAJESTY" from American Beauty, I am convinced that Peter Gallagher is capable of sucking the sexuality out of damn near any scene or movie he is in, no matter how erotic it's intended to be. Also, the casting was stretching it by trying to make me believe that Laura San Giacomo could be sisters with Andie Macdowell. What the fuck, casting director?
The Bucket List
This was a pretty decent comedy/feel good movie, in that it made me laugh and it made me feel good, so hey, it set out to do what it wanted. It was absolutely glurgy from start to finish, but I didn't mind, largely because I believe that the actors played roles that both firmly suited them, and that contrasted with one another well. A relatively simple plot but it was executed quite well, I felt. If you like nice, fluffy films, I'd have to recommend this one, but if you find sweetness or whatever to be too much for you, I'd stay away. If there were chicks in this movie, I'd call it a chick-flick.
Hero
Make no mistake: Until I say otherwise, Hero is my pick for the greatest film ever made.
This was a positively breathtaking movie experience, and I'm very glad that I got to watch it in class where we have the auditorium as opposed to watching it on my PC, which would probably suck some of the life out of it. We watched this for the "Cinematography" section of the course, and there's no small wonder why. The visuals in this movie are unrivaled. The subtle uses of symbolism (in colors, namely) are one of the few cases I've seen of symbolism which I actually felt worked and weren't contrived pieces of garbage. Shot-for-shot, the film is stunning from start to finish, and the story of Nameless and the "King of Qin" (Qin Shi Huang except not really) is itself worthy of retelling.
The action and wire-fu can be ridiculous at times, but partway through the movie, I decided to treat it like I would a ballet, and it really helped hold the movie together after that point.
Watch this goddamn movie.
The Terminal
But not this one. Of the 10 movies I've seen this month, this is easily the worst one. The Terminal is... I don't even know what it is. It's supposedly a comedy, except the best joke of the entire film is used up within the first 5 minutes or so, and the film is an ungodly 128 minutes. This is the length I would expect for an epic superhero movie or a western or... something more than a guy stuck in a goddamn airplane terminal.
Characters in the movie seemed to switch alignment seemingly at will, as the main "villain" of the story seemed to go from very believably sympathetic to over-the-top cartoonish evil at the drop of a hat. If the movie had outright TRIED to be a drama, it might have been better, but it clearly didn't try that hard at it. I liken this movie to my experience in college: It didn't know what it wanted to be, and it lingered around way longer than it should have. This was the first movie I've intentionally put on in YEARS, where I felt like I might turn it off instead of finishing.
I don't give a fuck if it's Spielberg. I don't give a fuck if it's Tom Hanks. I don't care HOW ridiculously hot Catherine Zeta-Jones and Zoe Saldana are. This was just a really bad, not very funny movie. Avoid at all costs.
The Maltese Falcon
A very good movie that, aside mostly from some tropes of its time, still stands up. Same Spade/Humphrey Bogart is pretty much the man I always want to be, even though I never really saw this movie today. Bogart is fantastic, and his vicious little smile is something I'm going to have to work on, because damn, that needs to go into my arsenal. THIS mystery actually made a lick of sense, which is good, because unlike "In the Heat of the Night", the mystery is paramount to the enjoyment of this film.
I find it odd that this is the selection on classical editing, because really, there were parts where the editing of this movie really took me out of the action. Sometimes the characters or an object would VERY visibly jump from shot to shot, so that was a little distracting. There's also a "jump take" or two in the film, and those are REALLY distracting.
Nevertheless, this was a very enjoyable movie that didn't bore me the way some earlier Hollywood cinema can. I can see why Bogart is a legend. Also, I couldn't help but want to build a time machine so I could get Sydney Greenstreet to the future where he can play the Kingpin of Crime, because OH MY GOD HE IS THE KINGPIN. But no. We get fucking Michael Clark Duncan.
-
Man, Ghostbusters plot matters? It has one of the best comedic scripts around and an awesome cast. It sounds like you made the mistake of taking it seriously, VSM. Just...roll with the wackiness? (Yes, I'm aware that this is pretty much what people said to me when I bashed The Fifth Element).
At least you had the decency to like Hero and The Maltese Falcon. Hero is just about the prettiest movie I've ever seen.
Also, I couldn't help but want to build a time machine so I could get Sydney Greenstreet to the future where he can play the Kingpin of Crime, because OH MY GOD HE IS THE KINGPIN. But no. We get fucking Michael Clark Duncan.
QFT.
And...Sex, Lies & Videotape is a Steven Soderbergh, no? I haven't seen this particular movie, but Soderbergh usually produces contrived rubbish, in my experience. Ocean's Eleven was watchable, but eh, that's the best thing I can say about him.
-
Roll with the wackiness
Tell me you are going to watch Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers and discuss it with me El Cid. I need SOMEONE to roll with the wackiness.
-
Have you ever seen Rudy Ray Moore's The Avenging Disco Godfather, Gref?
-
My personal favorite is Hard Rock Zombies. An 80's hair-metal band fighting zombie Hitler.
-
I was telling my brother about Hard Rock Zombies and that I needed to find out what it was called and get it. These do not matter just yet though. Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers is the movie of the week.
-
Roll with the wackiness
Tell me you are going to watch Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers and discuss it with me El Cid. I need SOMEONE to roll with the wackiness.
Netflix doesn't have it, and this is where my movies come from. Sorry man, I tried.
-
If you stop by chat I may be able to organise something.
-
Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers - Worse than it sounded even (deliberately). This was just plain brilliant. It knows exactly how bad it is and hams it up to the right degree without going over the top (like sayBrain Dead does). It is kind of like a budget version of Evil Dead 2 (which is already budget). Less Bruce Campbell and more a guy sounding like a guy trying to be Bruce Campbell as a P.I. This is just all kinds of win with some truely brilliant funny lines in it. Watch this sometime.
Edit - I am talking "Dance of the Virgin Dual Chainsaws" at the climax of the film here. G-String, some body paint and 2 chainsaws. With dancing. Following it up with EPIC CHAINSAW DUEL.
-
Okay, I need to see that.
Watched a couple of random fluff movies over the weekend.
Kung Fu Panda: Fun, but would have been better if it could decide whether it wanted to be a full-out parody or an homage to martial arts movies. Part and parcel of that is a criminal underuse of the stunt casting (Jackie Chan got what, like ten lines?).
Mr. & Mrs. Smith: Exactly what it was supposed to be.
-
Grefter: actually got the movie, but it doesn't run in either Winamp and Windows Media Player. Well, they play it, but only the audio. Not sure if I have really old versions of them or what. (WMP says something like "Codex not fou8nd," I think).
-
Can you try checking it in Gspot or something similar to see what the video codec is?
-
I know naught of this "Gspot" of which you speak.
-
It's a program that opens a video or audio file and tells you what encoding it uses. should be easily findable with Google.
-
SIG!
Whoopwhoopwhoop.
-
... ::Snickers::
-
SIG!
Whoopwhoopwhoop.
Man, you say that like I wasn't aware of the double entendre when I typed it.
-
You say that like I wasn't aware that it'd be humiliating for you anyhow. You glutton for punishment, you.
-
I know naught of this "Gspot" of which you speak.
Yeah, your girlfriend was complaining about that also.
-
El Cid I was way to late this morning to post it when I would have liked to. Meant to post it from work during a break but forgot.
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ This will play it without dicking around with codecs.
-
Kissing Jessica Stein- Sat down and watched most of this. Very entertaining film if on the light side, which is fine.
-
Coraline: Neither by Tim Burton nor a cartoon, but rather a stop-motion animation by Henry Selick. And it was fantastic.
I am an unabashed Neil Gaiman fangirl, so hearing that I loved a movie adapted from one of his books is not so shocking. But I really think this movie earned it, and RT's remarkably high rating bolsters my confidence in this impression.
It is very much a Neil Gaiman children's story, by which I mean that it is a thoughtful-though-dark look into the realities that kids face, all shown through a fantasy lens. If you like Neil Gaiman (for example, if you liked The Graveyard Book) then you will probably enjoy this film.
I read an interview that said Mr. Selick had originally obtained the film rights by promising it would be live-action and later negotiated it into what it is today. I am very glad he did: stop-motion animation was exactly the right choice for this story. A cartoon would likely have been too whimsical, live action would have been too gritty, and CG would have taken away the charm of the setting (it is, after all, a story about the Other world -- which is made of puppets). They had really innovative solutions to a lot of technical questions (the kind that make you scratch your head and go "How did they DO that?") and I really loved the way they put together the climax. The animation was beautiful, the colors bright when needed and wonderfully subdued-but-not-washed-out when needed, the characters dynamic, the backgrounds fantastically rendered. It was pretty darn awesome from even just a technical stand-point.
The story, of course, was up to the animation. The characters were believable and the main was very relate-able to anyone who remembers childhood; the way the story and the characters unfolded and progressed was really impressive for such a short movie (101 minutes) with such simple goals. I will say again that it was very Neil Gaiman, though Henry Selick is the one who wrote the adaptation script.
Criticisms? Well... it is a little difficult to get emotionally involved. I don't find this much of a flaw because it is a kid's movie (though it might cause a few nightmares for doing, as Andrew says, the exact opposite of what Nightmare Before Christmas did: it made cute/innocent things scary where TNBC made scary things cute). I really think that was half the point anyway.
In any case, I highly recommend that everyone go and see it. If you happen to find a theatre showing it in 3D that hasn't sold out, I would suggest that one. It won't be in 3D for very long because apparently the Jonas Brothers need it next.
-
Coraline: Neither by Tim Burton nor a cartoon, but rather a stop-motion animation by Henry Selick. And it was fantastic.
I am an unabashed Neil Gaiman fangirl, so hearing that I loved a movie adapted from one of his books is not so shocking. But I really think this movie earned it, and RT's remarkably high rating bolsters my confidence in this impression.
It is very much a Neil Gaiman children's story, by which I mean that it is a thoughtful-though-dark look into the realities that kids face, all shown through a fantasy lens. If you like Neil Gaiman (for example, if you liked The Graveyard Book) then you will probably enjoy this film.
I read an interview that said Mr. Selick had originally obtained the film rights by promising it would be live-action and later negotiated it into what it is today. I am very glad he did: stop-motion animation was exactly the right choice for this story. A cartoon would likely have been too whimsical, live action would have been too gritty, and CG would have taken away the charm of the setting (it is, after all, a story about the Other world -- which is made of puppets). They had really innovative solutions to a lot of technical questions (the kind that make you scratch your head and go "How did they DO that?") and I really loved the way they put together the climax. The animation was beautiful, the colors bright when needed and wonderfully subdued-but-not-washed-out when needed, the characters dynamic, the backgrounds fantastically rendered. It was pretty darn awesome from even just a technical stand-point.
The story, of course, was up to the animation. The characters were believable and the main was very relate-able to anyone who remembers childhood; the way the story and the characters unfolded and progressed was really impressive for such a short movie (101 minutes) with such simple goals. I will say again that it was very Neil Gaiman, though Henry Selick is the one who wrote the adaptation script.
Criticisms? Well... it is a little difficult to get emotionally involved. I don't find this much of a flaw because it is a kid's movie (though it might cause a few nightmares for doing, as Andrew says, the exact opposite of what Nightmare Before Christmas did: it made cute/innocent things scary where TNBC made scary things cute). I really think that was half the point anyway.
In any case, I highly recommend that everyone go and see it. If you happen to find a theatre showing it in 3D that hasn't sold out, I would suggest that one. It won't be in 3D for very long because apparently the Jonas Brothers need it next.
-
Gran Torino: Just saw this. Was really damn good.
Slumdog Millionaire: Saw this last week. Was also really damn good!
EDIT: Yeah, I'm too lazy to elaborate right now, maybe later.
-
Push: Not too shabby. Duel between telekinetics=fun. I'm a bit tired of precognition being used as a plot device. Pops up far too often (see also, new Nicolas Cage movie "Know1ing".)
-
Alright, right now where I work I get to catch bits and pieces of the movies we play to demo the TVs we have on sale. Which means I generally get the whole thing over osmosis. Which means I guess I have some movie thoughts.
Cars: Generally a pretty good flick. Took me the longest time to actually figure out a few key points (as in, being not terribly busy when said scene was going on), but it works once everything pieces together. Fortunatly, the actual end to the movie was one of the last things I caught, so I could appreciate it properly.
Wall-E: Eh. The opening is nothing special, and I didn't really care for the antics of the robots on the ship either. Captain was a bit niftier than I was expecting, and the general commentary about the movie that I saw back when it was popular completely misrepresented the thing. Really nifty ending credits song, but otherwise a fairly forgettable piece.
Mulan: Yeah, a lot of Disney stuff here since we are a family store and all. So, this one wasn't actually that bad. Nothing special, but a pretty decent flick. Liked the fact that the comic relief got to have some dignity, and enjoyed the fact that the female lead got to do some rescueing. Not to mention, I liked the duality in the usage of the Make A Man Out of You song.
Hancock: Only played this once because it turned out to be a little racier than I expected, which means no good when you can expect kids to be around (and a lot of parents see our movie showing as a good way to get the kids out of their hair while they shop). That said, this movie impressed me. In the sense that I'm still boggling at how a movie can centre around a fowl-mouthed binge drinking doesn't give a damn superman, and be a chick flick. I mean, how the hell do you take a concept that awesome, and the driving focus of the narrative is super powered adultery?
Madagascar 2: The A-plot is, well... not boring, but not that interesting either. I mean, the zoo animals the movie focuses on have their moments, but mostly it's stuff you've seen before in a hundred other stories. On the other hand, the penguin sequences are grade A comedy, and the half of the movie they take up is about as much time as they can handle without falling apart from lack of interest due to being a B-Plot. I still love that Airplane sequence, and I suspect no number of repeated viewings will diminish that love.
-
More crazy weird movie watching time! Want to get others to try and watch Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_Vampire_Hunter) around the same time this weekish.
Ripped straight from the Wiki.
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter is a 2001 cult film from Odessa Filmworks which deals with Jesus' modern-day struggle to protect thelesbians of Ottawa, Canada, from vampires with the help of Mexican wrestler El Santo (Based on El Santo, Enmascarado de Plata) (played by actor Jeff Moffet, who starred as El Santo in two other Odessa Filmworks productions).
You know you want to watch that. So go find it by any means possible!
Edit - Oh yeah and Hard Rock Zombies is on the agenda for the Sopkos or something.
-
Ahem, official announcement.
Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li enters theaters tomorrow. Make sure to see it!
-
Only Raul Julia can play Bison, as much as I do love McDonough as an actor.
-
... Chris Klein is in it? I don't... I don't know what anyone involved in that film thinks they are doing. Not for even a second.
I kind of can't wait to see it.
-
I saw Emperor's Groove on TV. I have to say, that was one really damned good movie. Very entertaining.
Also saw the movie Freaked! and . . . I could see the angle the movie was coming from but I really just kinda got annoyed and instantly bored. Over cheesy on my grits this morning? No thanks.
-
I saw Emperor's Groove on TV. I have to say, that was one really damned good movie. Very entertaining.
Yeah, that movie, more than any other, I think, suffered from abysmally misleading previews that made it out to be a straightforward feel-good animated adventure. Seen plenty of previews that make movies out to be better than they are, but this is the only time I've seen ones that make it look so much worse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=torLy2yvGZU
-
Coraline: Saw this with my sister when I was in Chicago. Pretty much seconding LD comments because I am lazy. Just the right amount of creepy for a kids' movie.
Watched a bunch of movies at my brother's place. Had actually seen them all before but it had been a long time for some.
Burn After Reading: Actually saw this just last year when it was out in theaters, but I am required to hype it again because I still haven't seen anyone else here mention watching it and this is wrong. Coen brothers + comedy. C'mon people, what's the freaking holdup?
Transformers (animated): I blame Scar for making me want to watch this again. It is at least hilariously bad (as opposed to the live-action movie, which is just bad) in a way that could only be achieved in the 1980's. Usage of Dare to Be Stupid was just inspired. I really don't have words for that scene.
The Thing: Had only seen this once, and missed the beginning in that viewing, so I was due to revisit it despite it being creepy as fuck. Has aged better than most horror movies due in large part to the entire cast going mad from the stress of suspecting each other in addition to there being one profoundly nasty monster around. So yeah, it is basically the most gruesome game of Mafia ever. Special effects have aged reasonably well, I think? Creature and transformations are still pretty grotesque, but a lot of what makes the movie nightmarish is just the characters knowing that this abomination is in their midst masquerading as one of them. Good stuff, pretty clearly still the best horror movie I've ever seen. Assholes flooding the genre with generic slasher movies for the past few decades need to be strapped down Clockwork Orange-style and made to watch this until they get the fucking point.
-
Usage of Dare to Be Stupid was just inspired. I really don't have words for that scene.
I watched that movie again last year. I didn't even realize that song was in it when I was a kid. I laughed out of control when I saw the Autobots kick ass to that tune.
-
The Thing: Had only seen this once, and missed the beginning in that viewing, so I was due to revisit it despite it being creepy as fuck. Has aged better than most horror movies due in large part to the entire cast going mad from the stress of suspecting each other in addition to there being one profoundly nasty monster around. So yeah, it is basically the most gruesome game of Mafia ever. Special effects have aged reasonably well, I think? Creature and transformations are still pretty grotesque, but a lot of what makes the movie nightmarish is just the characters knowing that this abomination is in their midst masquerading as one of them. Good stuff, pretty clearly still the best horror movie I've ever seen. Assholes flooding the genre with generic slasher movies for the past few decades need to be strapped down Clockwork Orange-style and made to watch this until they get the fucking point.
I <3 El Cid.
-
Burn After Reading: Actually saw this just last year when it was out in theaters, but I am required to hype it again because I still haven't seen anyone else here mention watching it and this is wrong. Coen brothers + comedy. C'mon people, what's the freaking holdup?
It was good, not great. Points for making Brad Pitt look like an absolute dork (he totally stole the movie) and George Clooney look like a 50-something loser. Good performances all around from the cast. It was kind of muddled overall though. I know what they were getting at, it just wasn't as great as their previous movies.
-
Usage of Dare to Be Stupid was just inspired. I really don't have words for that scene.
I watched that movie again last year. I didn't even realize that song was in it when I was a kid. I laughed out of control when I saw the Autobots kick ass to that tune.
When you've got a gang of robots dancing in a circle to that tune--led by Eric Idle and Judd Nelson--that's really the only appropriate response.
-
Watchmen: I'd say it's about 80% faithful to the original. There's longer fight scenes, which aren't bad. And one longer sex scene, which is great because EDIT - I got the actress wrong. Whoever she is, she's frickin hot. The ending is quite a bit different, but it conveys the same overall meaning.
Enjoyed it, as did the wife. I don't think it'll do that well at the box office though. Too much sex and violence for older people, too much history for younger people. Still, it's a good adaptation of a culturally significant work.
-
Watchmen: I liked it. It was extremely faithful and still worked as a movie, although it's hard to gauge exactly how well it was done when you knew everything that was going to happen ahead of time. Accuracy is a double-edged sword, I guess. I really liked the performances, and the new ending honestly worked better than the original. It was certainly set up better.
-
I am going to watch it this morning, so can't comment for certain yet, but considering Watchmen is all about disillusionment and disenfranchisement then the ending being incredibly short bitter and underwhelming is like perfect.
-
The Reaping- Damn fine horror movie. It's what the genre should be, light on the blood and heavy on the plot and suspense. While I pretty much had most of the plot figured out by halfway through, it was still good. It was carried by a strong performance by Hilary Swank and a simple enough theme about faith.
-
Repo! The Genetic Opera: Pretty good, as attempts to re-create Rocky Horror go. Obviously forced in a lot of places, but fun, and you have to love Tony Head as a singing evil mass-murdering doom surgeon.
-
Watchmen - OH yeah watched it yesterday. Shale is pretty on the money, if you have read the comic it is a very faithful remake of it with some twists at the end to change it a bit. They are like the changes with V really, they are changes to make it fit the medium and they work. Not sure if it takes anything away from the story but meh. It makes Ozymandias a bit... different? I dunno, was still pretty decent.
Down sides time!
They do ultra compress some of the back story in the intro credits, while they cover the back story again a bit during the movie I strongly question how well some of the plot is to follow if you don't already know the story behind the original Minutemen.
THe flow of the plot is really good, but doesn't convey the same feeling of time passing a much as the book. They mention the dates often so there is time skips, but unless you are paying attention to it the whole thing kind of can seem to have happened over the period of 2 days. Which leads to complaints about Jupiter the Younger being a slut that you see in the raving lunatic's review that was linked elsewhere. You know instead of the reality that she had been living with Nite Owl for like 2 months before they got up with the down stroke.
The violence complaints though? Meh. It has some blood, but it isn't anything we haven't seen since the era of Mad Max. You shouldn't take your kids to see it, but that is why it is rated what it is. The themes in the story are not for kids anyway.
Edit - Oh yeah and Manhattan's penis is even less sexualised than the David, so yeah, they can fuck off about that one. IT IS JUST A PENIS GET OVER IT. COCKSCOCKSCOCKS
-
28 days later- Still enjoyable, though a lot of that is the pretty countryside they film it in.
RE 1- Not so good. Too much really bad plot, not enough action.
RE 2- Better, though Jill was almost entirely a nonfactor. Overdosing on zombie movies here, Dawn of the Dead's next.
I said it before, but Ciddy you must watch Lesbian vampire hunters.
-
You are in the UK, you need to watch Shaun of the Dead if you are watching zombie flicks. Also Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter.
-
You are in the UK, you need to watch Shaun of the Dead if you are watching zombie flicks. Also Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter.
Quoted for Truth
-
Watchmen- Awesome movie. For all that the backstory is compressed into the opening credits, it was still very stylish and well done. The musical selections for the movie were great. Very appropriate whenever they used period music. It amused me that half the cast of Eureka seemed to be in the movie (Mothman, Moloch, the New Frontiersman guy at the end). I expected Nathan Stark to come out as Ozymandias and Jack Carter to be in there somewhere.
-
You are in the UK, you need to watch Shaun of the Dead if you are watching zombie flicks. Also Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter.
Quoted for Truth
28 Days Later is set in the UK, no?
-
Watchmen (from the perspective of someone who hasn't read the original)
Good.
I...kinda hesitate to call it great, though. Slow-moving in parts. Less of...everything than I thought it would be (except gore--plenty of that).
It had been billed as "this is how superheroes would work in the real world" which...ehh. Rorschach was believable in as much as he's a sociopath, but that's nothing I haven't seen before (The Punisher). Silk Specter and Nite Owl were believable to a degree, in that they get an adrenalin rush and a sexual high out of superheroing, and actually try to be heroic. At the same time, when they're in a coffee shop and laughing loudly about Rorschach dropping someone down an elevator shaft, I really have to think "aren't you blowing your cover?" Speaking of blowing cover...what's up with the Silk Specter's costume--is it meant to be ironic? The Comedian is...well I can't accuse the character of being unbelievable, since I know irresponsible rapists exist and stuff, but the fact that he doesn't get kicked out of the good guy leagues is puzzling. He seems to exist more as a foil/plot device for other characters, like when he confronts Dr Manhattan saying "you could have turned the bullets into air, the gun into cheese, the glass into snow...". Dr Manhattan has had his brain modified (perception is a huge part of the brain's operation) so it's hard to really evaluate him as a human thinker--Data from Startrek is what he reminded me of. Ozymandias is...well on the one hand, he's right, that's one way to achieve world peace. On the other hand, I can't see someone actually going through with his eventual plan; it's so...convoluted.
-
The Comedian WAS kicked out of the Minutemen for that. You're right though in that they don't really bring that up in the movie.
-
Re: Silk Spectre/Nite Owl. Haven't seen the movie, but I don't think Silk Spectre's identity was any kind of secret in the book. Nite Owl, though? Yeah, point. Having that conversation in a coffee shop does seem a little "What." The scene took place in a rooftop in the book and there was no one else around.
-
Silk Spectre started her superheroing to promote her modeling career. A secret identity wasn't exactly in the cards.
-
That shit is exactly what I mean, the movie is great if you know the plot, if you don't it isn't quite as well put together.
Nite Owl's secret identity is about as secret as anyone really cares it to be anyway. With how much they all just kind of hang out together in their regular personas with people who have no secret disguises, Rorschach and the Comedian are really the only ones who could hide or frankly had anything to hide.
-
You are in the UK, you need to watch Shaun of the Dead if you are watching zombie flicks. Also Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter.
Didn't get around to it, seen it a couple of times already. SofD's a lot of fun.
Dawn>RE3>28 days>RE2>RE1 for the ones I saw. REs start slow and constantly get better as they start to ignore plot and focus on action. The undead are never really the threat in RE, it's umbrella. (Hell even scrubs completely own the zombies in RE, see LJ in RE2). Dawn's cool because the zombies -are- scary. The humans make mistakes which get them wiped out, but by and large it's about the zombies. Works. 28 days has some pacing problems and some weird story stuff in the mix but is solid enough.
-
Watchmen: Wasn't good, wasn't bad. I didn't really find myself bored during the movie, but I also didn't really find myself wowed.
Role Models: Good for some cheap laughs, nothing special. Above average for that type of movie though.
-
Needs more other Romero there Super. NoLD is of course a classic, but DoLD and LoLD are both alright.
Edit - And by alright I mean way better than that Resident Evil shit.
-
Don't care for the romero classics much, bu tI should see all of them them as an adult before deciding. Did not like land of the dead at all.
-
Land is pretty much for people that like Romero. It was probably a bad idea to release it so close after DoLD remake which kind of deRomeroed it a little (Still worth watching, but is a bit different).
-
Yeah, it's not my type of zombie movie. RE was fun because it was so awful, Dawn was just great for the style of zombies and the world setting.
-
RE isn't even good as a bad movie. There are infinitely better bad movies. Fuck, Peter Jackson shit is better than RE for bad zombie flick. Much better and much cheaper splatter at that.
-
Needs more other Romero there Super. NoLD is of course a classic, but DoLD and LoLD are both alright.
Edit - And by alright I mean way better than that Resident Evil shit.
Living Dead were the Russo spinoffs. He kept the naming rights to the Living Dead line. They're fairly sillyish. Sort of like a midway point between Night of the Living Dead and the comedy style of Evil Dead. Plus Russo Living Dead movies always = superfast zombies that won't die unless nuked or otherwise reduced to dust.
I always like the Romero movies more. More atmospheric. Slow zombies instill a fear of impending doom and inevitability despite their crappy stats.
-
Exactly, fast Zombies may as well not be Zombies. You can replace them with any generic monster. It is like having Medusa that breathes fire instead of turning you to stone.
-
Dragonball Evolution--someone linked me to the full movie on Youtube, and it's not like I respect this kind of movie enough to actually want to give money to the creators, so I went ahead and watched.
You know, I hadn't really thought about it, but Dragonball plot can't be compressed into two hours. This is unintuitive, since some of the subplots don't span that many episodes, and it doesn't feel like anything happens in Dragon Ball, but when you try and explain backstory and motivation for four or five characters, it's just brutal for time.
The movie's not really true to the cannon either, but pfft: cannon Dragonball plot. Who cares? Although Master Roshi not being old was just...what? I can understand not getting an actor that looks like him, because no human being looks like ugly Dragonball art, but can't you dye his beard white, make him wear a bald cap, and give him some red-rim sunglasses?
Overall, pretty bad. Significantly worse than, say, the Dead or Alive movie, and I'm fairly biased against all things DoA.
-
Watchmen: Wasn't good, wasn't bad. I didn't really find myself bored during the movie, but I also didn't really find myself wowed.
Just got back from seeing it, quoting for laziness. Muddled but watchable (not that I am likely to watch it again because hey, I have the book, but that is part of a larger "Why the hell does everything have to be a movie" rant). Main complaint is that Ozy came across as being a flake. I mean, he kind of was in the book, but he was more obviously competent there. Oh well. Movie wasn't an abomination, which is about the best I'd realistically expected.
-
Watchmen: Yeah, OK. I enjoyed it, I guess. Honestly I thought it was too faithful to the book in some respects (Up until Rorschach gets thrown in Jail.... Well, complex psychological character drama narrated like that works as a book. As a movie? It was just boring.), and if I hadn't read the book I don't think I would have enjoyed it as much as I did. The violence was a bit much, mostly because it was changed from the book to be more... graphic? The whole exchange between Rorschach and Big Figure was just ridiculous and hard to take seriously in the movie, as a more obvious example.
The changes they made usually benefitted the movie and were understandable for the most part. But, some of them were just... uh. Campy.
I did have the interesting experience of seeing it with someone who had never read the book and someone who read the book a few years ago. I suspect their reactions were typical: The person who hadn't read the book before hated the movie and got confused by some things (that, in fairness, weren't explained in the movie, but were in the book), and the person who had read it a few years ago loved it. I imagine I would have liked it more if I hadn't read it just, like, Monday.
-
I like it when I am right and people confirm that I am right for weeks afterwards. Thanks Zenny, good to read that from different perspective.
-
Oh, yeah, two more things:
Taking out any overt mention of The New Frontiersman and still ending the movie there is stupid.
Also, it is hard to have a story where disillusionment and the death of romanticism (Rorschach, in a nutshell) when everything comes off as so damn melodramatic (the ending, Manhattan/Laurie scene on Mars). But that's getting into metaphorics and artfag shit a bit and if I'm going to rant about that I may as well write my essays.
-
Been seeing a lot of movies lately.
Watchmen - It was good. Added soem stuff, took some things out. All in all it was what i expected. Also, the ending in the movie was a trillion times better then the books.
Taken - Good form what I saw.
Role Models - Paul Rudd is awesome.
I Love You, Man - Again.
-
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter - Another one that is even better (worse) than expected. Awesome movie and completely and totally ridiculous. Watch this now. The specially written soundtrack is so ridiculously 80's it is win. All kinds of stuff (Phones and the like) are very 80's in general which is cool since the film was made in 2001. Just pure win movie.
Reasons to watch this movie from the first 5 minutes.
Opening lines once the intro part is done "Where have all our Lesbians gone?"
Priest talks to a Punk who is also a priest and tell his he needs to go find Jesus to fight the vampires.
Another priest pulls up on a scooter and throws the punk a helmet with a gap cut into it for the Punk's mohawk to fit through with "Live to Live" written on either side of the gap, there is also crosses involved..
Punk and priest drive off on scooter with a Sex Pistols knock off playing.
These guys then die about 4 minutes later. Edit - This specific scene involves lesbian vampires crushing Jesus' sandcastle and kicking him in the nuts.
-
So. Movie Breakdown #2.
11)The Slums of Beverly Hills:
~You ever wake up one morning and say, "Gosh, I'd like to see Marisa Tomei's tits"? If so, that is probably the only reason you should watch this film. It is otherwise not very good, and the cast is pretty well unlikable. That's not to say that it's not well-acted--the cast was damn-well GOING for unlikable. It's just.... not my type of movie, honestly.
12)Grumpy Old Men:
~For the Supers. Excellent RomCom that takes the somewhat unusual twist of making it about really old people. Ann-Margret is a complete flake in this movie, but I have to admit, I'd probably have hit it anyhow despite flakiness and despite age. Bravo to her. The best part of the movie, however, was Burgess Meredith's hilarious performance as the incredibly ancient father. Really old guys talking about sex will be a theme for part of this run-down--this probably says something about my personality. Namely, I don't think Niu wants to be my friend anymore. ;_;
13)Zombie Strippers
~Ah, yes. Putting that Film Major to work. I actually watched this because my fake-cousin forced me, my brother-in-law, and two of my real cousins to watch it with him. He also fell asleep in the middle of the movie, so nuts to him.
On the other hand, this had me in a guilty amount of hysterics. Yes, it stars Jenna Jameson. No, it is not a porno, even a softcore porno. There are no sex scenes in this movie. What there are are a lot of completely fucked up dirty jokes. When the strippers actually BECOME zombies, the audience finds them irresistible, and are all to happy to go backstage and get eaten by the Zombie Strippers. Eventually the normal strippers completely fail to keep the audience's attention. Eventually, they get more and more ridiculously undead looking, but the audience finds them hotter and hotter. It's completely grotesque, but it's so over-the-top, it's hard not to laugh.
Also, the Hispanic gentleman is the most insanely racially stereotyped character I have ever seen in anything ever.
14)Black Orpheus
~Watched this in class for our discussion of sound in cinema, and as far as that metric is concerned, this movie is quite excellent. It has an unusual soundtrack in that the entire thing is diagetic--that is, all the sound played in the movie is supposedly something the characters can hear. And it's fun bossa nova music, to boot.
Where the movie fails.... well...
It's a Brazilian take on the tale of Orpheus' journey through hell to rescue his lover Eurydice from death. Only it's a modern retelling that takes place during Carnivale in the slums of Rio.
15)The French Connection
~This movie is pretty intense, but how the fuck does that old fucker get laid just by looking at a girl on a bicycle? He's not shown as at all charming or anything during the film, and then, "Hey, this chick on a bike is cute" and then BAM. His partner trips over a bicycle when he comes over to his apartment the next morning. I call shenanigans.
I digress. The French Connection is considered a classic, and probably for good reason. It invented a scene that gets parodied to this day in other films and Geico commercials, namely the subway stalker fakeout bit, and the happy wave "bye bye" as the train takes off. I have to say, I like crime movies where it's not set up as a mystery. This focuses more on the crazed obsession that the leading character takes on his quest to put the French druglord behind bars.
Apparently, there's a sequel to this movie, and that notion kind of offends me, because the way this movie was written, there was really no setup for a sequel at all. Ridiculous. I'll probably watch it anyhow just to see if it ruins my strong opinion on this particular film.
16)Nine Queens
~This is a really fun caper film, although there are a few parts of the movie that aren't particularly capery. I'd get into it here, but it'd be spoiler-laden, and assuming anyone wants to watch an Argentinian movie with subtitles, they should really watch this one.
I'd summarize the movie here, but... similar reasons keep me from doing it. However, it has a really nice, intense style, and the general "feel" of the movie is quite sleek. It's fun to watch, but on the other hand, I really like this kinda film. So take my advice with that in mind.
17)Battle Royale
~Also watched this for class.
HOLY FUCK THIS MOVIE. This is... can I call it horror? If it's horror, then it's horror done right. It manages to both be campy AND psychologically thrilling. The villains in this movie are all remarkably badass and creepy as hell.
Getting into extreme detail on this movie seems silly, because it would basically make me gush and basically turn me into Otter. And I don't want to replace him while he's gone. I will say, however, that the cinematography is generally excellent, and the setting used for this ridiculous orgy of violence is beautifully shot.
18)Shaun of the Dead
~Yet another movie watched for class.
Shaun of the Dead is hilarious. Not much else to say here. It deliberately subverting various cliches of the "Zombie" flick is handled pretty well. And there are parts that I think only the British could pull off with a straight face. Also, it taught me how to use the word "Fuck-a-doodle-doo".
19)Into the Wild
~Good movie. I say that because it held my attention for two and a half hours, and it wasn't about a subject I'd have found interesting. It had fantastic camerawork. Plus it had a decidedly (in my view) unlikable lead character, but I still watched it.
Into the Wild is based on the positively true adventures of some dipshit who got sick of his life in middle class bliss and being accepted to Harvard Law, and said "Fuck it, I'm going to Alaska."
He's such an unlikable, narcissistic FUCK who basically charms everyone he meets, and then destroys their lives by abandoning them and destroying himself, because, WHOAMG SPOILARS: HE DIES.
Who couldn't see that coming? A stupid assclown throws out all of his cash and travels to the harshest places in nature just to prove some kind of ass-backward point on the condition of society. He's clearly smart, but also clearly not near as smart as he thinks he is. He takes from every person that he meets, and rarely gives anything back. He cuts a swath of desperation and crushed dreams in his wake.
He is played by Emile Hersch, who, I swear to god, is like, this exact unlikable kid in every movie he's in. Only this time he does full-frontal. You know, on my list of celebrities I want to see full frontal nudity of, I'd have to say that Emile Hersch is probably not in the top ten. Anyhow, he seems to embody that sort of impotent, useless grunge "Fuck the man" mentality that was easily the worst part of the 90s. That is, until you remember Eddie Vedder does the soundtrack.
Naw, Vedder is -ok-. But only just. And the movie is, again, still pretty good. I feel horrible for his sister, the girl who was in love with him, the old man who wanted him as a grandson, and the hippy woman who thought he was like HER son. So pretty much everyone he met except for Vince Vaughn. (Also, more movies need a drunken Vince Vaughn. Drunken Vince Vaughn makes everything better.)
Anyhow, rest in peace you godawful narcissistic bastard. I hope whoever got into Harvard Law in your place made a few million dollars and boffs Australian supermodels.
20)Surfwise
~Surfwise is a documentary about some crazy bastard who decided to quit his life as a stanford educated doctor, and said "Fuck it, I'm going surfing." And surf he did. He also got married and had 9 kids who he forcibly kept out of school and forced every single one to be a surfer, like their old man.
There's some ridiculously fucked up stuff in this documentary. It shows the family as both happy and seriously emotionally scarred from their adventures. Most of them say the good times outweigh the bad, but a few are notably fucked up from, among other things, their parents fucking in the same room as them pretty much every night.
There's this one INCREDIBLY DISTURBING scene where one of the eight sons is sharing a song he wrote. The song is about how his crazy-ass dad fucked up his life. He turns it on in the background and starts speaking it out loud so you can understand the lyrics.
Something comes over him and he starts singing the lyrics. And I was all, "OK. He just likes the song." or "He has special feelings for this because it is an artistic part of his soul." or whatever. Except he gets more and more intense. The Camera zooms in on his face showing that full-bodied madness has taken over him. His eyes are completely unblinking as he spits out this song that damns his father and all of his crazy ass shit. It ends with a zoom on his eye, so you can see just how batshit the guy has become. An unblinking bloodshot eye while the man in possession of it is still spewing out this string of curses about his dad. And then he just STOPS suddenly. And he says "I'm sorry. I just can't listen to anymore of this"
It was really funny, but eventually I realized "Holy fuck, this guy has serious problems" and I couldn't laugh anymore.
All in all, I was glad I watched it, but I'm still not sure what the fuck I watched or why. Hooray for documentaries.
Best movie of the bunch? Battle Royale. You should watch it today.
Worst? The Slums of Beverly Hills. You should watch it never, unless you like Marisa Tomei's tits. Then you should watch only until her shower scene and on MUTE.
-
17)Battle Royale
~Also watched this for class.
People let people watch BATTLE ROYALE for class? I thought that was against the law. Hoo ah!
-
I love you man:
The best movie I've seen in a long time. Very solid romantic comedy.
-
Princess Mononoke:
Insane Mind Trip from HELL!
I own this movie, granted it's been like four years since I have seen it last, but I read somewhere that this movie was out of control if one watches it high.
So I couldn't resist. I went to my friends house and threw the dvd at him. Told him we were going to watch this blitzed out fo our mind and good things would happen. For some reason I reminded myself of John Stewart's character from Half Baked who thinks everything is better when you are high.
Dear Jesus. The Demon Zombie Monkeys were horrifying as shit! Also, the main character Ashitaka has not one once of fear in his entire being. That man is the most bad ass bold, brave, calm, collected main character ever. He never backs down ever. him and Bilyl Bob thorton's character were both pretty daring and fearless.
Overall I still love this movie and yes the Dear God freaks me the hell out to this day. he looks like Rafiki from the Lion King on acid.
-
Has this topic been dead for that long? Huh.
Watched DC's latest series of DTV movies. Short review: The New Frontier >>>> Wonder Woman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Superman: Doomsday.
The New Frontier - The story is superb, but you should know that coming in because seriously, read DC: The New Frontier. It rules. Anyway, it's a freaking work of art visually, has a great cast, and manages to be both the best and the most faithful adaptation of a specific superhero comic (as opposed to just using the same characters) that I've ever seen. My only complaint is that the graphic novel (which is also awesome) had enough material for another hour of movie at least. Really good ending sequence.
Wonder Woman- The simplest of the lot. It's a straight action movie, pretty generic in every substantial way, but the fight scenes are done well and the animation budget is immense. Nathan Fillion is an awesome Steve Trevor, too. NOBODY MESSES WITH LINCOLN!
Superman: Doomsday - Judging from the title, I was hoping this was just going to be a series of fights between Superman and Doomsday until one or the other exploded. Sadly, it turned out to be the entire Death & Return of Superman arc, and I don't think I have to tell you how that goes. (HINT: It sucks.) Plus Superman's design looks like he's going on 50 for some reason.
-
In Bruges - This was recommended to me. It is very good. Funny and very good bleak humor. If you like good things then you should watch this. If you like shit then don't bother.
-
Wolverine Origins: Umm not very good. It was mildly entertaining I suppose, and the fighting was pretty solid, but the story had so many plotholes/stupid moments that I spent half of the movie when my head on my hand.
Not in a rant mood for once, so I'll leave it at that!
-
Monsters vs Aliens: Disappointing. All the funny jokes were used up in the trailers. About the quality of writing of television cartoons.
Fighting: Extemely low budget. You can see the boom mikes if you look for them. And the fight scenes aren't particularly good, which is pretty much the only reason you would see this kind of movie. Terrance Howard is apparently slumming after Iron Man.
Taken: Damned good. Liam Neeson kicks a lot of ass, and somehow makes it look believable.
-
Went out and watched Star Trek recently. It has a few really large plot holes, and the main premise is pretty laughable. But, it's pretty clear that those things are there pretty much entirely so that you can get to the good stuff, and it works. I enjoyed the movie far too much to want to pick it apart, and so long as all you want is a fun action movie starring James T Kirk, it'll get the job done.
-
Went out and watched Star Trek recently. It has a few really large plot holes, and the main premise is pretty laughable. But, it's pretty clear that those things are there pretty much entirely so that you can get to the good stuff, and it works. I enjoyed the movie far too much to want to pick it apart, and so long as all you want is a fun action movie starring James T Kirk, it'll get the job done.
Works pretty well for someone who's not a fan of the series too. :D Simon Pegg as Scotty works scarily well, and I didn't even recognise Karl Urban until I saw his name in the credits. ._.
-
Angels and Demons: Entertaining, but not as good as Davinci Code. They changed quite a bit from the book.
-
Went out and watched Star Trek recently. It has a few really large plot holes, and the main premise is pretty laughable.
Truly, it is a Star Trek movie.
-
Angels and Demons: Entertaining, but not as good as Davinci Code. They changed quite a bit from the book.
I liked Angels and Demons more than Davinci Code. However, I had read Davinci Code before seeing this movie. This is not so with Angels and Demons. Probably kept a lot of the plot issues in A&D from annoying me like they did in DVC.
Either way, much much better than the Wolverine Movie.
-
Choke- Great movie. Funny as hell and the Palanuck roots show.
-
Either way, much much better than the Wolverine Movie.
Most things would've been. Saw this yesterday and... ugh. It completely sidetracks from... well, pretty much anything and everything. There's no relevance to the comics, cartoons or even the other films, and the whole film was just... meh. It wasn't especially bad, but there was nothing that really kept me interested for more than a minute or two.
-
Saw "Lady in the Water".
This director keeps getting more WTF with every movie of his I see. It gets points for... absurdity in a humorless situation? I got a Dr. Seuss vibe a bit... but it was overwhelmed by how horrible all the dialogue, pacing, characters, and actors were. And the music sucked too. Damn, if you're going to fail at story, at least hire a decent composer to sell the emotion and hope your audience isn't paying much attention.
The movie seems to be making up a fairy tale and trying to pass it off as real by having the 'strange old Korean tenant' re-tell the 'old bedtime story her grandmother used to tell her'. Ugh.
Points for the grass-wolf thing, though. I want one. It's kind of how I imagine Pokemon should look.
-
Star Trek
Good.
You know, I can see the arguments that it's not really the essence of Star Trek because that had a lot more social commentary (first interracial kiss on TV, much more interesting view of torture, etc). On the other hand, it is basically the essence of Star Wars (father, noooo. Mother noooo. *insert 10 action sequences, and some swordfighting*). And hey, I like Star Wars.
-
I don't often check this topic, but on reading your post, MC, I'm imagining your avatar staring me straight in the face and saying in the horribly deadpan voice "Father. Noooooooo. Mother. Nooooooo." and it's just awesome.
-
You know, I can see the arguments that it's not really the essence of Star Trek because that had a lot more social commentary (first interracial kiss on TV, much more interesting view of torture, etc).
Interracial kiss schminterracial kiss. Star Trek has gotten too much light for something they didn't do first. Besides, that scene was ridiculously hilarious and offensive at the same time. :]
I've been holding off on watching it. My mom saw it - of course ( ^-^ )V. Said it was better than the other Star Wars movies, and I don't believe I can take that with a grain of salt. 'Cos the others were pretty shitty. Instead I saw X-Men, which was entertaining ..... at least. And funny. My mom saw that too. Totally geeked her out on mother's day - wait, wait. She already is a geek :D . I get it from my momma~
-
Either way, much much better than the Wolverine Movie.
Most things would've been. Saw this yesterday and... ugh. It completely sidetracks from... well, pretty much anything and everything. There's no relevance to the comics, cartoons or even the other films, and the whole film was just... meh. It wasn't especially bad, but there was nothing that really kept me interested for more than a minute or two.
If it was a standalone movie it would be a passable action movie I suppose. The fact that it comes before X-men though and still manages to fuck up so many aspects of the plot is astounding.
It'd be like if Star Wars Episode 1 decided to make the bad guy Mace Windu and never introduced Palpatine. If you know how shit is supposed to end, you should be able to make the beginning work? And yeah, a total butchery of everything else Wolverine didn't help. Nor did a severe lack of Ryan Reynolds!
-
So yeah, liked Star Trek movie. Dad probably enjoyed it more since he watched the series back in the day, but a pretty fun movie even if it has a few moments that don't quite make sense.
-
Y'know, I know Wolverine didn't have a coherent plot, but it never strayed into outright plot hole territory, and was still fun to watch. How does that compare unfavorably to The DaVinci Code exactly?
Note that I basically consider DaVinci Code "last Crusade, but with all the good parts like Nazis, having a sense of humor, Sean Connery, Harrison Ford, direction, music... and so forth removed."
-
See, and I think Last Crusade is the worst Indy movie by a fair margin. Why must individuals have opinions about things? We need a hive mind mentality so that we can all follow Grefter's opinion of what is good and not.
-
I just figured I'd spare people the effort of asking why I didn't like DaVinci Code. Come to think of it I STILL haven't gotten around to giving Last Crusade a good rewatching since that movie made me really want to.
'sides. I was actually asking him to back up his statements for the purposes of conversation, as I find reading actual reasoning more interesting to read than "lolthissucks".
-
I just figured I'd spare people the effort of asking why I didn't like DaVinci Code. Come to think of it I STILL haven't gotten around to giving Last Crusade a good rewatching since that movie made me really want to.
'sides. I was actually asking him to back up his statements for the purposes of conversation, as I find reading actual reasoning more interesting to read than "lolthissucks".
Word! Most of it is pretty petty, but here goes. LOTS OF SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY!
1. Sabretooth is his brother, but in X-Men he doesn't seem to acknowledge his existence at all. This seems weird seeing as how he betrays his brother in Wolverine and then unbetrays him and spouts off some crap at the end about being brothers and all that. Unless Sabretooth also got shot in the head by some adamantium bullets, this makes no sense. When you KNOW how a plot is going to end up, you should be able to adjust to that. It'd be like if Star Wars didn't killed Mace Windu in episode 3 and then just had him magically gone in episode 4.
2. The whole deal with his wife annoyed me. "Hey, just stay with Wolverine forever while we hold your sister. We'll let her go someday." You'd think after six years she'd get a little tired of this. Or you know... USE HER FUCKING POWERS TO FREE HER SISTER. You're telling me she never ever got a chance to use her mojo on Stryker or anyone near him?
3. Too much random mutant dropping. I'm thinking maybe Blob will come back in the next Wolverine movie or something, but it seemed like they were just throwing mutants out because they could. And please tell me Blob didn't get his name in the comic because he misheard the word bub... if he did, I'm sad I ever learned that.
4. They keep shooting Wolverine. Even Agent Zero. Umm hey guys, you're a top secret military group that just infused this guy with adamantium and now you're going to just shoot at him even though you know it won't work. Real cute!
5. I didn't buy Stryker at all. He just decides to stab the general as if there would be no repercussions... really? Seemed completely pointless except to maybe show us that the calculating Stryker was going crazy or something? No clue.
6. The fighting was not that impressive. The initial attack was cool when Zero and Wade showed off, but Wolverine is actually a pretty dull fighter, motorcycle be damned. I will admit that the final fight was decent though.
7. This is what finally did me in.
Stryker: Yar, I got my cool 6 shooter and adamantium bullets
Random Chick: Umm those still won't be able to kill him
Stryker: I KNOW! But dude, I can make him lose his memory! That is so worth risking my life over despite the fact that I could have given Zero this gun and he could have done it for me!!
Did they really think that the audience wouldn't have figured it out? Wolverine getting shot by super bullets, waking up, and not knowing who he was wouldn't be obvious enough?
Oh and finally, apparently Xavier didn't age at all in 20 years, in fact... he got older. I guess the budget was too low to throw a fucking wig or makeup on him.
Like I said, most of it is pretty petty, but it just kept happening. I managed to block each one out and enjoy the movie for the most part, but then at the end it was a big "are you fucking kidding me" moment. Very similar to Signs.
-
I just figured I'd spare people the effort of asking why I didn't like DaVinci Code. Come to think of it I STILL haven't gotten around to giving Last Crusade a good rewatching since that movie made me really want to.
'sides. I was actually asking him to back up his statements for the purposes of conversation, as I find reading actual reasoning more interesting to read than "lolthissucks".
Opinions are meant to be kept to yourself so that no one has to face the reality that there is people out there who put more thought into their entertainment than treating everything as some variant of pornography.
-
Oh and finally, apparently Xavier didn't age at all in 20 years, in fact... he got older. I guess the budget was too low to throw a fucking wig or makeup on him.
Actually Xavier has been bald since he was a teenager. But yeah, still should not look old.
-
I can't believe you're bitching about Patrick Steward aging.
-
You'll notice that I didn't give that one a number, it was more of an afterthought. Still seems lazy as hell though considering how little effort it would take to make him look a bit younger. Apparently he was always bald, but even minor makeup can take 20 years off of his face.
Nothing was epically awful about the movie, just a ton of plot issues that simply didn't add up to me.
-
Saw "Lady in the Water".
This director keeps getting more WTF with every movie of his I see. It gets points for... absurdity in a humorless situation? I got a Dr. Seuss vibe a bit... but it was overwhelmed by how horrible all the dialogue, pacing, characters, and actors were. And the music sucked too. Damn, if you're going to fail at story, at least hire a decent composer to sell the emotion and hope your audience isn't paying much attention.
The movie seems to be making up a fairy tale and trying to pass it off as real by having the 'strange old Korean tenant' re-tell the 'old bedtime story her grandmother used to tell her'. Ugh.
Points for the grass-wolf thing, though. I want one. It's kind of how I imagine Pokemon should look.
It's based on a bed time story M.Night told his kids. and the writer (whom is M. Night) is the main character. The math does itself.
-
Hahaha, Lady in the Water. Haha, I almost forgot that shitty ass boring-horribly-paced-ridiculously-plot-twisted-and-fail movie ever existed with its shitty character personalities and unnecessary innuendos. Jesus, I'm going to have nightmares tonight. That said, I've hated everything Shyamalan has ever produced.
-
Catch Me If You Can: Very fun movie. Solid performances from all the leads, well-paced, and knowing how much of it is fictionalized just makes Frank Abagnale that much more impressive. (For instance, it leaves out the time when he was arrested for impersonating an airline pilot, and got out of it by getting real pilots he'd met during his cons to vouch for him.)
-
Hahaha, Lady in the Water. Haha, I almost forgot that shitty ass boring-horribly-paced-ridiculously-plot-twisted-and-fail movie ever existed with its shitty character personalities and unnecessary innuendos. Jesus, I'm going to have nightmares tonight. That said, I've hated everything Shyamalan has ever produced.
I never bothered to watch this one, but I remember reading that a character in it who gets KILL BY DEMONS was named after a movie critic that bashed the director's work. I think that pretty much says everything you need to know about Shyamalan.
-
Hahaha, Lady in the Water. Haha, I almost forgot that shitty ass boring-horribly-paced-ridiculously-plot-twisted-and-fail movie ever existed with its shitty character personalities and unnecessary innuendos. Jesus, I'm going to have nightmares tonight. That said, I've hated everything Shyamalan has ever produced.
I never bothered to watch this one, but I remember reading that a character in it who gets KILL BY DEMONS was named after a movie critic that bashed the director's work. I think that pretty much says everything you need to know about Shyamalan.
There's one more REALLY important detail in this movie that's telling of Shyamalan's personality.
The central storyline of the movie is that there are these mystical people who live in the water and they're trying to impart some very important message that will revolutionize the human world and make it a wonderful utopia. To do this, one of them tries to contact a young college boy who's writing a paper/book on how to improve the geo-political landscape of our times that will initiate this revolution.
The actor who plays this savior/messenger is none other than Mr. Shyamalan himself.
-
Fast and Furious: Basically what you'd expect. Lots of scantily clad women teasing you, lots of races and wrecks, and so on. The plot in this one was better than any of the others IMO, but it was still Fast and Furious plot. They did pull a couple of moves that I didn't see coming in the least.
This one > Original > Second one >> Tokyo Drift.
-
I want to see the new Fast and Furious. My boyfriend is into cars and always commenting on crappy modding that's in the movies, so I learn things from time to time. I think Tokyo Drift was shot better than all of the other movies. Otherwise, I'm in the boat of Original -> T.D. -> 2F2F.
-
Regarding Lady in the Water.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LadyInTheWater
Let us never speak of it again.
Star Trek - So yeah this was good and almost makes me want to get some of the original seasons on DVD. Almost. Is very good and everything is better with more Leonard Nimoy and Simon Pegg.
-
Star Trek: Saw it. It was okay. I'm not getting the hype at all, but it's perfectly watchable. I am basically the variety of fan parodied in that one Onion sketch and have no need of anything actiony or particularly photogenic in my Star Trek, so yeah. I'd expected worse since the initial advertising, so maybe it says something that I didn't hate the movie. Have no real motivation to see it again, though.
Idly, came into the screening a few minutes late (was waiting for the parents, who got caught in traffic). I don't imagine a lot happens before the hook-nosed guy from Iron Man heads to the Romulan ship and gets speared?
-
So my students are being very un-genki at this time of the school year, so I went to the video rental store and marathoned a bunch of recent English kids movies in hopes of finding something to use in class.
Idly, I also thought I'd do some comparative thinking on them.
In order of viewing:
Wall・E: Best of the lot. I really wasn't expecting much from the trailers, but it ended up being a really thoughtful movie. Despite its attempts to have a generally positive ending, the whole experience was actually pretty horrifying to me as it presented a realistic view of 'apocalypse' that terrified me. Not the intention, I know, but my imagination ran away with me while I was watching it, apparently. On reflection, it does an amazing job of mixing elements of silent film and sci-fi/environmentalist themes. Not my favorite movie ever, but at least it was a good movie.
Golden Compass: My personal favorite of the bunch. This movie felt a bit rushed, but the main antagonist lady was truly chilling. And the child actors weren't horrible, so that was nice. It was a visual feast, so I'm glad I saw it, but the whole experience worked more as an advertisement for the books than as a movie. I haven't read the books yet, but now I -really- want to. Why didn't anti-Christian literature exist for me when I was kid? I don't feel I can it rate it much more objectively than this because I found myself seriously agreeing with every plot point and thinly-veiled anti-Christian theme. The plot alligns with my personal views too much for me to be entirely objective here. It's like when overly-conservative people try to claim that FOX news is objective. I'm at least aware that I'm biased here. Note that I liked the Christian symbolism in WallE.
Lady in the Water: Yeah, I watched it during this marathon. As bad as advertised. And according to Grefter, let's move on.
Eragon: From this point on, the movies get progressively better. Well, considering that they're following Lady in the Water, that's not saying much. Anyway, Eragon is entirely fogettable. Even the visuals were lame. And I -like- dragons and swords/sorcery (obviously). Fail, Eragon. The titular hero himself is an impulsive idiot and there's the horrible romantic subplot involving the girl he's never met... The dragon character was also pretty lame. The cool Obi-Wan/UOM guy dies. Spoiler. If you couldn't figure that out five minutes into the movie, you're too young to be on this forum. The whole thing is just -too- predictable and -too- archetypal. Don't get me wrong, Djinn likes tropes, but at least try to subvert one or mix them up somewhat creatively. Tales of Symphonia has more creative characters than this movie.
The Seeker: Seems based on a book series for tweens. There's a chosen one, some really heavy-handed Light/Dark symbolism, and a 'surprising' twist on the villain's identity. It also has a lame romantic plot that they thankfully drop later on. It's set in modern day England somewhere, but magic exists secretly and our chosen one (angsty teenage blonde-haired kid) has to travel through time to collect macguffins and stop the Dark Rider or something.
The exposition is mercifully short, and the very first instances of BHK starting to see evidence of magic existing in the modern world is actually pretty and culminates in a dark chase scene with some creepy raven-esque eldritch things. Then the secret magic society shows up to take all the mystery out of the magic and the movie sucks. Disappointing.
Spiderwick Chronicles: A Nickelodeon movie, and appropriately, filled with so-ugly-they're-cute little creatures. Except they're not cute. Apart from this failure, this movie wasn't bad! Not great, but not bad. It's another kid-lit book-based movie that's set in modern times where magical things exist secretly. The 'secretly' part being the key. There's a world of fantastic faerie-creatures that exist hiding in nature and Professor Spiderwick chronciled all their secrets. Unfortunately, some bad faerie-creature wants to get the book to use its secrets to destroy all the other good faerie creatures. The villain has zero motivation, but who cares? The rest of the story revolves around a family who moves into Spiderwick's home after it's been abandoned (they're distant relatives or something), and the youngest son-with-attitude finds the book in the attic. Some stuff happens with the family finding out about the faerie creatures which culminates in a magical seige of goblins vs. kids that involves exploding an oven with tomato sauce. Somehow, it was kind of cool.
There's no romantic subplot in this at all, and it's probably the main reason why the movie is 10X better than all of the previous ones (besides Golden Compass and WallE). There is a human drama subplot about how the family has recently been split up because of an unfaithful father. Luckily, this is but a blip on the radar compared to the magical plot (rightfully so, who cares about your deadbeat dad when you're being seiged by fucking goblins?!).
Bridge to Terabithia: Another one based on a kids book, but this time, not a series, but a singular book. This works really well. I was surprised by the quality of the movie. The actors aren't great, but the story is told pretty well. The ads are misleading. This is not a magical fairy tale story. It's actually just a human drama with some acid trip sequences spliced in while the kids are out in the woods 'imagining' things. It works pretty well at conveying the sense of 'Oh come on, you -know- you did this when you were 8!' It was a change from the rest of the kid-lit fantasy stories I had been watching, so my opinion might be biased by being thankful for a change. There's also no romantic subplot, another plus. It's basically a friendship story with a tearjerker ending, and all the tropes that go along with that. Not much to say beyond that, apart from the fact that it's actually enjoyable and the characters are believable.
Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian: Were the Telmarines in the original books Spaniards or is that a creative addition for the movie? The movie had the biggest budget of any on this list by a large margin and it shows (apart from WallE, perhaps?). The visuals are beautiful. ...and that's it. I was really bored the whole movie. Even the plucky mascot character didn't grow on me. The actors for these kids are terrible. And Caspian himself is an idiot. The only actor I liked was the guy who was playing the 'I eat babies' bad guy. But the visuals were really pretty and the source material wasn't slaughtered, so I supposed it did its job well. Better at being 'epic' than any of the other films, though I can't tell if I mean that ironically or not.
tl;dr:
WallE >> Golden Compass > Prince Caspian > Bridge to Terabithia > Spiderwick Chronciles >>> The Seeker > Eragon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lady in the Water
Did I miss any recent-ish kid-lit releases?
-
Idiocracy: Watched this again recently. Still an awesome movie. Watch it. It's too under the radar to really be that hard to pirate.
-
Eragon: Tales of Symphonia has more creative characters than this movie.
Ouch, but sadly correct.
The Seeker: Seems based on a book series for tweens.
The Dark is Rising series by Susan Cooper. Excellent stuff. They're pretty short books, aimed at maybe 5th-grade level? You might try to find some for your English students.
-
Djinn, if you like tropes and stuff like in Eragon, I highly recommend you check out this little known gem of a series.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_wars
Edit - Oh and if you can think of anything inventive to bash Lady in the Water with, go right ahead, just you know, this guy wrote a movie about a writer who is going to write the BEST THING EVAR and then stars as it kind of covers anything you could possibly say about it really.
-
Idiocracy: Watched this again recently. Still an awesome movie. Watch it. It's too under the radar to really be that hard to pirate.
Yeah, but what ARE electrolytes?
I think that whole dialogue is probably one of my favorites, despite the overall movie being only above average.
-
Djinn, if you like tropes and stuff like in Eragon, I highly recommend you check out this little known gem of a series.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_wars
Snarky. I like it.
I'm not ashamed of liking tropes. But I already said that I prefer it when tropes are used/combined/subverted in -somewhat- original ways... And yeah, the Eragon = Fantasy version of Star Wars wasn't lost on me, but it didn't improve the movie in any way?
Edit - Oh and if you can think of anything inventive to bash Lady in the Water with, go right ahead, just you know, this guy wrote a movie about a writer who is going to write the BEST THING EVAR and then stars as it kind of covers anything you could possibly say about it really.
Yeah, but that's a level of egoism that bears repeating from time to time. If it isn't mocked often enough, this sort of thing will become too common. I'm sure you understand that. I've always thought of you as being the guy whose purpose was to counterbalance people with egos like that. Keep up the good work. ;D
-
Nah, my job is just generic swearing. All the other things I do is purely extracurricular. I am a giver. Some people are just good you know, good to the bone.
-
Man. I remember when I first saw Bridge to Terabithia. I'd never read the book. And only saw the previews which made it look like a standardish fantasy flick.
IMAGINE MY SURPRISE.
-
Clearly no one told you that the book won a Children's book award (and card game)
-
It's your own fault for not reading the book in the first place.
Still, that was an awful marketing campaign.
-
Nah, there is no reason for an adult to read a children's book, even if it is award winning.
-
Nah, there is no reason for an adult to read a children's book, even if it is award winning.
nonsense. good books are good, period.
-
It's your own fault for not reading the book in the first place.
Still, that was an awful marketing campaign.
Seconded on all fronts. It was an excellent book.
-
I just saw one of the cutest, cheesiest, girliest chick flicks ever that played by the chick flick rulebook. 9/10. Made of Honor. Corny win!
-
Up: What the fuck Disney/Pixar.
-
Up: What the fuck Disney/Pixar.
Agreed, but I really think it was a great movie.
Still. Recall the Bridge to Terabithia comment previously. You'll get a similar shock from Up.
-
Nah, there is no reason for an adult to read a children's book, even if it is award winning.
I read pretty much exclusively children's books, and online stories where the protagonist is a teenager, and Jane Austen books where the protagonist is...a teenager.
Then again, I'm not sure you consider me an adult >_>
-
I'm not sure you consider you an adult.
Anyway, video games are super-mature, right?
-
Anyway, video games are super-mature, right?
Of course! You can tell by the ratings.
-
When you run out of age appropriate good books you can start pimping out children's books.
Also I have ever been one to say we shouldn't be raising the bar on video games?
-
When you run out of age appropriate good books you can start pimping out children's books.
I never thought I'd see the day when you would lecture me to do only what is appropriate, Gref.
Rather than defend my position, let me borrow the words of an author of children's books who did not believe in writing down to children.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth… The extraordinary, the marvelous thing about Genesis is not how unscientific it is, but how amazingly accurate it is. How could the ancient Israelites have known the exact order of an evolution that wasn’t to be formulated for thousands of years? Here is a truth that cuts across barriers of time and space.
But almost all of the best children’s books do this, not only an Alice in Wonderland, a Wind in the Willow, a Princess and the Goblin. Even the most straightforward tales say far more than they seem to mean on the surface. Little Women, The Secret Garden, Huckleberry Finn --- how much more there is in them than we realize at a first reading. They partake of the universal language, and this is why we turn to them again and again when we are children, and still again when we have grown up.
-Madeline L'Engle,
Newbery Award Acceptance Speech: The Expanding Universe, August, 1963
http://www.madeleinelengle.com/reference/newberyspeech.htm
-
Huck Finn? A children's book? Pff... Pfft.... Pffttahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Anyway, yeah, what the hell, Gref? Advocating regulating one's reading by something as arbitrary as "target audience age"? That's dumb.
-
Huck Finn? A children's book? Pff... Pfft.... Pffttahahahahahahahahahahaha.
This is something that happens a lot with disrespected media.
Y is a really good X.
Critics: "Xes aren't good, and Y is good, therefore Y isn't really an X."
Fans of fantasy are probably familiar with this by now.
-
I think it's more that it's not a childrens book because it was meant to be there to tackle large social issues in the context of Huck Finn's journey. Granted, I read the thing when I was a kid, but I'm not inclined to use that as proof of anything since I read Moby Dick and the Bible as a kid as well.
-
Huck Finn? A children's book? Pff... Pfft.... Pffttahahahahahahahahahahaha.
This is something that happens a lot with disrespected media.
Y is a really good X.
Critics: "Xes aren't good, and Y is good, therefore Y isn't really an X."
Fans of fantasy are probably familiar with this by now.
Except that's not what I'm going on about at all. There are some good children's books, I recognize this. The subject matter that Twain tackles with Huck Finn (Slavery, Race, and the effects of both on Southern society; Southern family feuds; con artists; religious conventions/"providence;" etc.), and more specifically the ironic way in which each subject is dealt with*, make it a book that is in no way a children's book.
*For instance, there is an exchange shortly after Huck and Jim meet the Duke and King, where Jim and Huck argue about languages. Jim takes the fundamentally wrong position (since a Frenchman and an Englishman are both men, their "talk" should be the same), but shows a superior use of logic in his argument than Huck does. Afterwards, Huck says "You just can't learn a n****r anything." Given that Huck is technically right, a reading that ignores the irony in the scene will lead a reader to the same conclusion. Recognizing the dissonance between what Huck says and what actually happened, however, leads you to a reading/message that is more in line with what Twain was trying to get across. Children are typically oblivious to irony, so a typical child reading Huck Finn would not understand what Twain is trying to accomplish with that scene (or many others in the book). Ergo, not a children's book.
Sure, there are some children who will read the book and comprehend it. Typically, however, one needs become more acclimated to sarcasm to do so.
EDIT: Look ma, I'm usin' my degree for sumpin! Arguin' on them-thar internets. Special.
EDIT 2: In the spirit of my Avatar/Name, I AM AN ENGLISH MAJOR YOU ARE WRONG SHUT THE FUCK UP AND HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ME.
-
ok, ok, I take it back. you're right. books that are good can't be children's books, because kids r dum.
I'd peg Huck Finn as high school standard fare, so call it young adult if you really need to, but the point is young people read it, and they tend to be seen as the target audience. my general point still stands.
-
Not my fucking point. I'm not saying that "books that are good can't be children's books," or that children's books can't be good books. I'm saying that Huck Finn, SPECIFICALLY, is not a children's book because its target audience, regardless of whom it "tends to be seen as", is not children. Simple as that. I'd elaborate again but I don't think I'd be saying anything that I haven't already said.
-
hm, do you define target audience as who was intended to read it when it came out, or who it is marketed toward now, or use some other standard?
-
A good question, and I'm not entirely sure myself. Who reads it most is probably the best criteria, but is flawed, at least in this case. Most people probably read Huck Finn somewhere around 15-18, but it's also often assigned reading. This metric only really works when it's voluntary reading, otherwise you're selecting the "appropriate" age by what has been pre-established by a third party, which is a measurement I don't agree with in the slightest; simply because everyone SAYS that's the age that one should read the book doesn't mean it is.
Who the author intended the target audience to be is tricky, too; Twain very well could have been writing to a child/young adult audience as a sort of teaching novel, but this is only really valid in the contemporary setting if so, and there's a good argument against it (though don't quote me on that, the details are kind of fuzzy on this front.) Then of course there's the intentional fallacy and all that goes along with that, which is complicated in how much you buy into it, but that's a different subject for a different time.
Who it is marketed towards now has sort of already been dealt with: just because it is being marketed at an audience doesn't mean that it's the appropriate audience.
The best answer I can give is still no good: What audience is best able to understand the text. I don't really think that Twain's writing is all that accessible to a juvenile audience; I recall reading it at 16 and thinking it was crap, and re-reading it at 21 and finding a lot more value in it, for instance. Of course, there will be people who can understand the text at 15 or 16, which complicates the matter, but in all honesty those people are few and far between. Still, I wouldn't trust the typical teenager to have easy access to the book, and there is the fact that most often when they pick up the book they only do so because they have to, not because they want to.
I'll have to think more on this to really give a coherent answer, though.
-
To continue the tongue in cheek joke.
A good question, and I'm not entirely sure myself. Who reads it most is probably the best criteria, but is flawed, at least in this case. Most people probably read Huck Finn somewhere around 15-18, but it's also often assigned reading. This metric only really works when it's voluntary reading, otherwise you're selecting the "appropriate" age by what has been pre-established by a third party, which is a measurement I don't agree with in the slightest; simply because everyone SAYS that's the age that one should read the book doesn't mean it is.
Who the author intended the target audience to be is tricky, too; Twain very well could have been writing to a child/young adult audience as a sort of teaching novel, but this is only really valid in the contemporary setting if so, and there's a good argument against it (though don't quote me on that, the details are kind of fuzzy on this front.) Then of course there's the intentional fallacy and all that goes along with that, which is complicated in how much you buy into it, but that's a different subject for a different time.
Who it is marketed towards now has sort of already been dealt with: just because it is being marketed at an audience doesn't mean that it's the appropriate audience.
The best answer I can give is still no good: What audience is best able to understand the text. I don't really think that Twain's writing is all that accessible to a juvenile audience; I recall reading it at 16 and thinking it was crap, and re-reading it at 21 and finding a lot more value in it, for instance. Of course, there will be people who can understand the text at 15 or 16, which complicates the matter, but in all honesty those people are few and far between. Still, I wouldn't trust the typical teenager to have easy access to the book, and there is the fact that most often when they pick up the book they only do so because they have to, not because they want to.
I'll have to think more on this to really give a coherent answer, though.
And this is why you should be reading books for adults, because you are smart enough for them.
But seriously, reading a children's book is fine. You can enjoy it, they can be fun. It is like reading pulp fantasy can be fun. It is just when you are looking at the overall "Here is something awesome that you should totally read before you die/should have heard of and read the book of before seeing the movie", children's books in a forum of intelligent people (honestly generally University graduates at this point) is kind of setting the level of discourse a touch low. It is going, here improve yourself! Check this shit out.
(http://members.optusnet.com.au/grefter/spot.jpeg)
-
I figured it was more of a "Hey well everyone else in my demographic is reading it I may as well check it out, at least then there's something to talk about" sort of thing, but then again I also took your statement as pure sargasm at first, so who knows.
-
I do. You should have gone with your first idea.
When I have ever started being serious after a joke with the line "But seriously"?
-
/me shrugs, settles down with his copy of The Little Prince.
-
I disagree with the idea that Children's Books can't be discussed at a college level. That was just my kneejerk reaction to Grefter's comment.
Upon further inspection, I realize that Grefter means that college students are not reading children's books to enrich themselves or to expose themselves to new ideas. Yes, good point.
But -creating- a book for Children, and generally, the younger the target age the more this is true... is really difficult stuff. Trying to distill the main ideas and cut out unnecessary details and keep meaning intact and accessible to younger readers.... Well, -I- have trouble with it and it's been a subject of discussion many times among my co-workers (elementary school teachers).
Since we're treading really close to such a topic, I wanted to ask for some opinions about the creation and direction of children's books from the DL. Yeah, whatever Movies topic. Tangents are good.
-Djinn
-
When I have ever started being serious after a joke with the line "But seriously"?
When the Austrailians went to war with the Philippines, because they were concerned about their eucalyptus crops being taken over by Asia? Since we're treading really close to such a topic, I wanted to ask for some opinions about the creation and direction of children's books from the DL. Yeah, whatever Movies topic. Tangents are good.
-Djinn
I have absolutely no idea what you're babbling about.
-
I have absolutely no idea what you're babbling about.
short version: I think writing children's books is hard. What do you think?
-
Don't know exactly how young you intend, but this should work through the second grade at least, if memory serves.
Young children have an incredible ability to focus huge amounts of attention on very small things, and they like rereading. If I were writing (and illustrating) a children's book, I would do two things. First, repeat the same action over and over again, with different results, changing it up only at the end (The prince visits a planet, etc). Second, I would include seemingly inconsequential details in the beginning and perhaps through the book that matter for the end of it, like Labyrinth's stuffed animals. If there's a cooler feeling to an eight year old than being in on the big secret, I don't know what it is.
-
Since we're treading really close to such a topic, I wanted to ask for some opinions about the creation and direction of children's books from the DL. Yeah, whatever Movies topic. Tangents are good.
-Djinn
From what I've seen, the more modern children's books have been attempting to throw either too much propaganda or too many morals at an audience that can't really accept and appreciate the values--or fully comprehend what's being said--and that it's actually making more and more children want to go to the senseless television to watch things they don't need to try and understand.
I say too much propaganda because of the direction the government's gone with their political correctness. They've decided to aim lower and raise children with the ideas and morals they want them to. And while this has pretty much always been the case, it just feels like it's gotten much stronger as time has progressed.
I also say too many morals (and too much for them to handle) because there are a lot of fantastic children's books that teach a great many lessons that me, nor any of my friends, have managed to catch until more recent years. It all went over our heads, and the stories were just that--fun little stories.
Young children have an incredible ability to focus huge amounts of attention on very small things, and they like rereading. If I were writing (and illustrating) a children's book, I would do two things. First, repeat the same action over and over again, with different results, changing it up only at the end (The prince visits a planet, etc). Second, I would include seemingly inconsequential details in the beginning and perhaps through the book that matter for the end of it, like Labyrinth's stuffed animals. If there's a cooler feeling to an eight year old than being in on the big secret, I don't know what it is.
Children may like re-reading and be able to focus to an incredible degree, but that doesn't change a lack of understanding. They have neither the life experience to compare it to nor the base values to understand it with. They're still trying to figure out what "good" and "bad" is, some times.
-
There's identifying with a character doing extraordinary things; having a young protagonist that the child can identify with in a story where fantastic or unreal things happen to them is a fairly key element to most children's fiction, IIRC. I don't have much else to add, Children's literature's kind of outside the realms of what I write/think about often.
-
The notJim is pretty spot on with dissection of very early age literature. Case in point see Spot books, Meg and Mog or if you want to completely overkill it with good children's books for learning to read, The Very Hungry Caterpillar. They do also like to identify with the subject in fantastic work. This is the time something like Where The Wild Things Are come up.
-
I was thinking of Where the Wild Things Are, in fact. On a much grander scale you also have The Eleventh Hour, which completely captured my imagination, along with pretty much everyone else's in my second grade class. For those unfamiliar it is a mystery where all the clues you need are hidden in the illustrations, written backwards, jumbled, in code, etc.
Parents take note: the most effective bedtime story I know of is The Tomten, a book about a gnome-like fellow who looks after a snow-covered farm at night, checking in with all the sleeping animals.
Apropos of nothing, books that are still unquestionably worth reading that are for kids? Anything by Roald Dahl.
-
All of Graeme Base' work is also a good example for how to write and illustrate a book for young children as well. Roald Dahl of course is a quintessential example for how to write for children on topics they understand without talking down to them. This is all very good stuff which my understanding of Dev Psych backs up.
Edit - Actually having checked out some of the other stuff Base has put out since I was part of his demographic it looks like he has continued to really push the envelope in it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Band_In_The_Universe This sounds pretty damned awesome and fairly experimental for a children's book.
-
All of Graeme Base' work is also a good example for how to write and illustrate a book for young children as well. Roald Dahl of course is a quintessential example for how to write for children on topics they understand without talking down to them. This is all very good stuff which my understanding of Dev Psych backs up.
Edit - Actually having checked out some of the other stuff Base has put out since I was part of his demographic it looks like he has continued to really push the envelope in it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Band_In_The_Universe This sounds pretty damned awesome and fairly experimental for a children's book.
Wow. The Worst Band In The Universe sounds like an excellent (and very topical) book to read to Japanese youngsters.
Their creativity is going to be squeezed out of them soon enough. It's amazing to see the difference between the free-spirited sixth graders and the up-and-coming downtrodden salarymen of ninth grade. It's like 'You were so genki last year! What happened!?'
I need to find a copy of this book.
-
Terminator Salvation:
Cinematography - 9/10
Design - 8/10
Costumes - 8/10
Soundtrack - 3/10 (what music?)
Over Cheesy Lines - 9/10 (please stop saying things I already know!)
Story - 7/10. That said, I have to pep up on my Terminator history.
Disappointment Level - 6/10. Sam Worthington's sacrifice was pretty lame, plus uh, it was assumed that his heart *spoiler*
was malfunctional to begin with after a specific point in the latter part of the movie after Terminator knocked the shit out of it. But John Connor gets a good beating heart? Bullshit, he could have totally made a recovery in some nonrealistic way if they can send shit back in time. Plus it sort of quickly wraps up, and lamely wraps up, the redemption background of the character. LAME. 0/10
*end spoiler*
It was an entertaining movie if you forget much about Terminator. Well, no, because it's difficult to understand the overarching storyline. Scrap what I just said, I don't feel like backspacing.
-
Up: Is good and stuff. Yeah.
-
was malfunctional to begin with after a specific point in the latter part of the movie after Terminator knocked the shit out of it. But John Connor gets a good beating heart? Bullshit, he could have totally made a recovery in some nonrealistic way if they can send shit back in time. Plus it sort of quickly wraps up, and lamely wraps up, the redemption background of the character. LAME. 0/10
Za
They don't have the Time tech yet. Kyle and the T-800 being shiny new are evidence of this.
-
Here's what stood out to me; Skynet was specifically after Kyle Reese.
This makes perfect sense to the viewer- kill Kyle Reese, he never goes back in time to become John Connor's father. Thusly, John will be highly motivated to save him and easy to trap. Direct, logical.
But why does Skynet know this in-context? John's father is, unless I've completely lost my mind, listed as "unknown" in all John's files (I recall them actually showing this in T2). I suppose you could make up some justification about the info being in Sarah's psychiatric file? But it seems more likely to me that the series has entered Timey Whimey Ball status and thus we're on a timeline in which Skynet knows that it's sent Terminators into the past and the info they gathered. Crazy, but fun possibilities.
-
Star Trek: Watched it over the weekend. Very good. The backstory was really, really dumb, but everything else ranged from solid to excellent, particularly the casting. Zachary Quinto sold me on him as Spock pretty quickly, and Karl Urban must have used necromancy to summon the wandering soul of DeForest Kelly or something, because he was freaking perfect.
Also, for all the ways in which the story wasn't "real" Trek, it did something genuinely interesting and different with the setting that makes me want to see what happens to the Federation next, and not just to the characters. That hasn't happened since the Dominion War.
-
Also saw Star Trek, and it was really really good. They screwed with the canon, but they explained why they screwed with it. So it worked for me. Spock makeout scenes are just wrong though.
-
Even if they involve Kirk?
-
Leonard Nimoy hasn't gotten any younger. And let us not talk about William Shatner in his undies.
-
I fail to see how this makes it any less sexy.
-
You wouldn't.
-
Either would you.
-
Saw Gran Torino while I was back home. Not at all what I was expecting, but still a good movie. Bogs down a bit in the middle though.
-
I haven't seen it, but apparantly "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" involves 4 guys taking over the 6 Train at rush hour....
HAHAHAHA. Talk about requiring a suspension of disbelief. I doubt a terrorist would have enough room to pull his gun on the 6 train at rush hour, let alone be able to taking the entire train.
-
Hot Fuzz- Hilarious. Not usually in the laugh out loud sense, just for the sheer over the top nature of the movie.
-
I haven't seen it, but apparantly "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" involves 4 guys taking over the 6 Train at rush hour....
HAHAHAHA. Talk about requiring a suspension of disbelief. I doubt a terrorist would have enough room to pull his gun on the 6 train at rush out, let alone be able to taking the entire train.
The 6 Train? Seriously? Well, I guess the thought of the cops caring about, say, a hijacked J train is also pretty hard to believe.
-
I haven't seen it, but apparantly "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" involves 4 guys taking over the 6 Train at rush hour....
HAHAHAHA. Talk about requiring a suspension of disbelief. I doubt a terrorist would have enough room to pull his gun on the 6 train at rush hour, let alone be able to taking the entire train.
It has John Travolta. His existence alone demands more suspension of disbelief than most movies can ask of you.
This is where I slip into grouchy hipster mode and say to just watch the 70's version of Pelham instead. It has Walter Matthau, Transit Authority officer and generally does the low-key, normal-people-caught-in-shitty-situation thriller thing well. Also, it doesn't have John Travolta.
-
It has John Travolta. His existence alone demands more suspension of disbelief than most movies can ask of you.
This is where I slip into grouchy hipster mode and say to just watch the 70's version of Pelham instead. It has Walter Matthau, Transit Authority officer and generally does the low-key, normal-people-caught-in-shitty-situation thriller thing well. Also, it doesn't have John Travolta.
Seconded with fury. Pelham 1-2-3 needs no remakes.
-
Say, shouldn't it be, y'know, on the red trains if it's 1-2-3?
-
Apparantly it's because it's the train leaving from Pelham Bay at 1:23.
-
How many remade movies actually needed the remakes anyways?
John Travolta is certainly one of the actors that I can no longer completely buy in a movie, though.
-
How many remade movies actually needed the remakes anyways?
That depends. "Needed" in the sense that the original movie had a good premise/source material but maybe the execution could've been better? I'm struggling to think of one. People remake classics instead, because they are classics, and thus you have a known commodity that people can recognize and which will make your new movie stand out in a crowd (even if only a little). This, of course, is the studio's reason for liking remakes. I'm really struggling to think of one that improved on the original artistically, though.
-
I preferred the remade Ocean's Eleven to the original. Whether it was honestly -better- or I just liked the actors more, I couldn't say.
The sequels are a different story.
-
The Twelve Angry Men remake likewise probably didn't need to be made, but it at least felt slightly different in how it played thanks to the different leads, and both of them felt equally good.
-
Actually, a really obvious example occurred to me: Lord of the Rings. I don't think anyone's going to dispute that the Peter Jackson trilogy is better than the animated movies.
-
Actually, a really obvious example occurred to me: Lord of the Rings. I don't think anyone's going to dispute that the Peter Jackson trilogy is better than the animated movies.
*raises hand*
Better for different reasons, admittedly.
-
I dunno, Peter Jackson version didn't have "Where there's a whip, there's a way!".
-
Actually, a really obvious example occurred to me: Lord of the Rings. I don't think anyone's going to dispute that the Peter Jackson trilogy is better than the animated movies.
I'm sure there are some worthy, even superior remakes out there, but I don't think this counts. They're 2 separate movies based on the same source material, but I wouldn't say the latter is based at all on the former.
Oh, and Ocean's 11. never seen the first, but I'll agree the remake justifies its existence.
-
The Twelve Angry Men remake likewise probably didn't need to be made, but it at least felt slightly different in how it played thanks to the different leads, and both of them felt equally good.
Wow, didn't even know that got remade, I've only seen the 1957 version. You can tell it's based on a play, though, so I'm not surprised it holds up well to different interpretations by different casts.
Teeth: Jess Weixler is hot to death. I don't remember anything else about it. A+
-
Year One: Moderately amusing, but not really worth theater prices. Bizarre mix of Cavemen and early Bible stuff. Gets a point just for this line though: "We are the Hebrews! The righteous ones! ...Not very good at sports..."
-
TF2 was a pretty shitty film.
-
I finally saw Batman: The Dark Night. It was okay but not great, Ledger's Joker didn't do it for me for some reason I can't pin down. Still not a bad movie anyway.
-
Synecdoche, New York: Not as rewarding as Adaptation or Eternal Sunshine, but the Charlie Kaufman brand of weirdness is out in full force and I did enjoy the staggering insanity on display. Grady Tripp has nothing on Caden Cotard. I could only shake my head when it became apparent that he'd built a duplicate warehouse inside the warehouse-stage that housed his neverending play solely for the purpose of verisimilitude. Or built a larger warehouse over his original one. Actually, I think both happened. It seemed like his production had actually eaten the city by the end. Ultimately had some difficulty enjoying the movie as a drama, though. The more surreal touches (the burning house) were more just random here, as opposed to actually helping to propel the story forward. Also, if Caden had invested 10% of the effort he applied to his art on actually living his life, he wouldn't have had so many damn problems in the first place. This was probably the point of the movie, but it's harder for me to sympathize here than in, say, Adaptation, in part due to scale: we see most of the main character's life here and he barely changes at all. Still a neat movie, just not Kaufman's best work.
Hancock: Well, it was half of a fun movie. If it was all just about the title character's rehabilitation, I would've been fine with that even if it just led to the expected, uplifting Hollywood ending. He was enough of a douche at the beginning that that process probably could've been strung out for the movie's full runtime (with interruptions for the obligatory superhero hijinks). It would've been watchable, if still routine. Instead, the movie went badly awry when it tried to introduce backstory and mythology. Guys, you're writing a movie about a superhuman drunk; you seem okay with the light comedy that demands but you just do not have the chops to turn it into anything more complicated. Oh well, at least it got Jason Bateman a paycheck.
-
So basically it's what El-Hazard would be if Fujisawa was the main character and it sucked?
-
I liked Hancock >.>
-
I liked Hancock >.>
-
So basically it's what El-Hazard would be if Fujisawa was the main character and it sucked?
That could never happen.
-
I just watched Push.
Bullshit.
-
So basically it's what El-Hazard would be if Fujisawa was the main character and it sucked?
I have no idea who that person is and only a vague idea of what that show is. So uh.
And hey, I didn't say Hancock was totally without merit, Soppy. Just that it...decided to be about something different halfway through and that something turned out to be trainwrecky (as a rule, I am not real fond of trainwrecking when it lacks amusing commentary). It goes from parodying comic books to pretending to be one, complete with melodrama and needlessly complicated backstory. There was no need to switch gears when it was competent enough at the former approach.
EDIT: I thought the writer's name sounded familiar. Well, two are credited, but Vince Gilligan was the name I knew. X-Files writer, also produced the last couple (craptacular) seasons. Explains a lot. IMDB also informs me that the director of Hancock is slated to do a Dune remake next year. Reallly don't think we need another attempt at filming that.
-
El Hazard is a "high school student teleported to another world" show in which everybody so transported gets superpowers assigned at random. The kid's teacher's power is that he has prodigious superhuman strength when he's not drunk. His favorite application of said power is to knock down any walls between him and the nearest liquor cabinet.
-
El Hazard always struck me as "Anime cliches to the max, but done well."
Movies!
Watched two lackluster suspense films today.
"Karla" (oddly enough, called "Monster" in Japan) is a suspense flick based on the lives of two real-life serial killers from the 70s. It's told as a frame story in flashback as the titular (accused) serial killer Karla is recalling the events of the murders to a psychotherapist who will determine whether she deserves parole. Karla tells a story where she falls in love with a great guy who turns out to have a thing for raping girls and beating his wife, which escalates out of control as Karla finds herself part of the creepy sex fetish and subsequent murders (because she loves him!). The acting holds up pretty well, but the entire conflict is portrayed more like a Lifetime movie than a suspense flick. It's only at the very end when anything resembling creepy appears when it turns out that Karla may or may not have been a more willing participant in the murders than her story implies. It's too bad as it could have been cool if it didn't move at a snail's pace.
Number 2 was "Hannibal Rising". I've only ever seen "Silence of the Lambs" which is one of my favorite films ever and while I've heard tons of reviews saying that the sequels ruin the movie, I found myself with the morbid curiosity to see how bad they could be. After all, I love cheesy horror films! Well, Hannibal Rising is less 'cheesy' and more 'artsy and slow', so I didn't really get any of the suspense of the original film NOR the splatterfest I was expecting from a poorly-done film about a serial killer/cannibal. What a let down, this movie can't even do 'cheesy' right! The story isn't that bad and sometimes it's almost creepy, but it would have done better if it wasn't a prequel to Silence of the Lambs. I mean, who doesn't love a good story about a young child getting traumatized and then seeking revenge on his tormentors by eating them? (The plot of Digital Devil Saga?!) Overall though, it gets points for making Hannibal younger and sexier, which really fits into the 'cheesy' category that I find so amusing!
-
Watched Bruno. I'm pretty sure the best part is a woman saying she would give her baby liposuction to get her in a photo shoot where she would wear a baby Nazi uniform and push a baby Jew in to a baby Jew oven.
-
Watched Bruno. I'm pretty sure the best part is a woman saying she would give her baby liposuction to get her in a photo shoot where she would wear a baby Nazi uniform and push a baby Jew in to a baby Jew oven.
... sold.
-
Pump Up The Volume. Christian Slater as a teenager in 1990 (pre-grunge for people counting) having a pirate radio station winding up kids into a frenzy of distrust for the system and a fucked up school and to not put up with the bullshit and see the truth. Of course this whole movie is a lie. Still it is a fun romp and isn't a bad slice of late 80's early 90's youth culture. Bonus points for taste in music. Leonard Cohen and MC5. Good times. Also bonus points for a young Seth Green.
-
Michael Clayton: Just generally outstanding. Having a hard time singling out any aspect of it in particular, but I enjoyed it more than the majority of movies I've seen this year.
The Trial: Finally got around to seeing the Orson Welles version. It is pretty groovy. Everything's shot in this oppressive, sterile, industrial wasteland that can only bring to mind the Soviet Union (idly, the movie was made in 1962), perfectly appropriate since that was a place where things as surreal and dysfunctional as Kafka stories actually occurred on a daily (if not hourly) basis (one could credit Kafka with being eerily prescient, but I suspect that it was by accident). Also, I have been trying to place the music for days with no success and this irritates me. I know I've heard it somewhere, just...argh.
-
I'm way the fuck behind on movie progress. I'm only just now up to 30 for the year, and the year is long over half over. What I've seen.
21)Glory Road
~Is a sports movie. It's pretty much exactly what it was advertised as. Did it need a movie made after it? Maybe! Is it different from any other sports movie? Not particularly. Is it well made? Eh, sure.
22)Syndromes and a Century
~DO NOT WANT. So yeah, I like movies. I'm a film major. This is one of the things that film majors have to put up with, namely, Experimental Films. This movie.... ....actually did sort of make sense, but it still seemed pointless. Experimental films are pointless. Dear god. Why.
23)Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
~This is a classic, but some parts felt painful to watch on a review. Also, that scene where the poor little sneaker gets dipped is surprisingly horrifying for a PG movie. Happy cartoon characters graphically tortured to death. Weird. Eerie.
24)Heavy Metal
~Continuing my small foray into animation was this classic/disaster. The cast of SCTV does most of the voices for this jack of all trades movie that has elements of action, horror, romance, comedy, and epic fantasy, and succeeds at pretty much none of them. Also, animated titties and crazy bush. Gratuitous in some points. This movie had great music, and little else.
25)The Grave of the Fireflies
~SPOILERS for anyone who hasn't seen Grave of the Fireflies.
"Two Japanese Children Slowly Starve to Death in the midst of the allied bombing of Japan during World War 2"
It is exactly as depressing and awful as it sounds. I mean "Awful" as in the content is horrific. It's a very well-made movie that I enjoyed watching. Gut-wrenchingly authentic, and even more depressing when you realize that the writer of the story did it as penance to his sister who did die, only he killed himself off in the written version, too. Sad, sad SAD.
26)Black Snake Moan
~I had enough with Animation, so I watched this little number.
Whoever did the ad campaign for this movie needs to be SHOT. Hurf-durf, pld black dude chains up a young white woman in his lawn in sexy outfits.
This is actually a pretty serious movie. Sure, it... DOES have an old black dude chaining up a half-naked white woman, but he does it for the OPPOSITE reasons as the ads made it out to be. He was trying to keep her still so she wouldn't binge on drugs/sex. He finds her beaten and ODed on the street and takes her in. Apart from the hokey wedding, this is a pretty decent flick. It's also a MUSICAL that centers on THE BLUES.
SIDE NOTE: I didn't like the idea of Timberlake acting, but he did a decent job portraying panic disorder, speaking as someone who actually has it.
27)The Hustler
~Classic movie that I watched because it felt like time to watch a genuine classic movie. This turned out to be a classic for a reason. It was a really well-acted film about knowing when to quit. The relevance kinda hit home. I don't really watch many movies from this time period, so one thing that struck me was the sexuality of the movie. I picture movies of the time as being hokey and full of gosh-darn earnestness, but maybe I'm too into Jimmy Stewart.
28)Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
~Fluffy. Worth watching if you enjoy seeing robots beat on each other, but a few parts of the movie were preposterous (which is a FEAT, when your general premise is "Car-shaped robots kill each other over possession of a mystical staff/cube") For one, how would an underdeveloped weapon fire inland far enough to HIT A FUCKING PYRAMID?! Those aren't exactly BY THE WATER, GUYS. Also, pointless robo-leg-humping. Still, it's fairly entertaining. It's not a masterpiece, but you can watch this movie and have fun.
29)Harold and Kumar go to White Castle
~Starts off really slow. Picks up about when another guy starts peeing next to Kumar. Like, oddly close to him. After that turn, the movie never looks back and gets weirder and weirder. Very funny film. NPH was fantastic as "himself". (Of note, he's Credited "Neil Patrick Harris ~ Neil Patrick Harris". Not "Neil Patrick Harris ~ Himself". I wonder if this was actually because of how grossly fictional his character was. Yes, I have too much free time. ALSO awesome? Christopher Meloni. Holy hell, I didn't think the guy from Law and Order SVU could make me laugh like that.
30)Superbad
~ALSO starts off really slowly. This is the second time I watched this film, but it still kept me in stitches from shortly before the cops show up to the end of the movie. It's just an absurdly funny "into the night" flick, one that you should probably watch if you haven't, already.
So yeah. 30 down, 70 to go by 2010.
-
It is indeed because the movie version is the total opposite of his real life self, so he specifically asked to be credited as such. The fact that it is they type of character he does best only adds to the awesome.
-
Indeed. Grave of the Fireflies is incredibly good and incredibly sad. Actually one of the few titles I was proud to be selling at CPM!
-
27)The Hustler
~Classic movie that I watched because it felt like time to watch a genuine classic movie. This turned out to be a classic for a reason. It was a really well-acted film about knowing when to quit. The relevance kinda hit home. I don't really watch many movies from this time period, so one thing that struck me was the sexuality of the movie. I picture movies of the time as being hokey and full of gosh-darn earnestness, but maybe I'm too into Jimmy Stewart.
Watch more older movies, VSM. Late 60's-70's gradually discarded the "gosh-darn earnestness" you speak of; coming out in 1961, I suppose The Hustler was little ahead of the curve. Paul Newman is pretty awesome in general, yes. See also: Cool Hand Luke, and...Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, which is one of my favorite movies and it's some form of crime that few of you mooks have seen it. Pre-60's...Billy Wilder movies are usually worth seeking out (Sunset Boulevard, Stalag 17, Some Like It Hot, and The Apartment are the ones I've seen, and all were quite good).
Also, if you like Jimmy Stewart, watch Anatomy of a Murder. It's great fun to see him play a complete schmuck (and he was obviously enjoying every minute of it).
-
Eh, I like the first Heavy Metal. Has a certain charm to it. Second one is absolutely wretched though.
Harry Potter and the Lots of Snogging: Rather good. Probably the best movie since the first one. Draco's actor does a particularly fine job; he was rather lacking in the last couple of movies. My only complaint is that the director seems to have an aversion to showing important scenes on camera. Every time a major spell is cast you end up looking at a wall while it happens.
-
I get the feeling VSM saw the nudity and it made him get all tightassed about it to enjoy anything. Heavy Metal's a fun little film thought not a classic by any means. Agreed on Heavy Metal 2000, though. That movie sucked.
-
Maybe he didn't actually see it. Maybe he was just tripping balls on cat urine.
-
That episode of South Park is incredible.
The first Heavy Metal wasn't then and never will be good, but what it is and will be is the perfect nostalgia trip to the tawdry side of the '80s, like an anti-Breakfast Club or something.
-
I get the feeling VSM saw the nudity and it made him get all tightassed about it to enjoy anything. Heavy Metal's a fun little film thought not a classic by any means. Agreed on Heavy Metal 2000, though. That movie sucked.
The odds of me rating a movie LOWER because it contains nudity are about the same odds of you deciding to quit drinking and masturbating cold turkey so you join the Church of Scientology.
-
I just watched Push.
Bullshit.
Yeah, pretty much. (I was at the parents' place yesterday and they'd rented this.)
It's like, hey, evil government dudes, maybe you'd get better results from these espers you're hunting and drugging to death if you just...paid them well? I hear that works with most people. And they spend the whole movie looking for this drug...what, was it the only vial they had of it? Did they not have the formula written down somewhere back at HQ? What kind of chickenshit research outfit doesn't keep copious notes of their progress? I suppose it's possible they just wanted to get it back to keep it out of some other country's hands (maybe this was pointed out, I dunno--I fell asleep for 10-20 minutes in the middle of the movie, but I got the impression that I didn't miss much). But still, if your performance enhancing drug is killing all of the test subjects, you don't just keep using it on hundreds of people until you find one who survives. YOU MAKE A NEW DRUG.
Either way, the entire plot is predicated on the Division being bureaucratically incompetent.
-
I get the feeling VSM saw the nudity and it made him get all tightassed about it to enjoy anything. Heavy Metal's a fun little film thought not a classic by any means. Agreed on Heavy Metal 2000, though. That movie sucked.
The odds of me rating a movie LOWER because it contains nudity are about the same odds of you deciding to quit drinking and masturbating cold turkey so you join the Church of Scientology.
You are a ball of neurotic virgin possibly homosexual anxieties. Who knows what opinion you have of nudity.
-
Rented some movies recently that span a broad spectrum.
National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets- Fun. Not quite as solid as the first one, but still enjoyable. The difference between these movies and say, The DaVinci Code, is its absolute tongue-in-cheek nature, which turn it entertaining instead of headdesk worthy.
Zack and Miri Make a Porno- Hilarious but... not... great. It's not quite a complete movie, really. I get the angle they're going for, but the movie doesn't feel complete. Otherwise though, Jeff Anderson and Jason Mewes steal the show.
Valkyrie- Very dry, documentary style, but good. Not great, but good. Couldn't picture myself watching it again though.
-
Saw Doom. It was better than I expected. Never knew anything about Doom except that it was a really old, quintessential-ish FPS. Thought it was just going to be a stupid movie but it was okay for what it was worth. At least just the entertainment factor.
Saw Mean Streets. Good movie. Never saw Taxi or whatever with Robert de Niro at a younger age so I was very surprised at how lean he was. Either way. Ending was "wtf," but was necessary as the movie could have honestly dragged on forever.
-
30)Superbad
~ALSO starts off really slowly. This is the second time I watched this film, but it still kept me in stitches from shortly before the cops show up to the end of the movie. It's just an absurdly funny "into the night" flick, one that you should probably watch if you haven't, already
The cops ARE the best part of that movie. "I don't know, can you?"
-
Knowing: Yeah, I know, Nicolas Cage (I regard his presence in Adaptation and Raising Arizona as once-in-a-decade flukes, and it's usually safe to take him as an indicator that a bad movie lies ahead). But my parents assured me that this was good and insisted that I watch it. And I figured hey, Alex Proyas directed it, so there must be something worthwhile in it. Fairly serviceable thriller, as it turns out. The movie's propensity for callbacks make a number of plot developments obvious from early on (the nature of the
Strangers Whisperers, made truly obvious when one of them went all Lo-Pan, and the ultimate disaster), but competent direction and good production values ensure that this doesn't ruin the movie. Airplane/subway crash scenes had a visceral impact and were actually rather hard to watch. Excellent use of Beethoven, too.
I normally dislike stories about end-of-the-world prophecies, but at least Knowing does its own thing instead of piggybacking off whichever apocalypse theory is currently trendy (fuck 2012, fuck inane babbling about the Mayan calendar, and fuck Roland Emmerich).
Also,
it takes some guts to kill off humanity at the end of your movie. Especially in non-ironic fashion.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: Better than the first two (lol Chris Columbus), not as good as 3 & 5. Too much teenage romance, not enough plot. Structural problems are highlighted by the severe lack of time spent on exploring the actual subtitle of the movie (one line at the end, with almost no build-up to it? Seriously?) and the curiously anticlimactic finale. As much as *spoilers* actually can be anticlimactic, that is. But the filmmakers had a perfect excuse for a big fight scene at the end and it's rather curious that they declined to include it. I mean, A) it's in the book, so it's not like they'd have to invent anything, and B) dark wizards rampaging through the school, man. C'mon, villains being set loose in the most plot-important location of the 'verse makes it really apparent how far gone things are by that point in the over-plot. It seems silly to not take advantage of that. I mean, what, was Lavender mooning over Ron more important somehow? (The answer is no. Ron is never more important than anything.)
It's watchable, but 3&5 remain the only installments that I feel are actually commendable as movies.
-
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: Better than the first two (lol Chris Columbus), not as good as 3 & 5. Too much teenage romance, not enough plot. Structural problems are highlighted by the severe lack of time spent on exploring the actual subtitle of the movie (one line at the end, with almost no build-up to it? Seriously?) and the curiously anticlimactic finale. As much as *spoilers* actually can be anticlimactic, that is. But the filmmakers had a perfect excuse for a big fight scene at the end and it's rather curious that they declined to include it. I mean, A) it's in the book, so it's not like they'd have to invent anything, and B) dark wizards rampaging through the school, man. C'mon, villains being set loose in the most plot-important location of the 'verse makes it really apparent how far gone things are by that point in the over-plot. It seems silly to not take advantage of that. I mean, what, was Lavender mooning over Ron more important somehow? (The answer is no. Ron is never more important than anything.)
It's watchable, but 3&5 remain the only installments that I feel are actually commendable as movies.
The whole too much romance, not enough plot was a huge problem in the book too. It's not like it's even well written romance in the book. I still don't get how she could go from the character work she was able to do in OotP to that... It's easily my least favorite book for many reasons, this chief among them. The lack of the climactic battle was because they thought it'd take away from the same type of battle at the end of the last movie, which is still a dumb decision.
-
That was the only explanation I could come up with, yeah. Still doesn't sound like a sufficiently good reason to leave it out. At least, given how much fluff did get left in.
-
GI Joe: It's nonstop action from start to finish. Unfortunately, that has the opposite effect that was intended. There's so much action that it ends up being boring rather than thrilling. People die, and you don't care because you never had time to get to know them in the first place.
I did like the nods to the toys and 80s cartoon. The Cobra guns shoot effects that look like the little plastic spring-loaded fireballs common to the toys. Also, they worked in "Knowing is half the battle!"
-
People die? In G.I. Joe? MADNESS.
-
Yes, there is a disturbing lack of parachutes.
-
Watchmen Director's Cut- Thought it bore mentioning. They added in Hollis Mason's death scene, which was very, very well done. I can see why they took it out though, since it just feels awkward for the movie to have it where it is, even with the added extra references and build up to it. They added minor references to the New Frontiersman and Black Freighter in there as well. Still a great adaptation.
-
Started watching Pinocchio because it came on TV. Got very bored very quickly and stopped.
Got linked to a Mulan scene by some random location on the internet; ended up watching the whole movie and thoroughly enjoying it.
I'm puzzled by this; Pinocchio is considered such a classic and Mulan...doesn't seem to be. I guess I'll just chalk it up to Mulan being more modern, and thus containing fewer culturally discordant moments, more modern music and animation techniques, etc.
-
I always thought Mulan was considered to be the best Disney movie since... the Lion King? I forget the exact chronology. Pinnochio probably gets what hype it does because it is literally the second film Disney ever made and at the time was very technically impressive, rather than its merits on storytelling; as a film it probably holds up the least well of the first five Disney movies (after the first five you get a bunch I've barely heard of). Regardless, agreed with the former being a better film.
-
District 9 was awesome.
That is all.
-
I always thought Mulan was considered to be the best Disney movie since... the Lion King? I forget the exact chronology. Pinnochio probably gets what hype it does because it is literally the second film Disney ever made and at the time was very technically impressive, rather than its merits on storytelling; as a film it probably holds up the least well of the first five Disney movies (after the first five you get a bunch I've barely heard of). Regardless, agreed with the former being a better film.
There are people who dislike Mulan? Bunch of souless heathens. ;_;
-
I didn't care for it, but that's because the one time I saw it I was carting around my six-year-old cousin who had already seen it four times and said all the lines. I recall wanting to go see The Waterboy instead, because I was about 16 and that's the last time you can enjoy an Adam Sandler movie.
-
Mulan's main problem is that it is dark and serious, which doesn't really jibe with the whole Disney happyhappy experience. Also, Mulan has living parents.
-
Dumbo is ostracised by those around him.
Bambi's mother gets shot.
Mufasa is murdered on-screen.
The Beast. Just... the Beast.
I dunno. Mulan didn't feel exceptionally dark by Disney standards to me. I remember it having its share of playfulness (the entirety of Eddie Murphy's character for instance) and beyond that the subject matter wasn't light-hearted fluff but it hardly ranks as one of Disney's darkest tales.
-
I didn't care for it, but that's because the one time I saw it I was carting around my six-year-old cousin who had already seen it four times and said all the lines. I recall wanting to go see The Waterboy instead, because I was about 16 and that's the last time you can enjoy an Adam Sandler movie.
Punch Drunk Love.
Though, you can't exactly call it an Adam Sandler movie.
-
Wait, you stop liking Happy Gilmore at age 16?
Cooooool I've managed to stop aging!
Mulan did strike me as having less in the way of comic relief than is usual for a Disney movie... I think it's just that Mulan herself is a very serious character and it shifts the tone of the overall movie a bit (objectively I think on a jokes/minute ratio it's not really that much less than, say, Lion King).
The only Disney movie that ever struck me as outright dark overall is Hunchback of Notre Dame. This probably has something to do with the villain having a song about how he wants to capture and rape the heroine.
-
I think Gaston has something similar in Beauty and the Beast, though. Except that he gets a spiffy rug in the process.
And, lots of random Disney protagonists around that time are fairly serious. I mean, Pocahontas also had almost no humour in the main plot, with all of it coming from the spirits and her animal companions.
-
True, but the subject matter in Pocahontas isn't as dark as Mulan's (or at least is not presented as such. Preventing mounting war vs fighting off highly destructive invasion force complete with burned-out villages.)
-
Wait, you stop liking Happy Gilmore at age 16?
Cooooool I've managed to stop aging!
Only mentally, sadly. I know it annoys my co-workers when I get distracted by shiny objects.
The only Disney movie that ever struck me as outright dark overall is Hunchback of Notre Dame. This probably has something to do with the villain having a song about how he wants to capture and rape the heroine.
I'd say both The Rescuers and The Black Cauldron were overall dark.
-
Isn't Disney still trying to pretend The Black Cauldron never happened?
-
I saw District 9. I went into the movie with little assumptions as the trailer didn't exactly give me a solid understanding of what exactly the movie will be like. Plus I didn't research it. I've heard it's getting really good reviews. The movie was great. I think a new hero was born: Wikus van der Merwe (I think it's a Dutch name!). I don't exactly like alien movies as I find them all to be tepid and redundant, or just superficial and not enough is there. District 9 does alien movies justice. For me, this has been a very, very long time.
Wikus van der Merwe is an interesting antagonist-becomes-protagonist. I think if I say anything more, I will seriously spoil the movie as every tidbit culminates into awesomeness and character building. Either way, the stunt he pulls in the end definitely redeems his awesome points as throughout the movie, I began siding with the "prawns." It isn't a space opera. It is sci-fi. And it's about aliens. But ... it also covers Wikus's inner struggles as he's put through certain events and man's judgements to try to preserve his character as the movie continues. Good stuff!
This is generally a great movie that parallels past/current historical situations of ethnicities in internment camps or the likes, with political jargon and insincere consideration of their wants. Definitely has a racial undertone, and I don't find that a problem (New York Press!) as I believe it makes the emotions more readily accessible. Perhaps the New York Press needed more "typical" racial films like A Time to Kill or Rosewood? I'm quite frankly tired of those.
I haven't left a movie in a while and said, "OH MY GOD, I WANT TO SEE ITS sequel." They use the "live camera footage" technique or whatever it's called skillfully. At the beginning, I was like "Oh no, another Cloverfield," but that dropped as within 10 minutes it was already 10x better than that catastrophe (not a catastrophe really, but just not a good movie). I'm extremely happy that there are no big name American actors/resses because their cameos play absolutely no role in making the movie better. Good stuffs. I definitely wouldn't mind seeing it again if I were obliged. Best movie this year (for me).
And the preview for Law Abiding Citizen sort of sucks. But I think it would be an interesting movie. Zombieland is a must see. OH and EUREKA SEVEN IN TEH MOVIE THEATRES!?
-
Mulan 2. It showed up in Youtube's related videos right after the end of Mulan, and eventually I clicked on it. Expected it to be kinda bad (straight to DVD? Yeah...). It...was okay, nothing downright offensive about it barring perhaps a bit of Deus Ex Machina. At the same time, there wasn't a single scene where I thought "wow, that was awesome". Just...overall unmemorable.
-
Sounds typical of straight to video Disney movies from what I recall. I know I've seen a few! Damned if I can remember any of them.
-
I saw District 9. I went into the movie with little assumptions as the trailer didn't exactly give me a solid understanding of what exactly the movie will be like. Plus I didn't research it. I've heard it's getting really good reviews. The movie was great. I think a new hero was born: Wikus van der Merwe (I think it's a Dutch name!). I don't exactly like alien movies as I find them all to be tepid and redundant, or just superficial and not enough is there. District 9 does alien movies justice. For me, this has been a very, very long time.
Wikus van der Merwe is an interesting antagonist-becomes-protagonist. I think if I say anything more, I will seriously spoil the movie as every tidbit culminates into awesomeness and character building. Either way, the stunt he pulls in the end definitely redeems his awesome points as throughout the movie, I began siding with the "prawns." It isn't a space opera. It is sci-fi. And it's about aliens. But ... it also covers Wikus's inner struggles as he's put through certain events and man's judgements to try to preserve his character as the movie continues. Good stuff!
This is generally a great movie that parallels past/current historical situations of ethnicities in internment camps or the likes, with political jargon and insincere consideration of their wants. Definitely has a racial undertone, and I don't find that a problem (New York Press!) as I believe it makes the emotions more readily accessible. Perhaps the New York Press needed more "typical" racial films like A Time to Kill or Rosewood? I'm quite frankly tired of those.
I haven't left a movie in a while and said, "OH MY GOD, I WANT TO SEE ITS sequel." They use the "live camera footage" technique or whatever it's called skillfully. At the beginning, I was like "Oh no, another Cloverfield," but that dropped as within 10 minutes it was already 10x better than that catastrophe (not a catastrophe really, but just not a good movie). I'm extremely happy that there are no big name American actors/resses because their cameos play absolutely no role in making the movie better. Good stuffs. I definitely wouldn't mind seeing it again if I were obliged. Best movie this year (for me).
And the preview for Law Abiding Citizen sort of sucks. But I think it would be an interesting movie. Zombieland is a must see. OH and EUREKA SEVEN IN TEH MOVIE THEATRES!?
Two thumbs up for your review, and for the movie. Go, go apartheid retrospectives!
-
Finally, after months of hearing hype from friends, got to see Rent. Utterly amazing film, with an amazing cast and perfect acting.
Although, Maureen's speech is just plain strange. I get the whole nursery rhyme reference, but... just plain weird. Mark is made of mucho awesome.
-
Horror film Grostesque was banned from the UK ... Might have ended up on CT's most disturbing horror movies ever (do not let gran watch) list if it had been released then. Only just heard about it, the article I spotted on new MSN updates was about the ban and the raters refusing to cert it.
-
Stuff about District 9.
Just saw this. Yeah, agreed with what those other people said, have no significant complaints, etc.
But man, I got probably the worst batch of previews I've ever seen. Four were for horror movies (one with a bunch of sorority girls getting chopped up, originality; some Rob Zombie crapfest that I just tried to tune out; another Final Destination movie, but wait this time it's THE Final Destination argh what; and that ridiculous Paul Bettany movie where he's an angel or something. Which might not count as a horror movie, but lord did it look bad). Christ, it's like Hollywood saved up the worst movies of the year for the week of my birthday. That's actually pretty normal for late August releases, but this lot was shittier than usual.
-
Happy birthday to the Ciddy from Hollywoodz, it seems.
-
They didn't have a preview for Inglorious Bastards? Fuckers.
Actually they didn't have it in my session last night either... Fuckers.
District 9 was alright. Apartheid is bad, kay. Interesting use of accent and local dialect. Honestly not super excited about it though.
-
I believe Inglorious Basterds started last week as well? So wouldn't be suitable for a preview.
-
IB opens tomorrow.
-
What? GO SEE THIS MOVIE THAT IS NOW ON AND YOU CAN PAY MONEY FOR when you have already payed for a movie is bad? Fail industry.
-
What? GO SEE THIS MOVIE THAT IS NOW ON AND YOU CAN PAY MONEY FOR when you have already payed for a movie is bad? Fail industry.
Probably. There are people who get into a theatre on one ticket, then spend six hours at the theatre going into two other movies they didn't pay for. From a business standpoint I can see why they'd want the previews to be something not out yet (and TV ads used for the "now playing" stuff).
-
I can answer this. The trailers are mandated by the distribution companies. Non-movie commercials are set by the theater chain (or the theater themselves). The theater recieves a list of what trailers go on what movie when the film arrives so they can be put on before the movie is built up. Sometimes they can shoehorn or pull any trailer they want at any time, and do that quite often, but thats who gets what say on what.
-
My best guess on why it's set up that way though (well, aside from obvious "distributer wants to advertise stuff they'll make money on" issues) is... I think it's generally assumed that your typical movie-goer watches TV as well. TV already does a bang up job of covering movies that are currently play as well as stuff that will be playing within the next month. So people expect (and, I imagine, prefer) their previews to be for things that will come out in 3-6 months. In other words, "oh hey go watch this it is out" is already covered in other venues, so they use the previews to cover "hey here's the next hot shit, spread the word".
-
I want to see Inglorious Bastards, but I think I'm more hyped for Sherlock Holmes. But that's on Christmas Day, so . . . yeeeeah, Inglorious Bastards it is. I'm hoping the trailer isn't better than the movie.
-
Ponyo: I didn't dislike it, but it's nowhere near as engaging as Miyazaki's other works. It's basically one long acid trip - I have no idea what Miyazaki was smoking but I hope it's illegal. There's a total lack of conflict in the movie. He managed to pull that off successfully in Totoro, but here it doesn't work.
-
Talladega Nights: Went into the movie knowing nothing about it other than the name and the fact that it shipped with launch PS3s. Loved it. (From the name of "exotic-word nights" I was expecting some kind of spicy romance. Instead it was an over-the-top comedy about Nascar. Well worth watching regardless).
-
Talladega Nights: Went into the movie knowing nothing about it other than the name and the fact that it shipped with launch PS3s. Loved it. (From the name of "exotic-word nights" I was expecting some kind of spicy romance. Instead it was an over-the-top comedy about Nascar. Well worth watching because the other movie it could have been would have blown hard.).
-
"If I had to compare the German people to a beast, I would compare them to the hawk. A noble predator. If I had to compare the Jewish people to a beast, I would suggest the rat. Unlike my fellow Germans, though, I mean this as a compliment. Once a human has abandoned dignity, he can be resourceful indeed." -Hans Landa, paraphrased
I thought this was usual villainous babble when I first heard the line (it's in the beginning section of the movie), but considering how Inglourious Basterds proceeds, with Landa generally right and the Jews indeed abandoning any trace of chivalry to be the bad guys... it seems the film actually agrees with this sentiment. That the Jews are indeed rats, and further that this is a good thing.
It's a good movie, mind, solidly made with great scenes alternately tense and funny, just... man, I'm not sure how much Tarantino realizes the leviathan-sized moral questions his movie contains. This really is a movie about Jewish psychotic killers vs. the noble Nazi underdogs, except that knowing Tarantino, he probably thinks that said psychotic killers are cool, which changes the moral calculus a bunch. I just... don't know. I mean, Tarantino's a smart guy. A main plot point of the film concerns "Nation's Pride," a German film in which a war hero guns down tons of Allies. Hitler is shown laughing it up as he watches the movie. Repeatedly. And Basterds is certainly a funny movie, with plenty of laughter in the crowd as the Nazis get killed left and right. This HAS to be intentional, that Nation's Pride and Inglorious Basterds are the same movie... if I didn't know better, I might think that this was some kind of masterful postmodernist "show something by doing the opposite," except that I think Tarantino really does think revenge / exploitation movies are cool from interviews. ???
So yeah. Definitely a thought-provoking comedy-drama, if surprisingly light on action (there is literally maybe 10 seconds in the film of the Basterds' guerilla activities in France). Also realism is non-existent but that isn't really the point. I'm not sure I took from it what Tarantino intended, but it was certainly worth viewing.
-
Max Payne- A film about the Max Payne movie, with Milia Kunis, Ludacris as the good guy cop, and Mark Wahlberg as Max. It's as awful as you'd expect.
-
The Bad Seed: Is pretty much the grandmother of all those evil-little-kid-kills-people movies. Which is an unfortunate legacy because this is actually a good movie (on account of relying on dialogue and acting instead of titillation--none of the murders happen onscreen). It's impossible not to sympathize with the mom, creepy deviant Leroy does an admirable act of Obfuscating Stupidity...and there had to be something wrong with the actress playing that little girl. She was a model sociopath: bereft of all human emotion, but calculating enough to mimic it when doing so would earn a favorable response from the adults around her, drops the act completely around the one person who makes it clear he can see right through it, explodes in an unholy fury when thwarted. This must be what Ann Coulter was like as a kid.
Mind, the movie bears all the hallmarks of the fifties--there's a fair amount of what VSM has referred to as "'Aw shucks' earnestness," but still, this is a movie where an eight-year-old girl lights a dude on fire and then wanders off to practice the piano while he burns. It's about as warped as 1956 Hollywood would let you be. Though apparently there was some meddling with the ending. On that note, it was about ten minutes longer than it had to be.
I would've been totally cool with the movie ending with the mom drugging the hellspawn into oblivion, just because of how well that scene played out. It didn't serve much purpose to have the docs revive the kid just so she could be smote by the wrath of Zeus immediately thereafter. I'd guess the Hays Code frowned upon a mother killing her daughter, no matter how horrible a creature it was, so they had to find some way to take the responsibility out of her hands. Wikipedia informs me that they did change the ending from the source material, at least: apparently, mom dies, devil child lives in the original story. Supposedly the censors objected to this because it showed a criminal coming out on top. I'd object to it because it would be lame and also fucking depressing. I know this movie predated the cliches of modern horror films by decades, but still, I don't have enough words to describe how much I loathe the standard "OH WAIT THE HERO GETS SCREWED OVER AT THE LAST MINUTE AND THE VILLAIN IS STILL ALIVE LOLOL" ending.
Yes, I just spoiler-tagged a fifty-three-year-old movie. Why? Because the end credits asked me to. That was silly enough that I had to honor the request.
~
Barbarella: Precisely 12.65% of my brain cells died while watching this movie. The filmmakers obviously expected the audience to be on immense amounts of drugs while viewing it. They were clearly doing so while making it. The main character flies around in what can only be some manner of alien sex toy, of which every interior surface is covered in orange shag carpet. This is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is an astonishingly ugly piece of kitsch and finely calibrated to make me hate it, but Snow should see it at once.
-
In general horror as a genre seems to feel that the ultimate terror is the inability to fight fate and the utter helplessness of human beings.
This is also why I tend to strongly dislike horror as a genre.
-
Hey, it beats GUY WITH BIG KNIFE as far as I'm concerned. Just don't take it seriously as a worldview.
Barbarella: Precisely 12.65% of my brain cells died while watching this movie. The filmmakers obviously expected the audience to be on immense amounts of drugs while viewing it. They were clearly doing so while making it. The main character flies around in what can only be some manner of alien sex toy, of which every interior surface is covered in orange shag carpet. This is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is an astonishingly ugly piece of kitsch and finely calibrated to make me hate it, but Snow should see it at once.
I have to ask why you even entertained the possibility that it wouldn't be that. The packaging can't have been too subtle for you.
-
Barbarella: Precisely 12.65% of my brain cells died while watching this movie. The filmmakers obviously expected the audience to be on immense amounts of drugs while viewing it. They were clearly doing so while making it. The main character flies around in what can only be some manner of alien sex toy, of which every interior surface is covered in orange shag carpet. This is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is an astonishingly ugly piece of kitsch and finely calibrated to make me hate it, but Snow should see it at once.
Way ahead of you, I watched it when I was like 18. Also, you really need 100% more snark in your bloodcells, that movie is the funniest thing this side of DDS2 plot.
-
I saw Inglourious Bastards more as a movie that's about wartime movies, myself.
-
My friends and I are getting together for a movie marathon (no real theme), and we each chose a movie to watch. Overall, I think my friend's have pretty awesome taste. ;p
The movies we chose are;
Fight Club
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Into the Wild
Little Miss Sunshine
Milk
American History X
I am certainly look forward to it. =)
The one I chose was Fight Club, if anyone's curious. One of my friends actually also chose Fight Club, but changed her movie to Eternal Sunshine.
-
Saw District 9, basically just gonna reaffirm Idun's rant in that it is seriously awesome. Zombieland also looks like a must see, and already have plans to catch it with a friend.
-
I saw Inglourious Bastards more as a movie that's about wartime movies, myself.
This is what it is. Also it probably is the post modern thing about how the movie is the movie inside the movie. Tarantino will still love violence exploitation done well, but that is why it is post modern.
and there had to be something wrong with the actress playing that little girl. She was a model sociopath: bereft of all human emotion, but calculating enough to mimic it when doing so would earn a favorable response from the adults around her, drops the act completely around the one person who makes it clear he can see right through it, explodes in an unholy fury when thwarted. This must be what Ann Coulter was like as a kid.
Sounds like a child actor to me.
Needs more Man on Fire Piggy.
On horror movies. The genre is pure shit. This is why you watch the bad ones, because they make the "good" ones worse. Or make the actually genuinely fucking creepy ones amazing.
-
Barbarella: Precisely 12.65% of my brain cells died while watching this movie. The filmmakers obviously expected the audience to be on immense amounts of drugs while viewing it. They were clearly doing so while making it. The main character flies around in what can only be some manner of alien sex toy, of which every interior surface is covered in orange shag carpet. This is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is an astonishingly ugly piece of kitsch and finely calibrated to make me hate it, but Snow should see it at once.
I have to ask why you even entertained the possibility that it wouldn't be that. The packaging can't have been too subtle for you.
Oh, I had no real expectation of quality. Sometimes I rent famous movies just to see what the big deal is.
~
Saw District 9, basically just gonna reaffirm Idun's rant in that it is seriously awesome. Zombieland also looks like a must see, and already have plans to catch it with a friend.
Zombieland looked like it used up all its jokes in the trailer. Personally not expecting much from it. It was funnier when it was called Shaun of the Dead.
~
and there had to be something wrong with the actress playing that little girl. She was a model sociopath: bereft of all human emotion, but calculating enough to mimic it when doing so would earn a favorable response from the adults around her, drops the act completely around the one person who makes it clear he can see right through it, explodes in an unholy fury when thwarted. This must be what Ann Coulter was like as a kid.
Sounds like a child actor to me.
They're rarely this convincing (the actress was apparently even nominated for an Oscar, which doesn't happen often with child actors for the simple reason that most of them suck). You can almost see the little wheels turning in her head as she works out how to best exploit every human being around her.
~
Eternal Sunshine hype goes here. Best out of those movies in my opinion, Piggyman. Fight Club's entertaining just as long as you're not watching it with anyone who takes Tyler Durden seriously, I enjoyed American History X when I saw it but that was like in high school or something, Little Miss Sunshine is pretty typical indie fare though with a careful eye for targeting mass appeal more than most such movies. It's very twee, like it's consciously exploiting its own quirkiness. It's okay, but eh. Paints in broad strokes and the pageant itself was traumatizing (which was the point but still, ewww).
Haven't seen Into the Wild or Milk. They're on the Netflix queue, but that's like 200 items long at this point, so.
-
There was a joke about how bad children actors are in there, just as a heads up.
-
I decided to ignore the snark because I know how much you love explaining jokes.
-
As much as I love explaining jokes, here is some revenge. I present to you the plot of Nightmare Man and everything wrong with horror movies today.
Storyline
The film is about a tormented woman (Ellen) who believes there is a supernatural thing trying to kill her—her "nightmare man". Her husband and doctors believe she's a paranoid schizophrenic. On the way to psychiatric ward, the Morris' car breaks down. When her husband goes to get gas, Ellen stays behind and is attacked by her mysterious, horrifying enemy, the Nightmare Man. Escaping into the nearby woods, Ellen stumbles upon a country house where two young couples are spending the weekend who are now also in danger. They do not know if the killer is real or just a figment of Ellen's tortured mind nor if the killer is outside or already inside the house. As people start dying, nobody knows whom they can trust. Near the end of the film, the killer is revealed to be a hitman hired by Ellen's husband to kill her before learning about his affairs. Ellen reveals she is possessed by the real Nightmare Man, a demon who enters a female body first by getting them to wear his mask, then he rapes them. As the Nightmare Man, she kills the hitman and her husband. She sets her sights on Mia, the survivor, who kills Ellen, but is stripped and raped by the Nightmare Man's spirit. She is left in an institution, where the doctor decides to take her off her pills, which are the only things that keep the demon asleep.
-
...That's terribl...y awesome.
-
No. Terribly awesome is JCVH
Gloria Oddbottom: Where have all our lesbians gone?
God: Jesus...
Jesus Christ: Is that you, bowl of cherries?
God: Do bowls of cherries talk, Jesus?
Jesus Christ: I don't know. I've seen a lot of strange things over the years.
God: You need help, Jesus, and I will not forsake it.
Jesus Christ: Ohh, it's you Dad. So what's your advice?
-
Fight Club's entertaining just as long as you're not watching it with anyone who takes Tyler Durden seriously
People still do that? I thought by now, people had figured out what the message of the story was (you know, the effects of gesselschaft).
Also, better than the Nightmare Man? The Night Man (http://www.hulu.com/watch/17681/its-always-sunny-in-philadelphia-night-man#s-p1-n3-sa-i1). Assuming that Nightmare Man didn't have Danny DeVito in it.
-
Never underestimate people's ability to be really, really stupid.
-
Stupid people usually move on very quickly, as stupidity tends to carry with it short attention spans.
-
Watched both HellBoy movies for the first time in a single sitting. Visual feast. Decent characterization. The lead actress needs to learn how to act, though.
HellBoy 2 wins the award for "best RL Sephiroth clone", though. Dubious honor though it may be.
-
Liz? I dunno, seems to me that she came across as damaged and a bit fucked up emotionally, which seems appropriate. Granted, haven't seen Hellboy 2.
-
Fucked up and damaged is the character down perfectly. Not seen the second yet for some reason. No idea why not. Liked the first one, loved the comic, love Guillermo Del Toro.
-
Inglourious Basterds premiered last Thursday in Cinema's here in Holland. Needs to check my schedule to see when I can go watch it. Curse myself and my evening workhours.
Other than that, the last couple of DVD's I watched during the last two weeks are among others:
Andrei Tarkovsky - Nostalgia (seen most of his movies now. Tarkovsky was a cinema Giant.)
Krzystof Kieslowski - Dekalog (the first 3 episodes. Also loved his Three Colours trilogie and La Double Vie de veronique)
Wojciech Has - The Saragossa Manuscript (Mr Bongo films 182 minutes version. Fucking awesome)
Michael Haneke - La Pianiste (Isabelle Huppert > most. Other then that, yay for lots of Schubert. Very disturbing film, but pales in comparison in that particular aspect to dun dun dun)
Pier Paolo Pasolini - Salo. The 2008 BFI DVD version. (or rather a scholarly view on Fascism. Funny that I found more links to Dante rather then to Sade. Brilliantly filmed, but I do confess to being grossed out during some of the shit eating scenes =/)
-
-
Quantum of Solace: Good movie, not Casino Royale's level but far closer to it than to Brosnan's later oeuvre. Good cast, did some nice things with M and Bond's fellow spies. Good use of Bond girls, although what they did with Fields took a while to pay off. Didn't care for the climax much, mainly because the stuff blowing up crossed the line into unignorable absurdity.
Spoilery bits!
I freaking KNEW Mathis was innocent. Shame he died so easily.
Anyway, my big complaint with the movie is a relatively small point - Vesper's boyfriend. In Casino Royale, she was a genuine tragic heroine, locked in a no-win situation -- betray her duty and country or sacrifice the life of someone she loved (later, throw another person she loves on the left-hand side of the ultimatum). No right answer, and the only way she could even hope to save everyone was to sacrifice herself. Very effective, executed to perfection, and it made for one of the best endings a Bond movie's ever had. Now we find out that she was being tricked from the start, and she could have just told Quantum to get stuffed without sacrificing anything at all? That cheapens the whole thing.
On the plus side, if they were willing to juggle the plot around like that to give Bond's quest for revenge a bit of closure without killing White, he's likely being groomed as a recurring villain - wouldn't be surprised to see him filling Blofield's shoes. I hope so, he's good.
Edit: Green Lantern: First Flight. Meh. It's pretty, and the second half is reasonably good, but it's also serious, and I couldn't take it seriously by that point because the first half was just one long storm of cop-movie cliches. Also, can DC please, please please stop pretending that Sinestro turning evil is a plot twist? Even if he hadn't been Green Lantern's biggest villain for the last forty years, his name is Sinestro.
Also, and this is a really nitpicky thing, why name a planet Qward when it clearly isn't Qward? I know it doesn't change a thing about the plot, but it throws me out of the flow of the movie when they use a reference that only the comics nerds will get and then screw it up in the same breath. Instead of saying "hey, yeah, I know that place!" I think "hey, wait, that can't be right, Qward's in a different universe."
-
Inglorious Basterds - Stuff you heard about this being good is true. The stuff you may have read about this not really being about Jew revenge killing is also pretty much true. There really isn't much of a villain in this, it is pretty much Tarantino being Tarantino. It is a great movie up until a specific point. The perfect use of a David Bowie track makes this movie into brain sex for me. Great stuff. Not a moment I wasn't having fun.
-
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter: Grefter mind-control rays kicked in. Yeah, it's fun.
-
Fuck yes. Now Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers.
-
Speaking of, you watch Hard Rock Zombies yet, Gref?
-
Not yet. I have a lot of things to watch and way to much time spent at work up near the centre manager, so not much movie time.
-
Fuck yes. Now Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers.
I watched that a while ago.
EDIT: While we are on the topic of completely batshit movies, watch Repo Man, Grefter. I will consume headgear if you don't actually like it.
-
Wait, Grefter hasn't watched Repo Man?
-
I dunno. I mentioned it once before and didn't get confirmation either way. Figure it doesn't hurt to be sure.
-
I have seen Repo man ages ago. I watched it for the first time in a long while this year though when I bought it. I think I even posted about it here. Repo Man is Jesus.
-
Am going to see 9 on Saturday with math and science geeks. Yay~
Anyone seen it yet?
-
I have seen Repo man ages ago. I watched it for the first time in a long while this year though when I bought it. I think I even posted about it here. Repo Man is Jesus.
Oh yeah, if you haven't done so already, watch the DVD extras. I normally don't bother with such things, but Repo Man's are special. They include: an interview with Harry Dean Stanton in which he explains his belief in predestination and just generally demonstrates himself to be one of the craziest motherfuckers around; deleted scenes with guest commentary by the real-life inventor of the neutron bomb. Interviews with the writer/director/producer gang are less surreal but some of the bacdkground is still fun. Apparently Emilio Estevev's agent didn't want him to be in the movie and they had to stalk the actor personally to get the script to him (his agent thought he should only take teen comedies. Result: Repo Man is one of the only good movies he ever made. I'd say the only, but Breakfast Club is at least watchable.)
-
Inglorious Basterds- Saw this last week. Pretty good. Oddly, despite the trailers being misrepresentative, Brad Pitt was such a scene stealer that anyone fooled by it probably got their moneys worth anyways. Not much to say, very Tarantino in all respects.
9- alright. I dunno, it sorta felt like something was missing honestly, in terms of plot and detail. Could just be that video game bias kicking in again.
-
The Prestige: A very well-crafted movie all around. Good performances, interesting plot, solid directing, David Bowie, the whole nine yards. Alfred's revelation was seeded through the film beautifully. One thing that I can't figure out whether it's a plot hole or I just missed it:
Angier goes to Tesla asking for the same machine he made for Alfred. But we later find out that Alfred doesn't need science fiction to pull off the Transported Man. I can't remember Tesla or his assistant's reaction to Angier namedropping Alfred, but is it just pure coincidence that he really had made a teleporter before?
-
Yeah, The Prestige is a good one. Unexpected, that's for sure.
-
Angier goes to Tesla asking for the same machine he made for Alfred. But we later find out that Alfred doesn't need science fiction to pull off the Transported Man. I can't remember Tesla or his assistant's reaction to Angier namedropping Alfred, but is it just pure coincidence that he really had made a teleporter before?
Errr not sure I follow what you missed? Alfred used the machine once and made a clone then just used regular stage trickery to pull it off and a ridiculous amount of dedication to uphold the illusion. Angier took the easy, stupid, brutal and unimaginative way out, which was the whole point of the story. Once again, Angier totally missed the damned point and totally fucked everything up and this time did something absolutely atrocious. Tesla never claims to have made a teleporter and never did, he made a machine that duplicates things. Angier just didn't understand properly what he was doing.
On that note Shale, if you haven't caught The Illusionist from around the same time, it sounds like they are doing the same thing, but it is something else and equally fucking awesome.
-
Huh? But the entire reason Angier thought he was being duped was because Tesla didn't expect the machine to work like it did. The hat stayed put, so he didn't think to go out and look around for where the teleport might have ended up. Moreover, the Bordens couldn't figure out the trick behind Angier's teleport; if they'd known Tesla could do that, they wouldn't have been so puzzled. (Note that in the original book, it's spelled out in black and white that "Alfred" is identical twins, Albert and Frederick Borden, hence the name)
But yeah, the difference between Angier and Alfred was pretty clear. One devotes himself completely to his art to the point where every moment of his life is part of the act, while Angier just brute-forces it to the point where he's literally killing himself to make it happen and doesn't care. Of course, the "Alfred" illusion ends up killing Sarah and possibly Julia as well, so it's not like the Bordens are pure as the driven snow, they just inflict their damage less directly, and actually feel regret about it.
Yeah, I saw The Illusionist about a year ago. Good stuff.
-
Yeah, they were pretty clearly twins from the start, as I recall. He/they didn't expect Angier to accomplish anything by going to Tesla; he was sending a professional rival on a wild goose chase and it was just a coincidence that it happened to accomplish anything.
I still marvel at the sheer fuckedupness of Angier's plan. There's just no other word for mass clonicide.
I wasn't nearly as impressed by The Illusionist. It was okay, just nothing to shout about. Not sure it needed the happy ending. Definitely nice to look at, though.
-
I was fine with the happy ending; what it didn't need was the montage explaining everything.
-
Eh I always saw it as if you build a machine to duplicate things you don't expect them to duplicate outside the building.
I may just be misinterpreting it out of obsession with David Bowie and Nikolai Tesla though. I feel for it to be entirely unintentional cheapens the ultimate story a bit and it hardens up Alfred to much for him to send Angier on what he thought was a wild goose chase. Giving his rival a puzzle to solve and at the end of it the solution to his greatest trick gives off that sense of professionalism and respect that Michael Caine's character is promoting and ultimately shines through in Alfred's character.
The key to the whole thing is, he had the trick planned out and had got Tesla to build the tools for it before he ever met Angier and that is part of what makes the secret so profound.
To have them just be identical twins from the start, to be PERFECT duplicates as twins that grew up perfectly the same without either getting damaged in their own unique way or having differences in hair or whatnot in a movie where the central plot point is essentially cloning is kind of being a bit overly obtuse and you know all the Chekhov's Gun/Occam's Razor stuff being applied.
For the pair having individual names, that is the easiness of an intelligent man knowing what he wanted to do with this whole thing and his exact duplicate at work. One just adopts a new name, because before he cloned himself he already knew it would be totally fucking worth it AND picked out a name he liked.
Also just want to note my favourite part of Angier's plan just to show in spite of all his flaws and arrogance just how ballsy he is. It is the DUPLICATE that appears at a distance away from the machine. So every time he does the act the "Original" is the one that is being killed (Obviously last times clone each time). He has voluntarily dropped himself into a water tank to drown 50 times by the time he gives up and stops doing it. Fucking ballsy shit.
-
Hunger
Fish Tank
The White Ribbon
Funny Games
The Beat that my Heart Skipped
Thirst (Bakjwi) by Park Chan-wook
These are the movies I want to see. I believe... Fish Tank currently has no US release since it's farily new, The White Ribbon is going to be released in December, and Bakjwi has no US release date so far. At least, these are Cannes related films I want to see. If anyone's seen Hunger with 300/Inglorious Basterds Fassbender or if anyone's seen The Beat that my Heart Skipped, feel free to share your opinions. >.>
-
I just saw Wild Zero.
Wow. Just... wow. A Japanese friend I just recently made pointed me towards this interesting gem and I was thoroughly entertained.
I don't have the words to describe how awesome it was.
Luckily, I don't have to as after a few minutes of surfing, I found a well-written review. http://www.the-isb.com/?p=144
Sample:
With Guitar Wolf out of bullets, they go hand-to-hand for a fight so intense that green lightning erupts from the combatants, which has the unforeseen and inexplicable side-effect of giving the Captain super-powers. Luckily, after only six or seven explosions resulting from lightning fired from his eyes, the rest of the band shows up with a rocket launcher and blows him up but good.
And then the aliens show up.
And then Guitar Wolf pulls a sword out of his guitar, cuts a spaceship in half, blows it up, and saves the world.
-
My Netflix queue is bumpin'.
-
Just watched Chocolate, the Thai film of an autistic girl who fucks a lot of people up. I give it 5/5 for entertainment though I don't like some parts of the ending. Either way, Yanin Vismistananda is a fucking idol to me now. She is the female Tony Jaa, only 25, all her own stunts (I think there's a little wire fu or just weird speeding of the camera). Fucking awesome. You can stream it on Netflix if you have it. I strongly suggest watching that movie. I will watch her 2009 movie also.
Jeeja Yanin, her character, her emulation of Tony Jaa and Bruce Lee are GOLDEN. This is also a good movie that shows that autistic children can kick a butt load of ass too. New favorite movie and a new favorite actress to add to my bin of faves.
-
This is also a good movie that shows that autistic children can kick a butt load of ass too.
What? Like autistic children aren't already ascribed a ton of ridiculous powers in fiction as it is?
-
I don't know, I don't look up much on autistic literature or books or whatever. But this girl is a PHYSICAL powerhouse, whereas I would think some autistic characters may have 'supernatural'. Who knows, that's guess-timation.
-
Bondstravaganza!
Dr. No: Sadly underwhelming. Yeah, it's the first movie, made the franchise what it is, I understand that, but it just doesn't measure up watching it today. Connery's Connery, he rules, but the pacing's steadily declines from the start, where it's fairly tight, to the end, where we spend waaaaay too long watching Bond dicking around in the doctor's island (Which makes no sense at all, by the way. I mean, there's the usual mad science and shark tanks and what have you, and there's ventilation ducts that randomly flood with water. That's just weird.) Plus Dr. No himself follows the same arc, going from the genuinely good scene where he talks to the geologist to giving Bond an underground hotel room and having dinner with him for no other reason than that it's what Bond villains do.
License to Kill: There we go. That was awesome. Dalton's a good Bond, the script lets him play an actual character, the big scenes are well-done, and the requisite Bond ridiculousness manages to be hilarious (harpoon waterski!) without making the movie dumber. Q and Bouvier were great. Loved the cold open, too.
-
Just finished watching CJ7 by Stephen Chow. I did not know that Stephen Chow could make me cry. What a sweet story.
Still zany like Stephen Chow though. 5/5. I love kids movies.
-
Just watched Chocolate, the Thai film of an autistic girl who fucks a lot of people up. I give it 5/5 for entertainment though I don't like some parts of the ending. Either way, Yanin Vismistananda is a fucking idol to me now. She is the female Tony Jaa, only 25, all her own stunts (I think there's a little wire fu or just weird speeding of the camera). Fucking awesome. You can stream it on Netflix if you have it. I strongly suggest watching that movie. I will watch her 2009 movie also.
Jeeja Yanin, her character, her emulation of Tony Jaa and Bruce Lee are GOLDEN. This is also a good movie that shows that autistic children can kick a butt load of ass too. New favorite movie and a new favorite actress to add to my bin of faves.
If you watch the after movie stuff, what this movie really shows is that it sucks to do a martial arts film in Thailand. Dear lord at the injuries.
-
Haha, exactly. It makes me wonder how far it really goes to make a martial arts movie. That guy who fell down and his spine hit the edge of a box and he had to be hospitalized? Yeeeeah, not good.
-
Zombieland: Bill motherfucking Murray!
-
Green Street Hooligans 2 - 2/5
A Good Day to be Black and Sexy - 3/5
Wall-E - 5/5 (EEEEVAH)
1984 - 3/5 [even with having read the book]
Bang Rajan - 5/5 [6/5 if I include it being based on a true story as anything relevant. Very sad though]
-
Zombieland: Bill motherfucking Murray!
"GODDAMMIT! BILL MURRAY! Sorry, I just had to get that out."
Great movie, and would also make a great videogame. Double Tap.
-
Just watched Machine Girl yesterday. 5/5 for heelarious. 5/5 for reminding me of a LA anime.
Romeo and Juliet - Sealed with a Kiss is ridunculous. 3/5 for cheese.
Re-Cycle was good until it became an anti-abortion statement to me. 3/5.
Death Trance - Tak Sakaguchi + film = 6/5.
Green Street Hooligans 2 - 1/5. Fail.
-
Confessions of a Dangerous Mind: Surprisingly dull for a movie scripted by Charlie Kauffman. Persistently unsympathetic lead and the presence of Julia Roberts don't help any either.
Alphaville: Old dystopian sci-fi movie. Suffers badly from the futuristic dictatorship being horribly incompetent (they drag the hero into their HQ, he shoots everyone important because they didn't bother to search him for weapons; the malevolent AI is also talked to death with no significant amount of effort) and too many rambling monologues (it's French). None of this is really excusable by it being old, because they were clearly aiming for serious, 1984-style material rather than pulp. And man, that computer's voice was annoying. It sounded like the actor was belching his lines.
Dreary week for movies.
-
Midnight Express was good. The protagonist's choices were 100% what I didn't want him to do, but luckily he has three really great scenes with his insanity that makes me forget all of it.
-
Finally got off my ass, and decided to catch up a bit on the Godzilla movies, namely some of the more modern ones I missed. And by catch up, I mean "Fuck it, I'm just gonna watch Final Wars cause it looks and sounds bad ass!"
I...will sum up the plot of this movie...using FF7 Allegories. Why? Cause the movie feels like they ripped off of FF7 characters and such for plot, and well, it could actually work as a fanfic for FF7. You'll see what I mean!
*Intro shows Bahamut Zero getting owned by missiles and shot down into an ice berg, shift to modern times*
Narrator: Humans have caused shit to the world due to Mako. Because of this, mutants have appeared...they are SOLDIER. But they've adapted, and joined with SOLDIER to make the Earth Defense Force! However, monsters and shit exist, and need stopping.
Random Shinra Grunt: LEVIATHAN IS ATTACKING!
Barret: FIRE THE LASERS!!!
*Leviathan gets frozen, then drilled*
Random Grunt: Leviathan is beaten, but our ship is nearly destroyed!
Barret: There aint no getting off this train we're on!
Scarlet: *Appears on screen* Good work killing the guy, ubt you cost us millions! We'll have your ass back at base.
Barret: ^%*@, I just saved us all!
*shift to random training simulator, Cloud and Zack are fighting, Zack wins*
Zack: Man, Cloud, you can't keep holding back like that!
Cloud: Sorry, but I can't just get my fighting spirit up.
Zack: You'd be dead if this were a real fight, just let go once in a while!
*Angeal walks in*
Angeal: But Zack, know that there's no problem in holding back. To some degree, Cloud is right! Anyway, Cloud, you're needed in the director's room.
Zack: Catch ya later, Cloud!
*Director's room*
Scarlet: Aha, good, you're here! I'm having you on body guard duty to protect this scientist!
Cloud: Not interested.
Scarlet: Shut up! You're doing it!
Cloud: Fine, where is this nerdy guy with glasses?
Tifa: I'm right here (Meeple Note: Yes, Tifa is a scientist here, and you can all shut up)
Cloud: ...she's a scientist? She looks more like a model! *Actual line of dialog from the character in question*
Tifa: I'll pretend I didn't hear that...
*Shift to movie scene*
Yuffie: So, Mr. Rufus, you say Shinra will keep the world safe from Monsters?
Rufus: Yes, that's right! Now if you excuse me, I have to go in my luxury Helicopter! Oh yeah, tell Dark Nation, my dog, that I said hi, I haven't seen him in a while.
Yuffie: ...right....
*shift to lab*
Tifa: I have discovered that all SOLDIER recipients are so strong cause they have these J-Cells.
Cloud: What's that got to do with me?
Tifa: You're one of them, right?
Cloud: ...oh, yeah...
Cid: Ah, you're here, ^@^*^, ok, we found this ^*^@*&^@ monster and we need you to analyze it!
Tifa: ...it also has J-Cells, but what is it?
Cid: ^*^@ if I know!
Cloud: I don't see why I have to help...*starts going into a Cloud mental break down* Ah crap, not again with the crazy time...
Tifa: Its not just you Cloud, I'm seeing it tool
Cid: ^*@^ is this ^@*^@?
Aerith: That monster is Jenova! If it awakens, it'll destroy the world again!
Cloud: O...k...
Aerith: And you have some of her in you!
Cloud: SO I'm evil?
Aerith: Technically...yes...but fear not! You have the power to choose which way you will go! Now take this Materia!
Cid: What the ^*^@( was that?
*shift to Helicopter*
Rufus: Man, being President is awesome!
*Ultimate WEAPON appears, blows up Helicopter*
Rufus: ...not again...
*Ultimate WEAPON attacks Junon, starts blowing shit up*
*Diamond WEAPON attacks Corel, blows more shit up*
*Emerald WEAPON attacks Wutai, shit gets blown up*
*Ruby WEAPON attacks Costa Del Sol, things die*
*Sapphire WEAPON attacks Kalm*
Angeal: OK, Troops! Your goal is to kick the shit out of Sapphire WEAPON! Got that? Good! I'm gonna sit on the side lines and watch.
Zack: Ok everyone, lets go beat some giant monster ass!
*they kick Sapphire WEAPON's ass*
Zack: Man I'm awesome!
Cloud's mind: I wish I was that good...
*The other WEAPONs spontaneously disappear, giant floating fortress appears*
Scarlet: What the hell is going on?
*Rufus appears*
Rufus: Hey, I'm alive! Oh yeah, these guys come in peace, here, you all come with me *points to Scarlet and Angeal*
Hojo: AH, yes, you've arrived! I'll keep things brief; we're aliens who are in no way associated with Jenova, right guys?
Tsviets: Hail Weiss!
Hojo: See? Anyway, your planet is screwed by Meteor coming down in 489 days...but team up with us and we insure survival, right son?
Sephiroth: It'll bring you despair...
Hojo: Anyway, do we have a deal?
Scarlet: Clearly you have no alternative motives, lets go!
*shift*
Cloud: ...I don't trust these guys.
Tifa: You're paranoid, where's your proof?
Yuffie: I have proof! You know Rufus? He doesn't blink!
Tifa: That's a physical impossibility! Go tell Scarlet this now Cloud!
*Scarlet's office*
Cloud: Rufus is acting strange, he should be watched.
SCarlet: I know, now leave.
Cloud: Ok.
*Shift*
Cloud: Scarlet is clearly taken over by the aliens too.
Tifa: So...who can we trust here?
Cloud: I know one person!
*Cloud busts into Barret's jail cell*
Barret: What does your spikey haired ass want?
Cloud: How would you like to help expose Shinra for the liars they are, and blow up those Aliens?
Barret: Now you're speaking my language!
*shift to TV conference*
Scarlet: Oh, Tifa, you're acting suspicious...
Tifa: Screw this, guys come out!
*Cloud and Barret beat the shit out of Scarlet, expose her as being the fake thing*
Barret: ****, what is she?
Cloud: Well, this is all the proof we need, lets go.
Yuffie: So...Rufus...about this dog...
Rufus: ...I don't recognize it...
Yuffie: Really?
Rufus: ...wait, its my dog, isn't it!?
Yuffie: WHAT'S HIS NAME!?
Hojo: Oh, Rufus is stressed out, he forgot! Tell him his name for him!
Yuffie: ...Dark Nation...
Rufus; Ah! Dark Nation, good to see you!
Yuffie: I lied! Its name is actually Nanaki! This isn't your dog! YOU'RE NOT REALLY HIM!
Fake Rufus: It seems I have been found out, but what are you going to...
Barret: Die foo! *shoots Rufus in the face, he turns into an alien, everyone freaks*
Hojo: Wait !I can explain!
Sephiroth: ...you know, if you just unleashed all the monsters like I told you originally, we'd already take over this world and be gods *kills Hojo on the spot* Ok, now I'm taking over as leader! You guys stand no chance!
Barret: I wouldn't say that! *summons all of SOLDIER*
Sephiroth: Intriguing...come out Tsviets! *Tsviets appear*
Barret: Foo, you're outnumbered!
Sephiroth: Awaken, all of you!
*All of SOLDIER attacks the group...except Cloud and Angeal*
Cloud: SEPHIROTH!!! *charges, gets his ass kicked*
Angeal: All of you, run! Barret, take care of all of them! I'll hold them off, get going!
Barret: You heard the man!
Sephiroth: Lets bring them all despair. Send down every freaking monster we got and destroy everything!
Tsviets: Hail Weiss!
Sephiroth: ...close enough...
*Monsters destroy pretty much entire world*
Cid: @^*@^ hell, what the ^*@^* we going to do *^(^ now?
Barret: We'll use the Highwind, its still around! As is a few members of Avalanche! We'll take on everyone that way!
Yuffie: Yay!
Cloud: ...we're being followed *sees Zack chasing them on a motorcycle* I'll handle this! *gets on motorcycle himself, big action Motorcycle fight ensues, Cloud beats Zack*
(Yes, a huge motorcycle fight actually happens...in a FREAKING GODZILLA MOVIE)
Zack: ...kill...me...Cloud...before...I do...more harm...
Cloud: No...you're a friend *grabs Zack and drags him off*
*They board the Highwind*
Barret: Ok, I got this crazy idea. We'll SUMMON BAHAMUT ZERO!
Cid: ^*^(, that'll destroy us all!
Barret: *@^), Sephiroth will do that anyway!
Cid: ^*@^, but what if Bahamut Zero gets controlled?
Tifa: Well, see, Bahamut Zero is different cause he lacks the J-Cells like the other monsters do, so Sephiroth can't control him! Of course, once he kills everything, we're fucked.
Cid: So we release that ^*@^ freak, !&@% blows things up, and then we ^(^* rid of him somehow?
Barret: Yes.
Cid: ...lets do it!
Yuffie: Oh, I'm staying behind and taking pictures, just as souveneirs, later!
*they go to Northern Crater*
Reno: Man, the world's screwed.
Rude: Hmm...
Reno: ...say, is that the highwind?
Rude: Impossible, what would they want out here?
*Sephiroth's chamber*
Sephiroth: Mother...it seems the fools have a trick up their sleeve...go dispose of them!
*Jenova is released on the Highwind*
Barret: WAKE UP ^*@^! *They missile Bahamut Zero, he awakens*
*Jenova and Bahamut fight, Bahamut kicks the shit out of Jenova*
Sephiroth: WHAT!? HOW COULD MOTHER BE DEFEATED!?
Barret: You didn't know two things about us! One is me, the other is Bahamut! *Actual line of dialog, without obvious adjustments*
Barret: NOW GET US OUT OF HERE BEFORE HE KILLS US!
*Bahamut chases the Highwind to points where Emerald WEAPON is, Bahamut kicks his ass. Then Materia Keeper appears...dies horribly. Then Schizo appears...also gets his ass kicked*
Sephiroth: NO! How could he be that strong?
Tsviets: Hail Weiss!
Sephiroth: Shut up and send more monsters! RETURN THEM TO THE PROMISED LAND!
*Diamond, Ultimate and Ruby WEAPON all appear at once. After a big fight, Bahamut comes out ahead*
Sephiroth: ...a worthy foe indeed.
*on the Highwind*
Barret: Alright, BLOW A HOLE INTO THAT SHIP! *laser blocks it* *^*@, what are we going to do?
Cloud: ...a fighter jet is leaving the hanger.
Zack: Hey, Sorry Cloud, but I gotta do this; I have faith in you, good luck! *Zack suicides on the things core, taking down the shield.*
Cloud: ...good bye...Zack...
*They bust in*
Cloud: Oh, Tifa, hold onto this Materia...just in case shit goes wrong.
*In Temple of the Ancients*
Aerith: Oh, mighty Phoenix, please arise! We need your help!
*Phoenix appears, flies off*
*Bahamut beats the shit out of Guard Scorpion and Sapphire WEAPON...even though Sapphire WEAPON was defeated earlier*
Sephiroth: No more games. Go get them, Omega!!
*Omega appears on Bahamut, the two start fighting*
Sephiroth: Oh, yeah, Mother's not dead yet! *Sephiroth summons Jenova Synthesis*
*On highwind*
Cid: Alright, lets get those *^^@-...
*Tsviets appear*
Tsviets: Hail Weiss! *kill all the useless Avalanche members*
Tifa: ...should have seen that coming...
Cloud: SEPHIROTH! What do you want?
Sephiroth: I need you alive, for the sake of the Lifestream! Now come to my chambers!
*Sephiroth's chamber*
Sephiroth: In short, you are all nothing but puppets! We will take advantage of you, and all of SOLDIER were just descendants of Mother and myself! ...except you Cloud, you're a reject and thus completely useless...yet you have hidden potential...AWAKEN!!!
*back to the Monster brawl, Phoenix arrives on the scene, but Jenova Synthesis knocks it around some, then attacks Bahamut. Bahamut fights off both Omega and Jenova Synthesis, starts losing, Phoenix then comes in, kamikaze's Jenova, both die*
Sephiroth: It's only a matter of time before Omega returns this planet to the lifestream, and I shall ascend! Oh yeha, Cloud, kill them all.
Cloud: Yes, master...
Tifa: No! Cloud! What are you doing! Wait! *shoves Materia in his back* REMEMBER WHO YOU ARE!
Cloud: ...I was controlled, wasn't I?
Tifa: YOu were.
Cloud: ...I'm kicking Sephiroth's ass. All of you get out of here while you can!
Tsviets: Hail Weiss! *start shooting at everyone...only to get blasts deflected*
Rufus: Ok, Scarlet! Heiddegar, you know what to do!
Tifa: You mean you gusy are alive?
Rufus: Yeah, we all escaped cause I said so. My political power is just THAT GOOD.
Barret: Well *^(^, lets get off this train before it crashes! (He actually has a line similar to that)
*Tsviets pursue, Barret kicks the shit out of two of them single handedly while the other 5 run into a bunch of SOLDIERS, which they barely hold off*
*Cloud gets his ass kicked by Sephiroth*
Sephiroth: A fool like you who wallows in despair could never defeat me...you are merely a puppet!
Cloud: No, NOT ANYMORE!!! *Cloud glows Limit Break style*
Sephiroth: ...oh poo poo
*Omnislash, everyone escapes due to various DEMs*
*Omega reveals his true form...TIAMAT! Tiamat beats the shit out of Bahamut some*
Tifa; Oh no! Tiamat is draining Bahamut's Lifeforce! We must feed him the lifestream!
Cloud: ...Lifestream...hmm....*Fires a huge fucking beam at Bahamut, Bahamut kicks the shit out of Tiamat, then attacks the Highwind*
Barret: ^*@), everyone get out of here!
*Bahamut is about to attack, but Bahamut Jr. appears and has him stop, the two leave*
Cloud: Well, we won, but at what cost?
I know this sounds ridiculous but...the FF7 allegories really do work this well. In any event, movie is basically what happens when you take Kaiju battles at their finest, with quality special effects, and then add in Matrix style action scenes, with a Deathstar Run somewhere in the mix. Its a fun movie, and the big advantage it has over other Godzilla movies?
The Human side was actually exciting for once. Normally, the Human side of Godzilla movies is "useless subplot just so the movie has a fucking a script, and isn't just a bunch of monsters beating each other", which lets face it, only reason you watch Godzilla movies is for the mayhem. The fact that they made the normally useless human filler actually interesting to watch was a plus, though it DID detract from the movie, as the entire first half has very little Giant Monsters (if the lAbridged wasn't indicative), and mostly plot build up but...well, once Godzilla finally appears, things get pretty bad ass. You can tell they wanted to make the 50th anniversary go out with the bang, and the movie was clearly made in such a way that it COULD be the very last one, but this is Godzilla; there is never a true end <_<
-
Meeple = teh sex.
In any case, I finished watching three movies this weekend. MOVIE SPOILARS if you plan on watching any of these.
1) Blow (8.8/10)
This movie was pretty awesome, and Johnny Depp played it very well. There's a few parts where I thought the movie could have ended, but being a biopic and all, I guess it had to end when Charles Jung ACTUALLY went to jail. ;p
2) Lost in Translation (6.7/10)
Bill Murray being in this movie does NOT make it automatically great. Honestly, the movie drags on, and it actually does build up at some points, but god damn does it fail to deliver. Rotten Tomatoes calls it awesome, but I just didn't get that from this one.
3) The Butterfly Effect (9/10)
Just an excellent mindfuck of a movie. My jaw dropped a few times, and I actually got quite attached to the main character by the end. And I'd be lying if I said I didn't shed a tear when he changes the past for the last time, and says goodbye to Kayleigh. Oh, and this is proof that Ashton Kutcher is more than just a comic.
-
/me sees the score for Lost in Translation, then the one for The Butterfly Effect.
Piggyman, we can no longer be friends.
-
/me sees the score for Lost in Translation, then the one for The Butterfly Effect.
Piggyman, we can no longer be friends.
I don't know man, maybe I'm just a horrible person, but Lost in Translation really didn't connect with me. I know it's a highly acclaimed movie and all, but maybe I just raised my expectations too much for it, or something.
-
I'm less appalled by that (you still rated it above average after all) and more by the 9 for The Butterfly Effect. That movie was shit.
-
If you like your Rock/Metal a lot then it has a good soundtrack, but yeah Butterfly Effect 9 is a no.
-
Eh, Piggyman is 16. It makes sense he's more connected to a story about college-aged romance. When I watched Lost in Translation when I was younger, I enjoyed it, but for completely different reasons than most based on my experience of living in Japan as a student. Watching it again more recently allowed me to enjoy it on a different level for its ability to create a sense of isolation while surrounded by many people. Although I've never been that interested in the romance aspect of the movie, during my second watching I was impressed by the emotion they were trying to convey which I don't see portrayed often in other movies.
-
Yay, someone's defending me~!
That aside, I got in one last movie to cap off this weekend.
Into The Wild (9.6/10)
I don't know what to say. I'm actually stunned. This is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It ranks up there with Fight Club, Milk and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind for me. It's a long movie, but it never felt like it dragged on. At the beginning, I didn't quite know where it was going, but the moment the movie starts explaining how the main character actually ends up going to Alaska, it all came together very nicely. It's even nicely split into five chapters, which is a minor thing, but just something that I enjoy. The narrations are excellent, too. The soundtrack is insanely good, all original compositions by Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam. The ending was actually kind of surprising- a good surprise, mind you. Everything just fits together so well. Jesus, I fucking love Sean Penn for creating this movie.
I don't normally suggest other people to watch movies, knowing people have varying opinions, but this is, in my opinion, a MUST SEE. Watch it some time.
EDIT: And by some time, I mean SOON.
-
I liked Butterfly Effect. I wouldn't give it a 9, but it wasn't a total waste as a movie. Granted, I watched the Director's Cut where...
The movie ends with his solution being to go back to strangle himself in the womb and never be born.
I still can't believe the fat guy (Not Ethan Stuplee, the other one) was Fulton Reed in Mighty Ducks... reaaaally let himself go.
-
I liked Butterfly Effect. Granted, I wouldn't give it a 9, but it wasn't a total waste as a movie. Granted, I watched the Director's Cut where...
The movie ends with his solution being to go back to strangle himself in the womb and never be born.
I also liked Butterfly Effect (overall), but I still wish Ashton Kutcher would actually do this.
-
Haven't posted a movie dump in months, so here's what I've been watching lately.
SPOILER ALERT FOR EVERY MOVIE I LIST HERE.
Superbad ~ Saw this over the summer with my younger cousin. It's just as funny as I remember it the first time--it takes a while to build up, but from the moments just before the police arrive until the end of the movie, it's pretty much a comedy goldmine. Best line in the movie? "'Oh shit! It's the cops!'"
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince ~ As far as the Harry Potter movies go, this was a huge step backward from Order of the Phoenix. And this goes pretty much across the board. The writing felt worse. The special effects were MUCH worse. The acting was generally worse (Malfoy and Dumbledore excepted.) They didn't do justice to Sectum Sempra, but given the PG* rating, this is no surprise. I really didn't like the movie at all, except the scene where Harry was feeding Dumbledore the potion was PERFECT, and gave me chills. It's a shame everything SURROUNDING that scene felt completely off.
*The PG rating is asinine. The LAST movie was PG-13, and was the best movie they had made. They're sacrificing integrity to make a few extra bucks, and given how the actors are millionaires, and Ms. Rowling is a BILLIONaire, this is downright shameful.
Also, Harry, I totally share your love of the Interracial lovin'. First Cho Chang, now cute waitress girl. I dig it. M&Ms, bro. Different outside, same sweet candy that you crave on the inside.
Pineapple Express ~ HILARIOUS. A stoner movie that has basically raised the bar for all stoner movies, and in more ways than one. First off, it gets the whole "stoned people" act down perfectly. Second, it had an actual interesting plot and some really great moments. I love how all the drama was played off like average people in the drama. No one had any action-hero one liners, when the main character shoots a dude in the head, his response is to look down and say "EW!" The ending to this movie (which I won't spoil) is fantastic, and probably one of the funniest fucking scenes I have ever seen in my life.
Everything from this point on was a required film for one of my two classes this semester.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind ~ Interesting movie. There are certain things from this movie that, I feel, will be hard to replicate in the future, as so much of the plot could be rendered meaningless today with the development of the Internet. Not going to touch any of the symbolism with a ten foot pole, because my Prof completely turned me off to it with his discussion of it, and because I think Spielberg forces -way- too much in some of his movies.
The Great Escape ~ An excellent movie, as we all know. I want to be James Garner when I grow up. Kind of infuriating how this is known as a "James Dean" movie when it's such a huge ensemble piece. Also, Dean is nowhere NEAR as sexy as Garner, so what the fuck, Americans?
My biggest complaint to the movie was the portrayal of Ives the Scotsman. Make a note, and keep it near your heart: No Scotsman born has ever taken a sip of drink that two non-scots have and been unable to keep it down. That little fuck should have been able to drink the two Americans under the table, and that's the goddamn truth.
EDIT
I mean "Steve McQueen" How do I always mess that up!?
Il Buono, Il Brutto, Il Cattivo (The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly) ~ Anyone who thinks the title is about the moral standing of the characters is an idiot, and I hate you. This is a really good movie, but again, we all pretty much knew that already. It's another one of those cases where the "Star" of the film pisses me off, because Eli Wallach has a more prominent part than Clint Eastwood does, taking up the majority of screentime and getting by far the most exposition of any of the characters, and also the biggest insight into what makes him tick.
Nevertheless, this set up a lot of things for Westerns and for film-making that changed the way they look. The lingering closeups of expression, sometimes expressionlessness, really sells it.
Also, "The Ecstasy of Gold" is one of the greatest pieces of music ever written, and it's choreographed into the one scene it's played in perfectly. I think I had an orgasm watching that ugly little pudgy Mexican prance around that graveyard in search of Arch Stanton. Also, I can't watch Wallach's performance of Tuko without thinking of Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow. Depp says he modeled his behavior off of Kieth Richards, but it's highly probable he was more than a little influenced by the lovable scoundrel in this film.
Oh, and Eastwood is OK too, I guess.
The Third Man ~ I did not expect Nudity in a movie from this time period. That said, the movie didn't do anything for me. I liked the little speech about humans being ants and about what war and peace do to civilization, which is a big part of why the movie is famous. Other than that, I just sort of found the whole thing boring.
The Silence of the Lambs ~ Not a lot to be said here, I think we've all seen it and all can tell you what's good about it. I had a harder time finding Hannibal Lector so scary, but thinking on it, it's because Hopkins' performance as Dr. Lector became a TEMPLATE for creepy-ass dudes everywhere. I've seen so many people crib his style that, watching it, I feel like he's cribbing someone else. No, I'm watching the thing that influenced everything else.
Because we analyzed the scene where Clarice meets Dr. Lector for the first time in depth, thus having to watch it at least ten times, I can honestly say I have never heard the word "Cunt" used more times in a scholarly setting.
Ringu ~ I like Japanese horror better, apparently. One thing I noticed (and loved) was there were no cheap scares. If I see another cat jump out in something, EVEN AS PARODY, I'm going to scream in sheer misery. Also, this was more psychologically interesting to me. It was more of what I'd call a "Thriller" than a "Horror" film, but whatever. Usually when I watch a Japanese movie, I notice just how different the storytelling style is, and this was no exception. Me, I appreciate the little things that you don't notice in the direction. Japanese movies tend to build up a scene slowly. They'll have a shot of several parts of the area and really establish setting and tone before anything. American movies tend to toss you right into the nitty gritty of the scene. Me, I like to be seduced a little. I think it's because I have such a strong feminine side.
Days of Heaven ~ A beautiful movie, it nonetheless sucked.
I really wanted that to be my entire review, but there was a GREAT moment. In possibly the most ironic thing I have ever seen, the lead female tells the lead male that she loves him because he still has the same hair. That leading actor? RICHARD GERE. I still crack up just thinking about it.
How to Steal a Million ~ Forget about James Garner. I want to be Peter O'Toole when I grow up. This was a really fun little movie with the aforementioned O'Toole and Audry Hepburn, whom is just too goddamn pretty for words, but we all knew that. I'd say go watch it because it really is a lot of fun and chances are you haven't seen it.
As for random commentary, I suddenly understand the whole Paris Hilton scandal. Hilton, I think, is trying to BE Audry Hepburn, or at least a character she'd play in a movie. She's got the whole "Fashionplate" thing going, and their faces are shockingly similar. Just the general attitude, the mixture of girlish feigned ignorance with a remarkably savvy underside.... mmn. I can definitely see it.
Imagine how big of a scandal it'd be if Audry Hepburn had leaked a sex tape. Now, instead of that, think the much happier thought over how much HOTTER the sex would be than in the Hilton tape. Oh, Paris, you can try all you like, but you'll never reach the height of sophistication and sensuality of Miss Hepburn.
The Conversation ~ This was another excellent movie. I say that because unlike many films, it made me genuinely uncomfortable throughout a large chunk of the film. I think Hackman did a great job of making his character have a believable anxiety disorder, because the uncomfortable way he tried telling people who were doing nice things for him to stay out of his life reminded me of how I sometimes act when I do something "weird" because things are outside my comfort zone. It looked like a compulsion for him, which is what it IS. So that was just tremendous acting there.
Furthermore, and this will sound weird, the kissing between Hackman and (Elizabeth MacRae?!) jibed VERY well with what little I know of the subject from personal experience, and felt much more genuine and realistic than kissing in movies normally does, so I was a little uncomfortable during that whole situation, and when he wakes up to see that he's been betrayed, with the tapes gone, that made everything even worse. When he simply said "Bitch", I really FELT it.
Also, I discovered the mystery of where the Bug was BEFORE the big "Hit you over the head" moment where it flashes back to the Conversation. So when Hackman is tearing up his entire apartment fruitlessly looking for it, I kept shaking my head. I honestly never knew how the movie ended, so him NOT discovering the bug made it even MORE uncomfortable.
I'm comfortable saying that Hackman's performance here was the best acting I have ever seen.
Citizen Kane ~ You know me, I love to hate on popular things. I'm not "counter culture" but I like to be contradictory, and sometimes, things just seem overhyped. So I went into this movie wholly expecting that I'd hate it. And I did, at the very opening.
Unfortunately for my worldview, Citizen Kane happens to be an excellent and compelling movie that kept me glued to the screen for the entire production.
Forget Peter O'Toole, I want to be a (not fat) Orson Welles when I grow up. Actually, I was so enamored with the character of Charles Foster Kane in the beginning, and I empathized with him so much throughout the film, that I began to have an existentialist crisis. I mean, he reminds me a lot of myself (albeit much more successful at.... everything.) And he's a total narcissist. Does that make ME a narcissist? I only want to give and receive love, but what if I'm like Mr. Kane and only want to receive love? Am I, too, damned to a life of unsatisfied unhappiness?
Also, that "There is a man---A CERTAIN MAN!" thing is gonna be stuck in my head for weeks.
-
Yay, someone's defending me~!
That aside, I got in one last movie to cap off this weekend.
Into The Wild (9.6/10)
I don't know what to say. I'm actually stunned. This is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It ranks up there with Fight Club, Milk and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind for me. It's a long movie, but it never felt like it dragged on. At the beginning, I didn't quite know where it was going, but the moment the movie starts explaining how the main character actually ends up going to Alaska, it all came together very nicely. It's even nicely split into five chapters, which is a minor thing, but just something that I enjoy. The narrations are excellent, too. The soundtrack is insanely good, all original compositions by Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam. The ending was actually kind of surprising- a good surprise, mind you. Everything just fits together so well. Jesus, I fucking love Sean Penn for creating this movie.
I don't normally suggest other people to watch movies, knowing people have varying opinions, but this is, in my opinion, a MUST SEE. Watch it some time.
EDIT: And by some time, I mean SOON.
This movie is a semi-documentary, if you didn't know.
Also, I HAAAAAAAAATED the main character. SO VERY MUCH. I just wanted to punch him in his hairy little dick every time he flashed that smile of his. You know which one.
But yeah, the movie itself was pretty decent.
EDIT
Post is now legible. And for posterity, here is my original post on the topic.
19)Into the Wild
~Good movie. I say that because it held my attention for two and a half hours, and it wasn't about a subject I'd have found interesting. It had fantastic camerawork. Plus it had a decidedly (in my view) unlikable lead character, but I still watched it.
Into the Wild is based on the positively true adventures of some dipshit who got sick of his life in middle class bliss and being accepted to Harvard Law, and said "Fuck it, I'm going to Alaska."
He's such an unlikable, narcissistic FUCK who basically charms everyone he meets, and then destroys their lives by abandoning them and destroying himself, because, WHOAMG SPOILARS: HE DIES.
Who couldn't see that coming? A stupid assclown throws out all of his cash and travels to the harshest places in nature just to prove some kind of ass-backward point on the condition of society. He's clearly smart, but also clearly not near as smart as he thinks he is. He takes from every person that he meets, and rarely gives anything back. He cuts a swath of desperation and crushed dreams in his wake.
He is played by Emile Hersch, who, I swear to god, is like, this exact unlikable kid in every movie he's in. Only this time he does full-frontal. You know, on my list of celebrities I want to see full frontal nudity of, I'd have to say that Emile Hersch is probably not in the top ten. Anyhow, he seems to embody that sort of impotent, useless grunge "Fuck the man" mentality that was easily the worst part of the 90s. That is, until you remember Eddie Vedder does the soundtrack.
Naw, Vedder is -ok-. But only just. And the movie is, again, still pretty good. I feel horrible for his sister, the girl who was in love with him, the old man who wanted him as a grandson, and the hippy woman who thought he was like HER son. So pretty much everyone he met except for Vince Vaughn. (Also, more movies need a drunken Vince Vaughn. Drunken Vince Vaughn makes everything better.)
Anyhow, rest in peace you godawful narcissistic bastard. I hope whoever got into Harvard Law in your place made a few million dollars and boffs Australian supermodels.
-
Also, Harry, I totally share your love of the Interracial lovin'. First Cho Chang, now cute waitress girl. I dig it. M&Ms, bro. Different outside, same sweet candy that you crave on the inside.
*Yoink*
-
Awesome. I will eventually regain my post as most quoted DLer.
Also, I forgot one of the movies I'd seen:
Rear Window ~
Alfred Hitchcock makes good movies. Rear Window is no exception. Having to read an article about all the Fruedian symbolism in the movie is just DREADFUL. Especially because I read the article first and then tried to see what the author meant, and determined that the author was batshit.
MODIFY
I love editing my posts. Anyhow, Piggyman, Zenny is an idiot, and Lost in Translation is an absolute pile of dreck, and Bill Murray is an idiot if he thought he deserved an award for his performance.
-
The Great Escape ~ An excellent movie, as we all know. I want to be James Garner when I grow up. Kind of infuriating how this is known as a "James Dean" movie when it's such a huge ensemble piece. Also, Dean is nowhere NEAR as sexy as Garner, so what the fuck, Americans?
You're thinking of Steve McQueen. James Dean died a few years before The Great Escape. Anyway, yeah, it is really an ensemble film. Movie studios just have this strange need to put a face on things for promotional purposes (preferably the most famous face involved in the project, regardless of how important they actually are to it).
The Third Man ~ I did not expect Nudity in a movie from this time period. That said, the movie didn't do anything for me. I liked the little speech about humans being ants and about what war and peace do to civilization, which is a big part of why the movie is famous. Other than that, I just sort of found the whole thing boring.
There's nudity in The Third Man? I don't even remember that (and I own the movie). When/where?
Also, that "There is a man---A CERTAIN MAN!" thing is gonna be stuck in my head for weeks.
And now it's stuck in my head. Thanks.
As usual, I am in the "No way, Lost In Translation was awesome" crowd, but that's been hashed over before. At least you liked The Conversation and Citizen Kane. Gene Hackman is better than us.
-
I am INDEED thinking of Steve McQueen, can tell the two actors apart, yet I always, always ALWAYS reverse their names. Every damn time.
As for the Nudity: It's in the background. When he's getting rip-roaring drunk, he's doing it at a strip or burlesque show, and a woman is parading around topless in the background she's either
A)Nude and has big nipples or
B)Has those little stripper star-like-patches that cover up your nipples, but COME ON that's basically nude anyhow. And still way more risque than I'd expect of the time period.
So yeah, what we've learned about VSM:
I can ignore the plot of a movie COMPLETELY the instant that breasts show up. I could use a girlfriend or six. (One for each day of the week, keeping the Sabbath holy--and for threesomes.)
Another thing I forgot to mention when I talked Citizen Kane: There were parts of the movie where I was juuuuuuuuuuuust about ready to bust out laughing, because I'd remember Mrs. Pells Frozen Fish Sticks, and how they're even better when you're dead.
EDIT
Wheee, four for four!
Another thing I noticed when watching Citizen Kane/The Third Man
Is it like, some kind of tradition for someone to say something to Joseph Cotten and him to look at them all weird and respond "I'm DRUNK!" I swear he did this in both films.
-
The Third Man was a British production, so maybe that had something to do with it (I wouldn't have thought England especially more lax in this regard than the U.S. at that time, but yeah, I can't really imagine an American movie circa 1949 getting away with that). And the word you were looking for was "pasties."
As for Rear Window...ow to having to put up with that kind of article. Hitchcock made thrillers. Technically skillful ones, sure, but the writer there has to have been overthinking it.
-
On the note of Butterfly Effect... I dunno. I like the movie conceptually and it works out okay in execution, but I can't help feeling that having abetter dramatic actor than Ashton in the lead role would have helped quite a bit. He's just not natural there, distracting.
(Lessee how two quotes looks with the banner...)
Ninja: Bah, no. Hmm... guess I'll sacrifice Backloggery.)
-
I am INDEED thinking of Steve McQueen, can tell the two actors apart, yet I always, always ALWAYS reverse their names. Every damn time.
Another thing I forgot to mention when I talked Citizen Kane: There were parts of the movie where I was juuuuuuuuuuuust about ready to bust out laughing, because I'd remember Mrs. Pells Frozen Fish Sticks, and how they're even better when you're dead.
Odd. I usually confuse William Holden and Steve McQueen.
And thanks. I have the Monty Burns version of "There is a Man" stuck in my head now.
-
Just watched Godzilla, Mothra, and King Ghidorah: All Out Giant Monster Attack.
This movie is 3 prior to Godzilla: Final Wars, but I heard its one of the better of the Millenium series. It...was a bit disappointing. One reason is the big monster brawl at the end wasn't quite what I was expecting. The Special effects looked pretty sweet, but I felt there was too much focus on the military's "WE MUST STOP GODZILLA!" instead of the actual fight at hand, which is usually the climax of these movies.
There's actually a 4th monster in the movie, Baragon, but I can see why he was left out of the title. First off, he wasn't in the final battle; he was just a guy before hand who faces off against Godzilla, and well, gets his ass kicked...badly. It was pretty pathetic; he bites godzilla's arm, then Godzilla tosses him around a bit, finally blasting him. I can see why they chose him though; no one gives a shit about Baragon, so he works for someone to get his ass kicked badly early on.
I mean,seriously...Baragon? I know most of you don't know much about Kaiju, but just know that Godzilla, Mothra and Ghidorah are the most recognizable faces for Toho movies, where as Baragon didn't even play a remotely worthwhile role in Destroy All Monsters (the original big monster Toho fest, where they used pretty much ALL their monsters.) So yeah, I really felt they tossed him in cause hey, he's barely used, why not giev him some "love" and let him have a fight with Godzilla where he gets his ass kicked?
The real show was Godzilla vs. Mothra/Ghidorah. Godzilla vs. Mothra is nothing special; we've seen this multiple times, let alone Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah...but Mothra and Ghidorah teaming up is just "what?" as is Ghidorah being a good guy, LET ALONE the Ultimate Heroic Figure. The fight itself was kind of neat, being in the city at night, and starting off with Godzilla vs. Mothra only, with Ghidorah joining midway and the fight slowly escalatnig to Godzilla vs. Ghidorah, whose slowly evolving into the more classic version (Ghidorah at first is utterly pathetic, not even able to fly! But as the fight progresses, he slowly evolves, and by the end, he's the classic version.)
What I found intriguing was how they handled Ghidorah's Roar. Now, all Toho monsters have a distinct roar that's consistent throughout the series; at most, they rerecord it with slighy variations.
Ghidorah was interesting cause at first, he sounds nothing like himself...but when he finally starts evolving, his roar becomes a modified version of his classic one. Nice to hear a modern rendition of it, contrast to Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah where they just changed it entirely into something that sounds like Rodan (not...that I don't like how it sounds, just when you see a monster you know, you associate certain sounds with them.) I was worried the old sound effect was gone for good (I can't tell if Ghidorah's Sound is the same in Final wars or not, cause of all the other audio going on, but...then, that's apparently "Kaiser Ghidorah" so they have an excuse! <_<)
One thing this movie does that no other Godzilla movie has ever really done?
Focus on just how cruel and horrible Godzilla's destruction can be. In most movies, he's just toppling buildings, and at most, we see corpses. Here? we actually see people getting stepped on, people getting slammed WHILE IN BUILDINGS, people actually getting nuked by his breath, what have you. It makes it seem a lot worse than usual, which was actually neat. The most disturbing part is this one:
Hospital room, there's a girl there with a broken leg, restrained to her bed. She looks outside, see's Godzilla. Tries to get up to run, but can't...now she's in immense fear for her life and she quite literally can't do anything about it but watch as Godzilla just inches closer. Eventually, Godzilla just walks bye, and she has a sigh of relief...
...then the tail slams RIGHT INTO HER ROOM out of nowhere. I believe it even shows the tail pop up from her PoV through the window, then shifts to outside and we watch it slam through her room. Really quite a "holy shit" scene, cause they've never been so...direct...about Godzilla's destructive merits...or any monster on the Daikaiju scale; the closest we get are the teaser GIANT BUGS killing a person here or there (by which I mean, the bugs are basically the size of horses, instead of several story buildings.)
Anyway, not sure which I'll watch next...maybe I'll hate myself enough to find Son of Godzilla and watch that...or watch one of the modern Mechagodzilla Movies, which apparently are decent.
-
Babel, 5/5. Similar story structure-wise as Crash. Definitely didn't have the endings I wanted in either three arcs of the movie, but for once - that didn't make the movie suck. With the Mexican storyline, I was extremely upset for multiple reasons even if she was an illegal immigrant. I was also upset with the final choice she decided to make in the desert, but it was a choice she HAD to make unless she wanted to directly put the children in more harm. This wasn't fleshed out enough because the condition of the children were skirted in the end of this arc.
My favorite arc was the Tazarine, though the Japanese one was sort of on par in quality. I just didn't prefer the intense sexual subject in the Japanese one - it was almost like art - an excuse to show the female nude body. The Tazarine arc definitely shows the opposite side to American crazy "omg terrorist attack" issues and they do not skirt any of the violence. Fairly upset with the way it ends continually focusing on the American tourists rather than the Tazarine family and the white woman's phobia for brown people. I think this was intentional though as their positions are constantly skirted besides the death tolls that rack up. Using a white woman had its pros too - white women in many racial movies sort of represent the emotional fear of whatever X is. This isn't to say that brown people can't represent X either, but Babel really made everything extreme, white and black to get its point across. Anyway. It was almost a 3 hour movie and the pacing definitely didn't show that (coughlotrcough). It's been a while since I watched a long movie and didn't notice its length. Good stuff.
Natural City 2/5. Too. . . . it wasn't very coherent.
-
Son of Godzilla: Continuing my current kick, watched this! It was the only movie in the Showa Series I had not seen at all (though, never saw all of Godzilla vs. The Smog MOnster or Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster...funny cause Hedora and Eboras get their asses kicked at the EXACT SAME TIME in Godzilla Final Wars...though, the latter looked kind of meh and the former looked like you need to be 5 years old to appreciate it...or just have a level of crack that makes you equate Godzilla to CAPTAIN PLANET)
Anyway, what can I say about this movie? It looks really bad compared to the last two I saw...but that's not fair; special effects in the modern era for movies that specialized on Monsters beating the shit out of each other vs. Special Effects in a 1960s movie that was meant to be geared towards younger children!
...and no, I don't mean this is one of those "Family" Flicks where a 5 year old can love it as much as a 35 year old, just on different levels; the movie is meant for kids. Its basically "watch Godzilla be a dad!" as the name would imply. Yeah, there are some amusing moments, but seriously, outside of the fight scenes with the monsters, which are some of the lamest. Kamacarus (IN HIS DEBUT! ...cause people really gave a shit about the large preying mantis with no super powers) was basically "Godzilla power bombs them, then fries their ass." Kumonga? Outside of one moment when Godzilla THROWS A ROCK at it, its just a lot of Fire Breath vs. SPIDER WEB! Uh, yeah, this isn't exactly the highlight of Godzilla fights...
The Human plot...is even laughable by Godzilla Human plot standards. Guys are on an island doing experiments with weather and shit, random reporter jumps down from a plane on a pure hunch cause he thinks there's a story, ends up part of the crew cause he's stuck there. They meet some island chick whose SORT OF A NATIVE, they need to find a way off the island before Kumonga (the giant spider), awakens.
...speaking of which, Kumonga being the main villain is proof Toho didn't give half a shit about this movie's quality, and just wanted to make something that only a 5 year old kid could watch. Kumonga is a giant spider. Giant Spidres are one of the most used Giant Monster stereotypes in the past, especially Pre-Godzilla. As you might have guessed, all he can do is SHOOT WEBS. He has a stinger, but its completely pointless cause it requires Godzilla getting up close and...yeah...
...yeah, I'll just stop here. This movie did the not-smart thing of gearing it towards younger children. I'd question how Godzilla still has credibility after this movie and Godzilla's Revenge, but then I remember Destroy All Monsters existed in between both, which is more in tune with a typical Godzilla movie, rather than "hey kids, Godzilla is cool no?"
Next up, Godzilla vs. Biollante. Actually kind of looking forward to this one, cause Biollante appeared in BOTH SNES Godzilla games, and is the only one I don't really know much about, and its odd cause this is quite literally his only movie (barring a quick mention in Godzilla vs. Space Godzilla)
-
If I'm not mistaken, Biollante is the biggest of all Kaiju. Also rather amusing to play as in Godzilla Unleashed game.
-
Sympathy for Mister Vengeance -
. . . . has anyone else seen this movie?
-
Yes. I think a number of people here did, back in the days when Otter and company were around? Park Chan-Wook is awesome, regardless.
-
Yeah back in the days we had people with taste in movies who enjoyed discussing them (Fenrir, Otter) that trilogy made its way through the group.
-
If I'm not mistaken, Biollante is the biggest of all Kaiju. Also rather amusing to play as in Godzilla Unleashed game.
He's definitely in running for it, that's for sure. The only one who might be larger is Orga, and even then I'm not sure.
I've seen Biollante some in a few of the games (namely the 2 SNES ones), so yeah, I know a bit about what he can do (Acid and Tentacles), what he looks like, and even his roar! Just haven't seen the movie with him. Apparently, the idea behind Biollante was another one of these "contest" monsters and plots, just unlike Jet Jaguar, they were going for something serious instead of CORNBALL SUPER HERO ROBOT.
I think they actually made a good choice, based on what I know, as Biollante has a pretty cool and menacing design, and Godzilla has never actually fought a plant monster before; lots of dinosaurs, robots and bugs, and even a Cyborg Bird with a Buzz Saw on its chest...but never a mutant plant.
-
Superman/Batman: Public Enemies - This is basically "Superman and Batman Punch The DC Universe," and does a pretty good job of it, with the added bonus of bringing Tim Daly, Kevin Conroy and Clancy Brown back as Superman, Batman and Lex Luthor. It all kinda falls apart in the last fifteen minutes - it's going for over-the-top craziness but it just turns out dumb, and that's not a statement I make lightly when the over-the-top crazy involves a gigantic Batman robot. Before that it's good fightin', though.
Edit: Also, they replaced Efrem Zimbalist, the guy who voiced Alfred in the DCAU, with the actor who did Norman's voice in The Big O. Recursion is fun.
-
Yes. I think a number of people here did, back in the days when Otter and company were around? Park Chan-Wook is awesome, regardless.
I just finished Sympathy for Mister Vengeance on Netflix last night around 4AM [funny that, when I couldn't sleep, even a sullen movie couldn't put me to sleep]. The first installment isn't exactly groundbreaking for me though. I found that I was appreciating the characters Chan-Wook created and the minute and random gore that wasn't exactly thriller more than the overall storyline. Perhaps it becomes much more intriguing when people debate whether sympathy is necessary or not? How to explain . . . .
Ryu is clearly a tragic and unfortunate character. His situation is magnified by the fact that he is deaf and mute (I don't like deaf and dumb, k?). Is he responsible for the daughter if he is consciously unable to recognize events going on behind him? Or should he have been thinking better? Does it make him a bad person? Should Hammurabi's eye for an eye really be enacted or should he be made even more of a victim to his disabilities? I liked this external struggle. Yeong-mi felt like an addition to the movie to elucidate and voice perhaps more subconscious thoughts of Ryu to the viewer (you have to disassociate herself with her personality and the rebellion). She was, in my opinion, an extension of Ryu which mediates the last minutes of the movie into a favorable ending depending on whose side you pick.
Dong-jin? I do not know where to start. It's great to see both sides of the story, but I felt that perhaps. . . he was a bit more undeveloped and his domination in many of the latter scenes that seemed to stick to more to an overarching aspect of the storyline rather than character development. . . that made his character a bit more lacking. I guess I would have preferred some sort of personal dialog rather than commentary about his situation as his motives and actions do become rather insane. The issue between a parent's loss is clear, but besides the snippet of the issue with his wife, you really just see a father who is interested in providing for his child. Once things happen, and he faces Ryu with regret, I felt that his action relied more on redeeming his masculinity rather than filling a void. I took it that way because of what happened to Yeong-mi seemed sufficient in terms of balancing the disorder of loss rather than a rampage that comes from little fleshiness.
I didn't quite like the black market story. It came in hiccups really to channel . . or make Ryu's actions an obligation or impetus for "vengeance," in its many realizations in the movie and to quickly finish his sister's arc. The characters were quite human though. That's always nice, rather than seeing common contrived pros/antagonists. The gore was gorey, yeah. Pretty nice. Sort of surpassed Quentin Tarantino's attempt of dialog and situation (chair-ear scene). Good movie . . I just felt like something things were rushed too fast, and some things were prolonged too much. It's just noticeable in the prolonged areas (pretty much Dong-Jin's screentime) that I felt there should have been more fleshiness!
-
Old Boy next.
Edit - Old Boy is the one that is the real masterpiece of the lot.
-
Yeah, I'm watching Oldboy tonight. I was told the trilogy is good in terms of 2-3-1 rather than 1-2-3.
-
Finished Oldboy. Extremely, extremely disturbing subject matter. I don't know what it is, but the last few asian films I've watched deal with incest, child pornography and awkward sex scenes. It's . . .
Anyway. 5/5. I'm dissatisfied with the way the despicable character in the elevator went out. Even if he is trying to make the other man feel his pain from the past, he is feeling agony over something he was "forced" to not control. So the parallel between Odaisu(?) and Mr. Despicable (in my case, I don't remember or know how to spell their names) isn't substantial. The action isn't either. Granted, they both committed the same act. One was remorseful, disgusted, apologetic. The other one was protective, complicit, accepting of it. I can't find myself to hate Odaisu, but I can find myself hating the other guy.
Yeeeeah, this'll teach me to talk about people out loud. Someone in elementary school may be plotting against me.
-
Tyranitar vs. Venusaur aka Godzilla vs. Biollante: The next movie in the Kaiju series by Toho I hadn't seen...that's worth seeing (so no, Varan, you don't count...nor do you "Frankenstein Conquers the World" or "The Mysterians" or "Battle of the Gargantuans." You all suck and are obscure...and one of you introduced FREAKING BARAGON *mocks*)
Anyway, this movie follows Tyranitar 1985, which was a huge step up from the previous Tyranitar movies (last one being the Terror of Mechatyranitar) in terms of special effects, be it explosions, Tyranitar's Hyper Beam, or just portraying Tyranitar as a menancing beast of death, especially since he slowly became cute. Special Effects are generally about what you'd expect for a movie in the late 80s; they look a bit dated, but they aren't a total joke either, so they're still good stuff, if nothing ground breaking. Though, seeing this movie after "Son of Tyranitar" makes the visuals look really damn good in comparison!
This movie is one I didn't know much about; I mean...I saw Venusaur in the SNES games, so I knew some of her (yes, its a female Kaiju...this is the second one ever after Butterfree...ok, so one of the Aerodactyls in the movie "Aerodactyl" was female, but that one died, and only the male one got canonized and such, so doesn't count!) attacks, her screech, and her general design, but the plot behind her? yeah, I just knew "plant spliced with Tyranitar." Reading the back of the box years ago, I thought it sounded lame; Tyranitar vs. a Plant? SERIOUSLY!?
Though, this would probably explain why the movie was unsuccessful, but in truth? it ends up being far more enjoyable than I expected, and thus can agree that its a sleeper hit of sorts; decent movie for the genre, just not very well known, and pales compared to some of the really awesome ones (Tyranitar Final Wars anyone?). First off, the late 80s special effects and visuals add a lot to the movie that the earlier era sort of lacked, so it had that as an advantage. It also had a coherent plotline that was almost kind of interesting, rather than just "Story that leads to oversized Pokemon beating the shit out of each other", so the human scenes weren't as boring. Furthermore? The Army scenes were kind of fun to watch this time. First off, it wasn't just the same old "Military uses Missiles! Its not very effective... Tyranitar uses Hyper Beam! Its Super Effective! Military Faints!"...make no mistake, those scenes existed, but they felt meaningful here, as they made it clear they knew that simple bombs don't work on Tyranitar, and they were just trying to stall him for Super X Mk 2 to appear, which actually had some features that sound like they'd genuinely WORK on Tyranitar, like a Mirror Shield to deflect Hyper Beam back at Tyranitar's face, and they were planning on using Organic Weapons that sound like they should hurt Tyranitar rather well (they eat Radioactivity, you see); this meant that for once, humans were approaching things a little more logically than just "FIRE LIKE MANIACS UNTIL WE'RE ALL DEAD, OR HOPE HE RUNS AWAY FIRST!"
The whole "Science = Grey" thing was...well, sappy, but it worked in context of the plot. Furthermore, Venusaur evolving throughout was neat, such that the big reveal at the end where she appears in her huge monstrous threatening form, one that actually looks like it might stand a chance against Tyranitar, was neat. Yeah, for someone whose only been in one movie, Venusaur made a good impression, and I can see why they like to bring her into Video Games; she deserves another movie at some point in the future...
It was overall good fun, and ended up liking it more than I expected. Venusaur being a more interesting monster than I expected didn't hurt, as did the general plot behind the monster this time too...I think Venusaur is also the first Tyranitar Clone (no, Mechatyranitar doesn't count; that's just a robot that is built to loosely resemble him <_< ) so yeah.
Anyway, next up is Tyranitar vs. Mechatyranitar 2!
-------
For those who are lost in this nonsense of Pokemon references, here's a list of what each thing stands for...
Note that I didn't care enough when just mentioning random shit in the first paragraph cause those monsters are all obscure piles of shit that no one cares about <_<
Tyranitar = Godzilla (Mechatyranitar should be obvious)
Venusaur = Biollante
Aerodactyl = Rodan
Butterfree = Mothra
Hyper Beam = Godzilla's Trademark Breath attack
-
Watched another movie last night, cause it was streamed, and then a different movie altogether this afternoon...so I'll rant about both!
Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II: The only Heisei Godzilla film I haven't seen, which means all that's left are various millennium movies!
Anyway, Mechagodzilla is a neat concept, and the recreation of his design was kind of neat, but...honestly, in the end, he's just not good at making interesting fights. Its just a lot of LASERS and shit, while Godzilla tries various means of Melee, or Atomic Breaths and...yeah...he just ends up being not as cool as he should be.
However, beyond the tame, repetitive fight scene with Mechagodzilla, the movie itself wasn't too bad. Main reason? It had Rodan. WHy Rodan? Cause Ghidorah was killed 2 movies ago (actually, this is an important plot point, cause they mention Mecha-King Ghidorah) and Mothra's busy going off, attempting to thwart Sephiroth's plans by blowing up an evil meteor HEAD ON...so they resort to good old death Pteranodon. Which is fine by me; Rodan's pretty awesome. The arbitrary fight between him and Godzilla early on lifted the movie a bit, especially since its nice to see they haven't forgotten the whole "yes, Rodan can hold his own against Godzilla", and I finally got to see the so called "Fire Rodan", which is to say "Rodan who can shoot Atomic Death Beams like Godzilla", which was certainly nice. Also had a more interesting fight with Mechagodzilla than Godzilla himself. Just nice to see Rodan in action again, having a prevalent role, rather than a minor one like in Final Wars...
MIND! His Final Wars appearance, brief as it was, was pretty damn good, especially since he probably had the single best entrance of any monster, and some of the best visuals were associated with him. I believe I said it once before, but I'll repeat myself anyway:
Rodan, for a simplistic idea (giant Pteranadon) is made completely and totally bad ass.
Also this movie introduced Godzilla's alternative son, Godzilla Jr...aka Baby...aka Little Godzilla...it depends which movie really. Unlike Minya, HE SERVES A PRACTICAL PURPOSE THIS MOVIE (and in the following two as well), other than just being "hey look at the cute little Godzilla, and isn't Godzilla a sweet daddy ^^." Not going to get into details, just to spare you, its just nice seeing a Baby Godzilla who doesn't look like a total joke, and serve a genuine purpose (make no mistake; the baby *IS* clearly trying to be cute, but it actually looks like it might be related to Godzilla, instead of "Reptilian Pillsbury Dough Boy")
So yeah, it was decent enough, much like the rest of the Heisei Series (Godzilla 1985 til Godzilla vs. Destroyah), so I can safely say now that the entire stretch of movies was overall nice.
The other movie...rather than go onto Godzilla vs. Megagarius (2nd movie in Millennium series, and next one I haven't seen), Hatbot said I should change my pace, and go back to 1960s Kaiju movies, and start a series I haven't really any experience with! That being...
Gamera the Invincible:
Its a black and white Giant Monster movie, so I wasn't expecting much. Its about what you'd expect; cheesey special effects, fake looking monster, what have you. I'm not sure why it was popular enough to merit its own series though...I guess the idea of UFO TURTLE has some sort of appeal, but the movie itself didn't really do anything ground breaking. There's a lot more boring human talking nonsense than should be in a Kaiju, as its all just "What are we going to do about Gamera!?" and the actual execution of the plans is like 10% of the movie total, and the giant monster destroying things is probably about 5 minutes of footage total? Ok, understatement, but still, its not much.
Contrast this to the original Godzilla: King of the Monsters for a second. It did take a while for him to appear (Gamera appears earlier, I'll grant that), but...a good deal of the movie is him stomping all over Tokyo, destroying shit. Its slow, accompanied by Godzilla's Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6qAIaqK3_Q&feature=related), which adds that ominous feel to it, and sets a much darker mood. Gamera's version is just "Rar, GIANT TURTLE SMASH!" and its over pretty fast before they go into "WE MUST DESTROY THE MONSTER!" The music didn't help either; no, I don't really expect something to match Godzilla's theme for fitting "GIANT MONSTER KILLS ALL" but Gamera's music didn't really add anything to the scene. I picture Godzilla's famous destruction of Tokyo to different music, and it definitely loses something.
Gamera himself...well, there were times he actually looked menacing; mostly the close up facial shots of him. Those did look genuinely scary, but the full body shots looked more ridiculous than anything else. Again, compared to Godzilla where these far full body shots had this somewhat intimidating appearance to it, especially since he was ENTIRELY BLACK (partially cause of the whole Black and White footage thing, but that just added to the movie, if you ask me), so he gave off this image of being an evil destructive force, rather than just a generic giant monster. No, Godzilla didn't really LOOK realistic (he's still a guy in a rubber suit), but just the way he was portrayed felt more effective than Gamera, where they had a lot of overhead or far distance shots, which are ineffective ways to make a monster look menacing.
Oh, and the roar is generic too! Godzilla's original roar...well, it sounded primitive and hard to understand, but hey, it did sound like it could be scary! Gamera's more a generic wail.
Again, this is all compared to Godzilla: King of the Monsters, NOT later films, so this is still fair game. Why am I doing this comparison? Cause Godzilla: king of the Monsters was an immense success in regards to the genre and somewhat revolutionized things from what I understand, in the sense of how Giant Monster Movies were handled after it; most of them emulate Godzilla style rampage. Gamera, being as big as it was for making a series, I expected more out of, but...it just felt lacking a lot compared to Godzilla.
But you know, comparing it to Godzilla is a bit unfair; that's like saying a Fighting Game in the early 90s didn't live up to Street Fighter 2. Actually, that is a good comparison; Godzilla is the Street Fighter 2 of Daikaiju movies (Immensely popular, revolutionized the genre, etc.), Gamera's kind of like the Fatal Fury (a somehow successful clone of the other, despite not really doing anything THAT original.)
...but then I noted when Gamera was made, and this is what really makes me disrespect the movie:
1965.
I know you're thinking "Why do you expect more out of a 60s movie? Come on!" Well, thing is? You know how I'm comparing it to Godzilla?
Godzilla was made in 1954. 11 years before Gamera. That means they had 11 years of stuff to work with, and there's really no excuse they couldn't at least live up to the standards as a result. If it was only a few years later, and there weren't many movies made? That'd be one thing, but by the time Gamera came out, Toho already released Godzilla Raids Again, Rodan and Mothra; that's 3 movies that did it more interesting than Gamera after Godzilla King of the Monsters came out...and 2 of them were even in color! I left King Kong vs. Godzilla off that list, since that movie is a completely different style, as is Godzilla films made afterwords; I won't get into that.
That's the thing that makes me wonder; why was Gamera so big? Wasit really just cause he's an interesting designed monster? That's about all I can think of. I look at other popular monsters and can see at least something big about the monster or the movie they came from:
King Kong, while not Kaiju (he's American), was pretty much the true Grandfather of Giant Monster Movies. While not the first, this movie was possibly the most successful one of all time, had AMAZING special effects for the time, and...yeah. For a movie made in 1933, its really quite a "HOLY SHIT" perspective. It didn't really dawn on me until relatively recently just how ground breaking this movie was; I use to think "oh, good special effects for the time, but its just a giant ape." recently, I thought about it and went "This movie was made 21 years before the original Godzilla" and suddenly, my respect for it rose dramatically. I understood why it was a classic, but now my general thought is "If you cannot respect this movie, you really have absolutely no taste and cannot put things into perspective AT ALL."
Point is, King Kong deserves every single ounce of respect he gets, and those who say otherwise are Batman and Robin fanboys!
Godzilla: King of the Monsters is essentially the Street Fighter 2 of Daikaijuu movies. Its the movie that set the standard for how Giant Monster Movies should be from that point on. It set an overall tone that Giant Monster Movies should have, made him look actually menacing (King Kong...never came off as quite scary beyond his initial appearance I felt, but then, I don't quite think King Kong was suppose to be absolutely menacing in the same way; they did portray a sympathetic side of him, and in the end, you kind of pity the monster.) While the series did decay quite a bit from its original purpose (even ignoring the propaganda nature of it) until the mid 80s where it regained the "Godzilla is an evil monster destroying everything!" aspect again, this does not detract from what this movie did to the genre.
Rodan...didn't really do much special...EXCEPT that from what I can tell, it was the first Giant Monster Movie to be done entirely in color, and it followed Godzilla by only 2 years. So yeah, in that regard, its got something.
Mothra took a unique take on the giant monster for once. Rather than portray the monster as something clearly evil (Godzilla), misunderstood (Rodan), or an innocent creature who just gets pushed to its limits where its rampage is understandable (King Kong), Mothra was clearly benevolent. The bad guys were clearly the douche humans who were killing people, imprisoning the fairies, etc. and Mothra was meant to be heroic, coming to save the day, despite the destruction involved. Yes, she destroyed stuff along the way, but that's more a case of collateral damage. They make it clear Mothra's not actually trying to destroy anything, its just kind of happening along the way; once she gets what she wants, she leaves. She could have very easily taken revenge, destroy everything, etc. like you'd expect...but instead, it actually leaves. This is a rare movie where the monster is dealt with completely not by aggression. Look at the other movies above:
King Kong? Shot down from the Empire State Buidling.
Godzilla? Oxygen Destroyered.
Rodan? Blow up a volcano until it basically erupts on top of them.
Mothra? ...give her what she wants, the good humans give her a nice farewell.
I suppose I'll toss one more movie up, even though its a change of pace, I can still see why its popular:
Ghidorah: The Three Headed Monster. From what I can tell, this is the first time so many monsters appeared together; Godzilla, Mothra and Rodan apparently are Toho's biggest monsters at the time, to see all three of them actually work together against a 4th, new monster was probably a big deal. As I once heard in a review "3 Heads are better than 1, and 4 monsters are better than 2!" best sums up the nature of that movie. It was also the first time you actually had a chance to route for Godzilla as a good guy, Rodan got reintroduced, and they even had Godzilla and Rodan fight, so there was a lot of action before the dramatic Ghidorah fight. This isn't to say that Ghidorah's got a neat design and what not, but I can't help but imagine that this being the first big monster brawl in Kaiju, so I'm sure that raise its popularity.
And even THAT movie predates Gamera, by nearly an entire year!
So my question is...what made Gamera such a big hit? The only thing I can think of is the whole "Flying Saucer Fire Eating Turtle!" thing, as the movie really just feels like another cheap monster flick, and it had several movies to base its standards off of, and...yeah. Its a movie made 11 years after Godzilla, but it certainly feels like it came out much closer.
...and yet, I still intend on watching more of those movies :\
-
Get the MST versions Meep, it just makes Gamera much better (This is why the series is even worth noting anymore).
-
Get the MST versions Meep, it just makes Gamera much better (This is why the series is even worth noting anymore).
I might actually do that, but...I feel as a fan of Kaiju, I owe it to myself to at least watch some of the Gamera movies. Though, from what I understand, the Heisei series ones are somewhat improved compared to the Showa series, and are "DARKER AND EDGIER!" (wouldn't shock me too; I might be in a minority, but I generally like the Heisei Godzilla films over the Showa ones)
-
Yeah fair enough, but Gamera 1 and 2 being the ones I have seen are pretty terrible Kaiju movies for what that is worth.
-
By "Gamera 2", I take it you mean "Gamera vs. Barugon" or whatever name you saw it under? Just assuming that's what you mean cause based on the dates, that one seems to come right after.
-
That is the one yes.
-
Yeah fair enough, but Gamera 1 and 2 being the ones I have seen are pretty terrible Kaiju movies for what that is worth.
This. Gamera makes other giant monsters look better by existing, I think.
-
Well, if nothing else?
The likes of King Kong and Rodan prove you can be a simplistic monster design (ie oversized version of some generic monster, even if a dinosaur) and be awesome, while Gamera proves that originality does not always yield awesomeness.
Then we have Gigan whose the best of both worlds. Original *AND* Awesome! (ok, he's not the most awesome monster ever, just plain cool; he's high up there in terms of interesting designs though <_< )
For what its worth, I don't exactly have high expectations for Gamera vs. Barugon and this is BEFORE watching the original. Just based on the little I've seen and heard of Barugon, he makes Gamera himself look that much better.
-
Paranormal Activity
I had gotten under the impression that I really liked horror films, based on intellectual stuff like Alfred Hitchcock movies and Silence of the Lambs (or the part of it that's available on Youtube in America, anyway...did they censor part 7 and 8 due to nudity). The movie Paranormal Activity exists to scare you. It really has no other purpose; it doesn't exist to gross you out. It doesn't exist to make you fascinated by the characters and their motivations. It doesn't exist to wow you with its camera angles (all the camera shots are done by the two characters in the movie, although there's obviously thought put into camera angles and scenes--it's definitely not the Blair Witch project or anything).
In the end, it succeeds at its goal: I'm inclined to call it the most frightening move I've seen. Did I enjoy it? Ehh...mildly on the side of "no"--turns out when a film focuses purely on fear I don't enjoy it nearly as much as horror films with a lot of intellectual commentary. Also, there were a number of possibly drunk frat boys catcalling the screen (all the catcalls were from men--even though when the lights came on the theatre was half-filled with women. regardless "listening to frat boys" is pretty low on my list of enjoyable activities). That, combined with several scenes of "I hand the camera to you and it's right in your cleavage; whoops 'accident'" created an overall feeling of 'I'm not meant to be this movie's target audience.' Probably wouldn't have had that feeling if I watched it outside of theatres, mind you.
-
Key lesson there: Suspense isn't horror.
-
That is your problem right there met, you are to busy watching GOOD horror films instead of bad ones. Don't do that, it gives you the wrong idea of the genre (So you probably shouldn't see Drag Me To Hell or something as well because that would just make you think horror movies can be done well these days). You need to go sit through something like The Grudge or Captivity. Skip over Evil Dead as well, it will make you think something good came out of the genre in the 80's. This is what Halloween 3 is there to show you what Horror in the 80's was like.
Also not to watch not necessarily so much in the Horror as Creep Me Right the Fuck Out genre, don't catch Last House on the Left (Original 1972) or 8mm.
Edit - Suspense is not horror. Loud noises are not horror. Fast cuts to mangled bodies is not horror. What they all are though is Horror films!
-
Edit - Suspense is not horror. Loud noises are not horror.
So...since the movie I just watched achieved most of its effects with those two elements, I guess I didn't watch a horror film?
-
Edit - Suspense is not horror. Loud noises are not horror. Fast cuts to mangled bodies is not horror. What they all are though is Horror films!
-
Eh, I would argue that suspense can make for good horror, but the rest yes.
-
Suspense is a tool that helps make Birds scary. The suspense of Birds is not what makes it Horrifying. Same goes for Bodysnatchers and other stuff.
Edit - The point is that suspense needs something to back it up or it is a hollow empty vessel, the mangled corpse needs to have a threat behind it otherwise it is just a corpse and loud noise scares are fucking stupid.
-
That is your problem right there met, you are to busy watching GOOD horror films instead of bad ones. Don't do that, it gives you the wrong idea of the genre (So you probably shouldn't see Drag Me To Hell or something as well because that would just make you think horror movies can be done well these days). You need to go sit through something like The Grudge or Captivity. Skip over Evil Dead as well, it will make you think something good came out of the genre in the 80's. This is what Halloween 3 is there to show you what Horror in the 80's was like.
Also not to watch not necessarily so much in the Horror as Creep Me Right the Fuck Out genre, don't catch Last House on the Left (Original 1972) or 8mm.
Edit - Suspense is not horror. Loud noises are not horror. Fast cuts to mangled bodies is not horror. What they all are though is Horror films!
Where the hell were you when I used Halloween 3 in the Movie Quotes Quiz?
Seconding the call on the original Last House on the Left. Thats just freaking intense and wrong on many levels.
Horror in the 80's... I'm not sure, but I think the House movies were made in the 80's. I think those really embody the majority of 80's horror film-making for me. Cheesy, half tongue-in-cheek, wacky creature effects.
Of course, The Thing was also made in the 80's and that fucking rocked. So were some of the Hellraiser movies. The Shining was 1980 and Pet Sematary was late 80's as well. So you can't completely write off the decade.
-
I was busy trying to erase Halloween 3 and everything related to the series from my memory.
-
Of course, The Thing was also made in the 80's and that fucking rocked.
QFT.
-
So the thing I was using to get most of the Showa series for Gamera decided to die on me, so I looked for streams and such! Thought I found one of Gamera vs. Barugon, aka War of the Monsters.
So I'm watching it, and they're acting like stuff has happened in the past...that definitely didn't happen in the movie...evidently, it was ATTACK of the Monsters I was watching, aka Gamera vs. Guiron...
So....
Gamera vs. Guiron:
Thankfully, the only thing that matters for Gamera Continuity is him suddenly being a good guy and "Friend to all children!" or some shit. Uh, yeah, with that in mind, I can already tell Gamera's a less cool hero than Godzilla, but I'll get to that later!
Gamera looks about the same he did in the first movie...but in color! Except there were definite moments where they used freaking TOYS to represent the monsters. It really contrasts Toho monsters who, barring some very specific cases (like one moment where Ghidorah is flying in Godzilla vs. Gigan), are pretty much always guys in Rubber Suits, which just are far more appealing than the usage of action figures.
Furthermore, the monster designs are just so much worse than Toho. I mean, this movie had Gyaos as a brief cameo, who from what I understand, is Gamera's version of King Ghidorah.
I'd compare the two, but finding a good shot of Gyaos, at least the Showa version, is tough; I'll explain why Heisei doesn't count here. But in any event, King Ghidorah looks relatively well portrayed. Just a simple 3 headed golden dragon; its nothing special, but gets the job done at displaying "Evil Kaiju whose damn strong", especially since he's towering over most other Kaiju (freaks like Biollante need not apply.) While not the most creative of designs, King Ghidorah still looks good.
Gyaos, meanwhile? He looks somehow more generic; just an evil bat thing. This...isn't so bad until you look at his head; its this weird flat triangle thing. I understand they wanted to make him look more original, but seriously, that just sort of makes him look like a joke.
That, and the general portrayal of the two style of monsters doesn't help. Toho monsters, while by no means realistic and clearly cheesey, at least look acceptable. The Gamera Monsters look like a joke...
Granted, being less awesome than King Ghidorah isn't exactly an insult; he is, after all, one of Toho's most memorable creations, and has popularity only outdone by Godzilla and Mothra (Toho's two most famous monsters), which is why he keeps coming back, and basically earned his title as Godzilla's Arch Nemesis. Still, I could compare the Showa Gyaos to some of Toho's other monsters, and I'd be less than impressed with him.
BUT BACK TO THE MOVIE.
There's two kids, they jump into a space ship, end up on another planet, meet two alien chicks who claim to be friendly, but are really evil and want to EAT THE KID'S BRAINS! A version of Gyaos attacks that planet, their guard dog Guiron stops him. shit happens, kids in trouble, GAMERA SAVES THE DAY!!!!
...this is an abbreviation. If you think the cheese sounds bad, it only gets worse.
The fight sequence when Gamera finally arrives and fights Guiron (who by the way looks like a mentally challenged shark with a blade on its head...just GIS him and you'll see what I mean)...it says something that Godzillla fight sequences, which thrive off cheesey pro-wrestling style visuals, look like high quality action scenes in comparison. I was face palming when the thing basically started with a TOY GUIRON continually slashing at a TOY GAMERA, and we're just watching the blade go up and down, up and down, hitting Gamera in the shell...
I will give credit to two things in the fight though:
-Gamera's JET PILE DRIVER. Grabbing Guiron in the legs, going into jet mode, then pile drivering him into the ground, blade first? Yeah, fun cheesey stuff; that's actually kind of amusing! If only the monsters looked less...jokingly...
-Missile thrown into Guiron's face. At one point, Gamera catches a missile, which while its still ignited, he throws it right at Guiron, impaling his face, and it explodes. Again, good cheesy stuff like this.
The children being the main obviously sets the tone that "These movies are meant for younger audiences!" This does explain the general quality though. I look at Godzilla movies, and well, only Godzilla vs. the Smog Monster, Godzilla's Revenge and Godzilla vs. Megalon, off the top of my head, have a child as a primary character...
Or IOWs, 3 of the worst Godzilla movies ever made. Its no wonder after Godzilla vs. Megalon, they stopped cutting the bullshit and went back to gearing more towards general audience by bringing in the two Mechagodzilla movies in, rather then aiming purely at the children. Gamera movies? Uh, yeah, they're entirely meant for children, at least ones after the first (and possibly vs. Barugon? That one sounds like it lacks children...actually, I've seen half of it.)
Oh, regarding the Heisei comment?
From what little I've seen, the Heisei Gamera and Gyaos look *A LOT* better than their Showa counterparts. They actually look like they can be taken seriously now, instead of being total jokes that only 5 year olds can appreciate. Just based off those visuals, I'm starting to understand why the Heisei Gamera garners respect; if the jump in quality of the movies is as much as the designs of those two, then there may be hope for Gamera!!!
...but only once we hit the 1990s. Until then, the way the movies are looking...yeah, much pain is inducing.
I know, I keep comparing Gamera to Godzilla, but come on; Gamera is the "Rival series" of Godzilla, so it feels logical. I understand he's popular with the children, which explains the later movies, but I'm still questioning how the first one spawned actual sequels...
-
Got dragged on a trip for my Media course the other day, went to see Coraline. It.. was better than I expected, although that's not saying much, since I couldn't really have gone in with lower expectations without seeing a film starring Orlando Bloom. I still don't understand the whole hype around kids films from people my age - sure, they're not bad, but they're still nothing special.
-
Bridge to Terabithia?
Also a giant ape invaded my dreams. I am totally blaming Meeple!
-
Bridge to Terabithia was depressing.
-
Bridge to Terabithia was an excellent book, still need to see the movie.
*Reads a description of Last House on the Left* Urk. Shouldn't have done that.
-
It is an incredibly powerful movie and it can and will make you feel a bit ill.
-
Each rant, I will try to be creative; if these rants are getting annoying, i'll stop and just do a quick review. So in any event...
Gamera vs. Barugon aka War of the Monsters: Saw this movie, now in much better quality so that I could tell what the fuck was going on, contrast to the stream where I could only watch the first half. Better quality made the movie WATCHABLE, but still bad. IT also had nearly inaudible MST3k
commentary on the side.
Well, its Gamera's first fight, and well, their choice for an opponent?
(http://henshin.250x.com/kaijuu/gamera2.jpg)
A giant horned lizard that sticks its tongue out, breathes ice, and FIRES RAINBOWS!!!
So...ignoring the rainbows and ice, Barugon's design. For Gamera's first fight, it sounds completely original an idea! A horned dinosaur like being! I've never seen that before! HA! Looks like Gamera is able to keep monster designs original at least! I mean, its not like Godzilla ever had anything like tha-
(http://www.kaijuhq.org/ang55.jpg)
...
Oh come on, Gamera, you can't even be slightly original ON YOUR FIRST FIGHT? Ok, so having a lot of monster designs as Toho did by then, I'm not shocked Gamera stole one but to make Gamera's first opponent practically copy Anguirus, who is Godzilla's first opponent ever, and just remove the shell? Oh, one thing I didn't comment on in my Gamera the Invincible rant was the use of the same visuals, so really, this just follows suit.
I think one of the MST3ker's said it best about 30 minutes into the movie:
"Doesn't this movie have a giant flying turtle in it?"
By which I mean, after Gamera's initial appearance, its takes over 30 minutes for us to get another inclinct of a giant monster. Then Barugon pops up, so you expect the movie to pick up, right?
...no, not quite. For you see, they use the usual MONSTER VS> MILITARY, MILITARY LOSES nonsense that Kaiju films love, except they lacked Toho's cheesy "Weapons of technological impossibilities" to add to the visuals, so its just machine guns and missiles...and the missiles get blown up by the RAINBOWS before they're fired.
(http://www.animecollectibles.com/uploads/images/godzilla/barugon.jpg)
I'm not making this up. This image, while a toy, is pretty much what he does,. HE SHOOTS RAINBOWS OUT OF HIS BACK TO KILL THINGS. And there are times he looks EXACTLY like this toy (Rainbow portrayal aside). While I would say "This is Gamera, its meant for little children!"...this movie seemed to take itself seriously. There were no kids in the movie at all, and it was a typical Kaiju "WE MUST STOP THE MONSTER!", except only 1/3rd as interesting.
In any event, I'm not sure how we're suppose to take something like that seriously. The design is laughable and the concept is stupid.
Oh, Barugon's roar is stupid too. Maybe I'll toss a video of his vs. Anguirus' up, just for a comparison, if I can find them <_<
EDIT: And I did!
Barugon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrmRg7JWQtg)
No, that's not random shit being destroyed, that's his roar.
Anguirus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLVEXyETvGs)
Crap quality...and I'm aware Anguirus isn't one of the best roars, but still!
Yeah, one sounds like a monster, the other sounds like a dentist instrument, if you ask me <_<
So about the fights...
Look at the first shot of Barugon I showed...
I know they look like toys, but I swear, I think this may be an actual scene in the movie. Yes, the fights more or less have this quality. I'm not making this shit up.
(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c241/LotRgamer07/Godzilla.jpg)
I think it speaks highly that this can be considered "higher quality fight scenes." And its just 2 guys in large rubber suits...and the movie this scene was taken from (actually, should be obvious if you're remotely keen) predates Gamera vs. Barugon by at least 5 years, if not more.
One thing i noticed, however, is this:
Why Gamera human plot is so boring. In this movie, a good deal of it had nothing to do with the giant monster; it wasjust leading into the GIANT MONSTER HATCHES< and its boring and shit.
In Toho films, you're introduced to at least something related to the monster early. I haven't seen Godzilla Raids Again much, but I remember Godzilla and Anguirus are introduced within 15 minutes. ANd once they're introduced, the movie pretty much centers on them in some way or another.
That's another thing I don't get. In Godzilla Raids Again, BOTH MONSTERS WERE THE BAD GUYS. The humans were basically going "keep an eye on who wins, cause that's who we're going to have to deal with." The threat worked like this:
They dealt with Godzilla before, so they know what kind of shit he can do. And the problem is, they know they're DEFENSELESS against him.
This new guy Anguirus? They don't know what he can do, but if he can beat Godzilla, then oh shit, you have a monster STRONGER THAN GODZILLA on the loose.
Godzilla wins, so the first scenario is in effect. Once Godzilla wins, its just "how the fuck are we getting out of this alive?" Eventually, they just blast an iceberg on him and go "lets hope he never escapes!"
Gamera vs. Barugon?
Gamera appears early...then disappears for most of the movie. He arbitrarily reappears after Barugon does some shit, and while not blatantly good, its almost like they are portraying him as the lesser of two evils, especially since they're giving off this illusion that while Barugon is t3h evilz, Gamera's more just hungry, and apparently only arrived cause Barugon's RAINBOW!!! has heat.
They try to pretend that Gamera's still a bad guy by, when Gamera reawakens, they go "oh no! We just got Barugon weakened, but now we have to deal with Gamera!?"
...but then Gamera wins, and...everyone cheers. He flies off. Its like "wait, when did the BIG BAD VILLAIN become a hero?"
I know, Godzilla became a hero too...but it took him 5 FUCKING MOVIES to finally be a good guy from the start, and the progression was actually logical, as they introduced a scenario where Godzilla (and Rodan) would actually help, without them randomly being HEROES!!!! for no good reason. Gamera, its more like "Oh hey new monster, LETS MAKE GAMERA A GOOD GUY!"
...basically, Godzilla became heroic SLOWLY. Gamera, its more like "ok, fuck it, THE EVIL GIANT TURTLE IS A GOOD GUY NOW!"
...I'm Kaiju too seriously, I know, but its fun to rant on this stuff, so shut up <_<
-
Saw 2 MORE GAMERA MOVIES! Evidently, I'll have to skip one cause it seems impossible to find barring means that require paying money, and **** the idea of paying money for bad Kaiju movies.
Gamera vs. Gyaos:
Ok, this movie wasn't as bad as I was expecting; no, its not good, but it was at least tolerable, meaning its on the "crap" tier instead of the "unbare-able pile of shit that should never see the light of day" tier. First off, Gyaos has an actually commendable design...at least, one I could see being decent with tweaks to take them out of the "Gamera joke appearance" style into a more "Toho general monster" style. He does, however, still obviously "steal" aspects from Toho Kaiju. Just compare him to Rodan, and you'll see what I mean.
Also, as a monster idea, Gyaos actually was kind of interesting. Vampiric Bird Dinosaur thing. IOWs, eats blood, is nocturnal and weak to sunlight. Also had a REASONABLE weapon; super sonic beams. as in, fires sound that slices things. Yeah, ok, now THAT sounds like something I can take seriously! certainly beats "HEAT RAINBOWS!" or "Shurikens FROM THE FACE" (something I forgot to mention with Guiron <_<) Its like they decided to try and make something cool instead of being just plain unique and silly.
Basically, Gyaos I can take seriously, kind of, just needs a few tweaks. Barugon and Guiron? Not so much!
What hurts this movie is, again, fight sequences. they're still a joke. Toho fights are generally Pro Wrestling fights with monsters...these aer fun on a cheesey level! Gamera Fights are toys fighting still; they're just laughable and not in a good way, more just in a sad way.
In the end, I can see why they chose Gyaos to be Gamera's rival; of all his monsters thus far, he's the only one I can take seriously, at least to some degree...and this is after Gamera started gearnig towards children.
the other movie?
Gamera vs. Viras...or was it Zigra? Bah, the names are all too similar, I just know its not Jiger.
...ok, this movie just sucks. I guess the diea of CONTROLLING GAMERA TO DESTROY works, except 1/4th of the movie is just recapping the earlier movies...like, show fights in entirety with Gyaos and Barugon. I'm not kidding; they seriously did 25 minutes of nothing but flashbacks. They also used BLACK AND WHITE STOCK FOOTAGE in a COLORED MOVIE.
stock footage is bad enough; it always annoyed me when older Godzilla movies did this, cause it stood out as cheap and you could tell they were ripped from another movie. its also only the bad Godzilla movies that used Stock Footage (Godzilla vs. Megalon and Godzilla's Revenge are two such examples. At least Godzilla vs. Gigan reshot the scenes, IIRC, to look very similar from those of Destroy All Monsters) too. But its ESPECIALLY bad when you use STOCK FOOTAGE OF A BLACK AND WHITE MOVIE in a colored film.
The monster in this movie is just a giant Squid; one of the single most unoriginal designs ever. It also spends a good 5 minutes of the aliens fusing into their leader to form this monster...and I don't mean a cool 5 minute transformation sequence ala Power Rangers or Voltron, but its just "guy moves into leader, he grows twice in size!" until he's Gamera's size.
...yeah, this movie sucks, even for Gamera standards. Gamera vs. Guiron did the Flashback thing too, but at least it was only clips from the scenes (such like 30 seconds of Gamera fighting Gyaos, instead of the WHOLE FIGHT); that's acceptible. Cheap way to waste time, sure, but its not blownig 1/3rd of the movie on flashbacks. This movie? Uh, yeah, no.
2 more Showa Gamera films; one of them has MST3k, other I haven't looked into. Then I can get onto the Heisei series, which looks like it might not suck!
-
Gamera vs. Zigra: ...its bad. That is all.
One of the movies I can't see due to basically being impossible to find (Gamera vs. Jiger), and torrents of it being dead. The other one, Gamera SUper Monster, has similar issues, but apparently, is so bad that its 33% stock footage, including reusing entire fight scenes, and the entire plot was summed up in one paragraph on wikipedia, and the only noteworthy thing is "Showa Gamera dies."
...IOWs, I'm basically done with the Showa Gamera movies! BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHH! Now I can start the Heisei series, which apparently is infinitely better, but time will tell.
-
I can't begin to explain how many movies I've watched within my absence of delaying a critical analysis of Faith Ringgold's monograph by the living Art Historian Lisa Farrington who is very quippy in her e-mails.
But.
I have watched ALL OF THE HARRY POTTER MOVIES WITHIN A WEEK. I even caught the dollar theatre one (finally my mom got to see it) of Half Blood Prince. WOOH.
So I'll just put up ratings.
Transformers 2 - 3/5
Role Models - 3/5 though I have an extreme dislike for the black child. Now remembering that the black child existed, 2/5.
Harry Potter Sorcerer's Stone -5/5
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - 3/5
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - 5/5
-- Favorite characters? Clearly Alan Rickman Severus Snape awesomeness. Also an allusion to my academic advisor who has similar patterns of speech, tone and intonation. Next up? FUCKING RON WEASLEY BITCHES.
After wiki'ing some of the plot differences in the books, I actually feel compelled to purchase and read them.
Lady Vengeance 4/5
Natural City (did I mention this earlier?) Looking at my Netflix ratings, it gets a 1/5. I think I mentioned it already.
Slumdog Millionaire - 5/5. Man. Good guy who succeeds is a trope but executed quite masterfully in this movie. PLus it's a love story, so it has aspects of chick flickiness that inherently augment its capabilities as an entertaining film.
-
And JK Rawling claims another helpless victim...
A moment of silence.
-
I did it under the premise that my mom basically made it an obligation that I go with her to see Half Blood Prince because she doesn't spend time with her children locked up in their rooms on their computers. So I refused to watch it without seeing the others. The happy thing about it is that I enjoyed it. Very much so. Yop yop.
-
It's cool. There are worse things to like than Harry Potter.
..just don't start writing fanfiction for it and you'll be fine.
-
You don't begin to -fathom- the extent of Harry Potter fanfic's black hole of madness if you haven't read the one where Hermione gets fucked by Draco in the nose. Literally.
-
Why would we :( Just knowing it exists is enough *runs far far away*
Good I'm not the only person that likes Ron >_>
Also Snape Snape Severus Snape :)
-
Why would we :( Just knowing it exists is enough *runs far far away*
You don't know madness until you experience it. There was also this fanfic with Remus Lupin the Prostitute...
-
You don't begin to -fathom- the extent of Harry Potter fanfic's black hole of madness if you haven't read the one where Hermione gets fucked by Draco in the nose. Literally.
I prefer a less mind-scarring method for giving the recommendation to avoid HP fanfiction...
But now hopefully she won't need to be told again... >.>;;
-
I'll stop at Remus X Snape/Sirius/Harry's dad.
Edit: Not all at once >_>
-
I'm pretty sure there's fic of that orgy with all of them anyway. If she were wise, though, she'd have stopped at the books, Djinn.
-
I was talking about Idun, who I don't think has read the books and only watched the movies to go see the latest one in theatres with her mum?
CT, however... Shame on you for reading HP fanfiction, you'll just encourage them. You don't want them to think they're -people-, do you?
-
But if she doesn't read the HarryxSnape MPreg, how can we ensure she's scarred for life?!
-
Plus, the more insanity we put her through, the more entertaining the innocence facade gets.
-
*My Immortal tumbles by*
-
I don't think I'll be looking up any fan fiction really. Ever. I. Hm. I don't think I've read any fan fiction besides ONE which has deterred me from fan fiction as a medium that allows fans to their physical sexual desires for inanimate things into more intimacy. That said, it was a Fran and Balthier fan fic I went in with no apprehensions about and really had nothing to say but "wow" after.
I did see a lot of satires about Severus Snape's voice, like the Family Guy clip. It's unfortunate, because his voice is fucking awesome.
-
I've only read a couple of HP >_> No Snow/CK horror stories ^_^
Snow ;_;
-
Oh, I've never read much fanfic. Well, discounting professional grade Star Wars fanfic. I've just been told that SnapexHarry MPreg is a relatively common variation.
-
You know... there's a lot of fanfiction out there that ISN'T sex-driven. Occasionally it's even entertaining on some level if you have time to waste. And for RPGs in particular... it's not like someone has to be that skilled of an author to live up to the original's standards...
That said, finding something of even comparable quality is few and far between and I don't recommend it as the search for it can desensitize you down to -my- levels.
I've never actually -read- HP fanfiction, so I can't speak on that particular pit of rabid fangirls, but I imagine it's like taking the anime yaoi fangirl population and multiplying it by millions of readers who've never dealt with any other kind of fanfiction. Second-hand horror stories like Snow's probably aren't even the worst of it.
-
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/My_Immortal (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/My_Immortal)
They need to make a Harry Potter spin-off of this. Best Harry Potter fanfiction evar!
-
Welcome to like last year~
-
I think FFT fanfiction is fine, just don't click anything that sounds bad. Most of the time you can tell in the title/abstract.
-
Welcome to like last year~
I love the fact you're in agreement with me. Goffikness you like yes?
-
Harry Potter Sorcerer's Stone -5/5
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - 3/5
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - 4/5
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - 5/5
Nice, that's pretty much exactly how I would rank them. Well, I might put Azkaban even lower, the book is about a billion times better.
-
And yet it's about the reverse of the order I would choose. Azkaban's easily the best to me and the Chris Columbus movies (first two) are just a mess.
-
Wait, does that mean it's worth me watching the rest of the films? I watched the first two, hated them completely (Hey, did you guys even bother learning to act?) and haven't bothered watching the rest.
Oh, and OK, do you realise that My Immortal has been published now? Clearly, you should go buy as many copies as possible and make it a best-selling book.
-
Azkaban had better acting than the first two, the script was just so cut up to fit in a watchable timespan that it made no damn sense.
-
Azkaban had better acting than the first two, the script was just so cut up to fit in a watchable timespan that it made no damn sense.
I agree, but the script was mostly fine to me. Just the most important scene (Shrieking Shack) was a bit rushed and needed to be a few minutes longer to fully explain everything. Otherwise, the movie was great and easily the best one so far.
EDIT: Although Kenneth Branaugh as Gilderoy Lockehart was the best casting of all of them by far.
-
Wait, does that mean it's worth me watching the rest of the films?
No. Go watch Blood Simple.
-
Gamera: Guardian of the Universe: You know, you'd think I'd stop watching this after 5 movies of absolute trash with one movie of plain vanilla crap...but whatever...I MUST PRESS ON!
This has to be probably the single worst name for a Gamera movie yet. I mean, vs. names are fine, Godzilla does it all the time! This sounds like they're being just plain garnering towards GAMERA IS A SUPER HERO ISN'T HE COOL KIDS!?
...the ironic thing? This movie is actually decent. Its not like the earlier Gamera films at all. This is the first in the 90s series of movies, and well...it shows. Special Effects and such look dated, but at the same time, they're above the level of tolerance, so its all good. It actually is a movie you can kind of take seriously, at least, in the way you take Kaiju movies seriously.
Now, I won't deny that some of the visuals did come off as bad at times. The first shot of Gyaos' face was just awful, and frankly, I feel like they could have made him...oh right, all Gyaos in this movie are female...HER a bit more pleasing to look at. I understand that she's not suppose to look pretty, and look evil, but there's a difference between "ugly" and "dear god what is that thing?" The general style of the monster, mind, didn't look half bad, though; it looked like what you'd expect from someone in a rubber suit. So basically, I'm just saying "they could have fixed the design, but the general portrayal was fine." This is what I was talking about, more or less, when I said Gyaos is someone I can see taking seriously if they just de-Gamerized the design, which this movie more or less did.
Also, there were a few bad shots of Gamera at close up, where it just looked awful. For the most part, Gamera looked fine in this movie, but a few facial profiles just came off bad; Godzilla in the 80/90s had some similar cases, mind. This is probably just the newer technology, animotronics, etc. clashing with the old Kaiju style camera work, would be my guess.
Gamera's roar was kept, but they made it sound less annoying; they added a deeper pitch to it, and made it sound more like a roar (while keeping the style the same) rather than souding merely like an Elephant dying of cancer. Gamera also actually looked a lot better in general; he looked threatening, instead of just "GIANT TURTLE!" which is odd cause this movie he's clearly displayed as good guy from beginning to end, but eh, its an update to his design, and one he desperately needed, and it works really well. You can take Gamera as a serious monster now, instead of just an ugly pile of shit turtle (which was ashame cause conceptually he was always neat, but his movies did him no justice. This movie actually uses that concepts potential some!)
Hell, Gamera even had a bad ass entrance. I mean, we see Gyaos (smaller than usual) doing shit, we're waiting for Gamera to appear...you know he's coming cause of the allusions to him...you see a Helicopter chasing a Gyaos, wondering just when that Helicopter is gonna get blasted...
Suddenly, out of the water, out of nowhere, Gamera appears, bitch slaps the Gyaos away, knocking him into a convenient electrical supplied area, and explosions ensue. In his first 5 seconds, he is being totally awesome. This is the kind of entrance I expect out of Godzilla (he has some really awesome entrances), not Gamera, so Gamera pulling it off was especially unexpected, let alone looking cool despite being such a joke of a Kaiju before hand; really raised his reputation.
His second fight was also nice, even if brief; just fire ball -> splat. I found myself questioning "...is this really a Gamera movie? When did he get actually cool?"
Basically, yes, this movie actually grasps what makes Kaiju fun to watch, you know, just watching Monsters kick the shit out of each other, as opposed to Monsters play-fighting with Fireballs. The fight sequences were reminiscent of Godzilla movies, and had actually flashy special effects (...ok, mostly just explosions.) Gamera's projectile being changed from "Flamethrower" to "Fireball" was a nice touch; it gives off for better visuals, and generally has that more power aspect rather than just sitting there watching him roast something, cause Fireballs = Explosions. Gyaos' beam looked like a cheap light...but honestly, that's still a dramatic improvement over the cheap shit she use to have. The added Sound Waves before she fires was a nice touch too!
Plot...well, reboot to the series, they worked it so Gamera's more interesting. Rather than "Prehistoric turtle that awakens after millions of years!" its "Genetically enhanced super monster of ancient civilization created to project the world from Vampire Death Birds." They get points for attempting originality here, if its still a corny explanation.
...really, I could go on, but the huge upgrade this movie is compared to the first 8 movies in the series (I've only seen 6, but the ones I didn't see sound like either typical Gamera Bullshit *OR* a movie that's half recycled footage) is staggering. It actually makes Gamera look like he deserves some of the hype. They totally changed directions with this movie, going instead of "ITS FOR THE CHILDREN!" to more just general Kaiju lovers. I mean, youngest character in this movie (and the person who links with Gamera no less) is a high school girl. That's...a considerable upgrade from all those Annoying Kids in the previous movies who are just useless besides "We Love Gamera! Gamera loves us!"
So yeah, despite being Gamera, it was actually not a half bad Kaiju. There's room for improvement, and still not quite Godzilla level, but at least its not making itself look bad by just existing. It certainly was a good way to salvage the franchise, that's for sure. If the other 2 movies in the trilogy are about equal to this, then yeah, I'll be forced to take Gamera seriously from now on <_<
-
Well, I was with some friends tonight. We watched The Orphan. Half-drunk. Passed midnight. In the dark.
Hehehehe. Oh god.
It wasn't amazing, but I actually found the twist pretty intriguing. Mind you, alcohol was in my system when I came to that deduction. ;p
-
Is it a good horror film? Blockbuster has a huge Horror Film wall and the covers look so interesting, but I KNOW a lot of Horror films generally suck.
-
The best ones are the ones you can't take seriously in my opinion (i.e they suck so ridiculously hard it's camp) The ones that stick in your mind are well good but really quite disturbing and I wouldn't let my granny watch 'em.
Speaking of which been on a bit of a horror spree myself.
*Last House on the Left (yeah yeah curiousity got the better of me
*Friday the 13th
*Condemned (XBox gaem)
From the local cash converters so I thought I'd made a pretty sweet deal. Until I arrived home and found the DVDs I'd bought were actually Blu Rays -_- I couldn't work out why my DVD wouldn't play 'em at first then I realised what they were.
-
Is it a good horror film? Blockbuster has a huge Horror Film wall and the covers look so interesting, but I KNOW a lot of Horror films generally suck.
It borders more on being a thriller than a horror. Lots of 'trick horror' moments. Although some parts are actually terrifying, towards the end especially. It's a movie that's good at making you hate most of the characters at some point. I suggest you watch it if you wanna know what I mean by that. ;p
EDIT: Also, hehe, nice Horror flick spree, CT. I'd ask how Condemned was, but this is a movie topic. ;p
-
*Last House on the Left (yeah yeah curiousity got the better of me
Which one? The new one or the old one? The old one is a lot more intense.
-
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
I don't understand why anyone would enjoy watching this movie. Or why it lasted about an hour longer than it should have. Admittedly I don't understand drug culture either....
-
The only part I really like in Fear and Loathing is the two or three minutes where he's perfectly lucid and has a monologue about how the earnest intent of the hippies to change the world gave way to drugged-out materialism. I can really do without the rest of it. (I've seen the thing a couple times now because my brother loves it.)
Johnny Depp does do a brilliant job of copying Hunter S. Thompson's mannerisms, though. It'd be mesmerising if the movie itself weren't so fucking depressing (I hate being around druggies in real life; watching them in a movie is no more attractive). Apparently he actually spent some time living with Thompson before the movie, sleeping in the basement. One day, while he was randomly poking through the heaps of random debris that had accumulated in the guy's house, he found a barrel of gunpowder. Just sitting there in the basement, under a pile of rubbish. He brought it to Thompson and asked what the hell it was doing in his basement. Thompson's response: "So that's where that was!" I find this way funnier than anything in the movie.
-
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
I don't understand why anyone would enjoy watching this movie. Or why it lasted about an hour longer than it should have. Admittedly I don't understand drug culture either....
Nah, you're right. It's not a very good movie at all.
-
This is It: Indeed it is.
Barely even qualifies as a documentary - just a bunch of rehearsal footage from his supposed-to-happen series of London concerts. But it's so nice to see Michael again and realize what an outstanding entertainer he truly was. He's a perfectionist, but not an asshole about it. Even when he's upset with his crew, he doesn't degrade them like so many people with his level of power would.
I wouldn't call him healthy - he's skinnier than Jack Skellington, and there are some disturbing bandages on his hands in some scenes. But he was *alive* and prepared to pull off a truly amazing concert. Rest in peace MJ.
Oh and the controversy that Joe Jackson is raising about body doubles being used in the movie is total bullshit. None of his other dancers are even remotely skinny enough to pass for him, and you know Michael Jackson dancing when you see Michael Jackson dancing.
-
Watchmen - 3/5; didn't like the pacing at all really. I suppose that was what I found most unattractive about the movie.
Dance Flick - 2/5. W. T. F.
I finally saw Nightmare Before Christmas fully. I always fell asleep to the musical breaks when I was a child. I've watched the full movie, but in pieces. As a cohesive piece, I'd give it a 5/5. If I remember the fact that I don't like half the lyrics, I'd give it a 4/5.
-
Quarantine was okay, and had some thrilling shots. But way too predictable. Cameraman dying within the last five minutes was too predictable. In regards to suspense in horror films, predictability with okay execution doesn't mix well for extremely frightening scenes. A good example would be the attic scene with the slow panning to the left, executed well but quite predictable. A bad example would be the mother and child scene that was inevitable or the scene with the guy with the broken shin. Executed a bit . . I dunno. Not the correct lighting, angle, music... it was a scary scene but not frightening. 3/5.
-
Gamera 2: Whatever the Fuck the Subtitle Is, it has to do with Giant Firebreathing Turtles.
Its about what I expected. Not as good as the first and feels like clear "fill in a gap" between the first and 3rd movie that many trilogies are like. Still, it was enjoyable enough. Legion was an interestingly designed monster, and the concept was kind of original for Kaiju too. Yeah, not half bad a movie, much like the first.
Also, Gamera has a Deus Ex Machina TURTLE CHEST LASER BEAM OF DEATH! He never uses it again...ever...but hey, I guess they felt they needed to give Gamera SOMETHING to combat Godzilla's Super Red Atomic Breath (Contrast to the usual blue) or something <_<
Gamera 3: Revenge of Iris (HA! I REMEMBERED ITS SUBTITLE!)
Ok, first off, why did Iris have to be a tentacle monster with a fetish for a young girl? GOD DAMN IT JAPAN!
...other than that? Pretty sweet. Involves Gyaos getting fried over and over again, some actual moral bullshit that wasn't too sappy to make the human stuff a bit more interesting than normal, and FALCON TURTLE PUNCH...with nothing more than an ARM STUBBLE.
This movie also made it obvious that Godzilla, Mothra, and King Ghidorah: Giant Monster All Out Attack was made by the same guy. Both movies really loved to focus on the destruction and humans getting hurt element, and many of the visuals were similar. Granted, unlike the Showa era, this isn't necessarily a bad thing cause the visuals actually look good, and they used them in different ways.
So yeah, Gamera 90s Trilogy is actually not bad for Kaiju, contrast to the "OH GOD WHY AM I WATCHING THIS!?" fail of the 60/70s Gamera movies. I struggle to say I enjoyed them as much as the 90s Godzilla films, but probably bias kicking in. These movies do well to salvage Gamera's reputation from being "joke Kaiju" to a genuine worthwhile box-office rival of Godzilla. The fight scenes were typical Kaiju cheese with good special effects, instead of "TOYS!!!", and they made use of Gamera's powers in more creative ways (you'd think spinning into the opponent at full force with rocket propullsion support would be an effective way to hurt something bulky like Iris. Well, so did Gamera evidently!) The movies are somewhat more gruesome than Godzilla films, as they really like to make Gamera bleed...but then again, GMK did similar things, like Godzilla exploding violently into a bloody mess, IIRC, so yeah, more proof it was done by the same guy.
ANYWAY, next on my Kaiju kick is the Rebirth of Mothra Trilogy! So going from Trilogy of Giant FIrebreathing Turtle to Trilogy of Giant Phoenix Psychic Moth Who Is the Reason Butterfree Exists!
Interestingly, it seems the two trilogies were basically made side by side, so I suppose Heisei Gamera's true Box Office Rival is Heisei Mothra, as Godzilla's movies were finished after 1994 until 2000.
-
I just saw "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" for the 1st time and...uh...yeah.
The movie is crazy weird, but I couldn't help to notice how eerily similar this chaarcter is (in the sense of acting methods and mannerisms) to that of Jack Sparrow.
In the end, it was a crazy weird that made the film work.
-
Meeple, I added Godzilla Tokyo S.O.S on my streaming queue. I hope it's good. First.Godzilla.Movie.Evar.
-
Saw Mrs. Vengeance. 3/5. The least favorite in the series. It just kept going on and on like Azumi.
Watched After Sex. 4/5. Cute. 8 different couples and what their conversations are like after sex.
Count of Monte Cristo (2002). Ended happily. How happy. Still a fan of the book, but thought the actor made a great Count. Also. IT HAD HENRY CAVILL. mm.
-
Saw the Muppet Movie in a theater Saturday. It was suitably awesome.
-
Watched the entire Rebirth of Mothra Trilogy!
I can...kind of see what they mean by it was more geared towards younger audiences, but honestly, only the 2nd movie really stood out as being especially childish. The first movie was more like "This is intended for the whole family!" style fun, and the 3rd has some very dark shit in it (the villain actually tries to EAT CHILDREN. Yes, we have a literal baby eating villain here...). It does have children as prominent protagonists, especially the 2nd where the children are the only actual serious human characters, as the two adults are just comical idiots, who are the butt monkey of like every joke. The other movies had serious adult characters, which kind of made them feel more like a general audience flick.
They are a lot more playful, I'll grant, but again, that just feels more like "lets appeal to general audience!" than "lets appeal to children!" By which I mean while Godzilla movies will have some cheap melee action where people are strangling each other (I mean, these scenes aren't enough to be considered actual action scenes, just adults fighting briefly), maybe a few gun shots here and there, the Mothra Trilogy will have cartoon style silly antics like CATAPULTING ROCK!
But anyway, the movies were enjoyable enough though the 2nd one felt a bit boring, cause...yeah, like I said, that one really felt geared towards children. That, and Degarla is far less awesome than Desghidorah and the villain of movie 3.
Though, I was trying to figure just what was really different about the Mothra movies in terms of style, which allowed for such a playful atmosphere, and more focus on Monster vs. Monster rather than Monster vs. Mosnter vs. MILITARY (military always loses...it just does...)...then it hit me! The Mothra Trilogy was an attempt to throw back to the ORIGINAL Mothra movie, in terms of what it was.
See, most Kaiju have a sci-fi element in it. This is obvious in Godzilla movies where there's big particle beam cannons that don't exist in modern times being used in the 70s to futility take down the monster. Not to mention that most monsters are from Space, Radiation, Genetic Engineering or a combination of both.
Mothra? More of a fantasy feel. The monster in question is a legendary guardian monster of sorts; no alien powers, no radiation nonsense, just...mystical. It hit me when I realized most of what is going on is magical, and not sci-fi, and there were no Tanks or anything fighting the Monsters, just Moth vs. Dragons (yeah, all the villains are Dragons, for...some reason. It makes sense in Movie 1 and Movie 3, but seriously, couldn't Degarla be more interesting?) I do have to question why a MOTHRA TRILOGY didn't use Battra, the EVIL Mothra...
...then I saw movie 3's ending, Armored Mothra, and its basically Battra with a paint job. Ok, so they did use Battra's DESIGN <_<
Anyway, movies are fun enough, nice to see Mothra break away from Godzilla and do things on her own, rather than just be a second stringer in a Godzilla movie. They did give her a shit load of new powers though...we're talking about 15 different new kinds of laser beams and lightning wings here, as well as transformations...but they made fight scenes more interesting, so hey! Also, the Fairies being portrayed completely differently than usual was a nice boon; making them actual characters, and able to think separately, rather than always talking together, and basically being uniform beings that exist in two bodies and...ok, its hard to explain but just know that in most movies, the Fairies are pretty much mirrors of one another!
Making an EVIL Fairy who was basically Rita Repulsa (ie a comical villain) didn't hurt either; just added to the playful charm.
Mothra did get its ass kicked repeatedly in the movies, then turns it around and kicks some ass...granted, fight scenes in these movies were a larger focus than Godzilla movies, and took much longer, so that's to be expected. As far as the enemy monsters...
Desghidorah was pretty cool. 3 Headed Dragon that breathes Fire and Red Lightning, sucks up energy...ok, I should note that each Mothra movie clearly has an underlying moral. Moral of the first movie is clearly "SAVE THE RAIN FOREST!" type shenanigans, as it involves the monster sucking life of trees, and mothra saving the day! This movie also had a rather sad moment, odd considering we're looking at clearly fake monsters, between the Mother Mothra and its child as it drowns in the sea. ANYWAY, Desghidorah is pretty cool, though obsolete in Godzilla movies for obvious reasons.
Degarla...WHY WEREN'T YOU BATTRA!? You even resembled him at times! Seriously, you're just a lame sea dragon whose only cool aspect is SHOULDER BOMBS. Honestly subpar for a Toho monster, and considering Desghidorah was a blatant rip off another, that says something. This movie did have some mild redeeming features, that one being ANCIENT AZTEC LASER BEAMS!!! ...in Japan...from a submerged pyramid. I am not making this up.
Friend's response to that statement: Ok, now that's just historically inaccurate. Everyone knows the INCAS had the Laser Beams!
This movie's theme was "Don't pollute the waters. It creates evil Jellystarfish created by a giant monster of death." ...Toho needs to not do Anti-Pollution movies, cause they're clearly not very good at them, for all that this movie is infinitely better than Godzilla vs. the Smog Monster.
3rd Movie...well, Toho knew how to end things:
"So, we need to end Mothra on a high note, so we need a villain who could totally kick ass, and people would cheer for it, but then Mothra would one up it and look even more bad ass as a result?"
"LETS USE GODZILLA!"
"*Smacks* NO! The whole point of this series was to NOT USE GODZILLA DAMN IT!"
"Oh, right...so...uh...how about...King Ghidorah?"
"You mean Godzilla's #1 rival who has never appeared anywhere Godzilla wasn't, and is a Space Monster, thus undermining the fantasy feel with an actual sci-fi creature, but cause he's a dragon he still fits?"
"Yeah, that guy."
"...THAT'S BRILLIANT!"
Yeah, movie 3's villain isn't anyone original, its just King Ghidorah...THIS IS NOT A BAD THING THOUGH; King Ghidorah is generally good at making things better, and he doesn't disappoint. He's as awesome as always here, and yes, they made him a BABY EATING VILLAIN. So many villains only pretend to eat babies, but Ghidorah decides to prove how bad ass he is by actually attempting to eat one! Unfortunately, he gets stopped by a giant moth in the process, but hey, he ALMOST did!
Anyway, for movies that were supposedly "intended more for children", they are so much better than the old Gamera movies its not even funny. for starters, the children aren't as annoying, and they don't seem to be like 10x more intelligent than the adults (outside of the 2nd movie, where it was more played for comedy; Gamera movies would have the kid playfully say something and they'd be like "Wait, that's a great idea to stop the monster!" Thank god the 90s Gamera said "to hell with the kids; the youngest character in this series is 16 years old!"), and the movies have generally pleasing visuals. They're decent enough for what they are, I guess, and pretty much work as a contemporary to the 90s Gamera (they were made more or less along side each other...how fitting that Toho releases its own Guardian Monster movie trilogy alongside Daiei or whatever company makes Gamera...this might be coincidental but I found it amusing that the two are similar, though Gamera's trilogy was clearly a lot more similar to Godzilla in style, which was a GOOD thing in that case. Mothra was more an attempt to try something new for Toho, going back to Mothra's original purpose.)
So uh, yeah, I guess onto the 2 Millenium Mechagodzilla movies! Mostly cause Megaguirus inspires so much apathy; if I want to see Godzilla fight giant bugs, I'll watch one of the movies where he fights Mothra <_<
-
Saw the Muppet Movie in a theater Saturday. It was suitably awesome.
"Tell me when we get to the fork in the road."
-
"Bear left."
"Right, frog!"
-
watched Ninja Scroll again. Not new, but still awesome.
Saints and Soldiers had awesome cinematography, but fell short in every other respect. Just because you're making a movie based off of history doesn't mean it's essentially going to be good and I'm going to be empathetic because it was "real."
Flyboys? Good, though the focus on the main guy to rake in money (That Guy from Tristin and Isolde) really de-powered the focus on a group effort rather than his heroic impetus.
Fight Back to School? Steven Chow at a young age? Good BUT nonsensical. What. Now it's time to watch the Legend of the Shadowless Sword.
-
Don't think I reviewed these two yet, so I'll do it now...if I did...YOU GET TO SIT THROUGH ANOTHER MEEPLE RANT!!!
Godzilla against Mechagodzilla: Decent movie, better than I was expecting. What caught me off guard was that the movie captures the cheese of the older movies (from the 60/70s) while retaining the special effects of the newer ones. This made for some amusing scenes. Also, Kiryu is exactly what I wanted from a Mechagodzilla. The original was neat, but lets face it, he could use an update, and Mechagodzilla 2 was just LASER SPAM!!! and nothing really special (that movie was saved by the existence of Rodan, mind, whose awesome.)
Kiryu actually looks and feels like Godzilla, just made of steel. He fires missiles, has a Laser Breath to compensate for Atomic Breath, and otherwise actually does melee and stuff. This combined with some ridiculous moments...yeah. Movie is slow moving cause of all the technobabble about working on Kiryu, but it was overall not bad.
It also has the whole "Reason for existence!" subplot, which...ties in well to Kiryu given the whole "he's the ressurected remains through technology of the ORIGINAL Godzilla now used as a weapon!" thing with humans, which while its GODZILLA PLOT, anything that makes the Human side of things more interesting is always good. You don't watch a movie for the human plot nonsense, but that doesn't mean that making the human side of things not dreadfully boring can't hurt!
Also...
Godzilla Tokyo SOS: Yeah, Idun, finally saw this, so I can assess it and you can judge how quickly you want to watch it <_<
Anyway, while this movie is a direct sequel of the previous one, it doesn't rely on it TOO much beyond "Kiryu's back!" and knowing Kiryu's origins helps explain the slight moral dilemma. This movie's human plot centers around "Playing God." see, bringing the 1954 Godzilla back to life through technology is in effect playing god, and Mothra, who is a deity like Kaiju, doesn't like this, so she asks politely (through her fairies) to dismantle Kiryu, place the bones back to sea, and if Godzilla attacks, she'll be nice enough to fend him off.
Ultimately, I get the feeling this movie was more a remake of Godzilla vs. Mothra than anything else. However, instead of the Egg nonsense and the dickish Humans, they replace it with a moral dilemma and throw Kiryu (oh, my bad; they forgot he has a name and just called him "Mechagodzilla" the entire movie <_< ) into the mix. Godzilla's fight with Mothra was very reminiscent of the original, just with special effects being better and now there's a city being blown up...oh and its at night too...so it looks a lot cooler, they pull the same stunt with Mothra's offspring and...yeah. However, the added Mechagodzilla factor certainly made things a lot more interesting than just "oh, remake, how nice" (Godzilla vs. Mothra wasn't a bad movie, but a generic remake would be kind of bland, honestly), cause now its atomic Breath, Poison Powders *AND* Machinegun/missiles/lasers being fired all at once.
That, and a team up of Mothra and Mechagodzilla is not something that really clicks as a usual team up. Granted, if Mothra could team up freaking KING GHIDORAH in a movie, let alone King Ghidorah BEING PORTRAYED AS A HEROIC FIGURE, in GMK, I guess Mothra can team up with anything these days...
Really, it was a combination of the 2 extremes of Kaiju. Mechagodzilla is about the epitome of Sci-fi in Kaiju (let alone Kiryu, whose not just a Giant Robot with impossible technology, but he's a BIO-MECHANICAL Robot), where as Mothra's completely lacking in anything sci-fi, being practically pure Fantasy (she's somewhat of a Deity Kaiju, you see, *AND* she has 2 Twin Fairies with magical powers aiding her, that have no explanation other than "they're fairies")...yes, RPGs do this all the time, but its nice to see it applied to Kaiju.
So yeah, Idun, this is a decent one, and if you need me to explain stuff based on Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla, in case things are a bit confusing, I'll do so <_<
So...now all that's left is Godzilla vs. Megaguirus...aka Godzilla fights a huge freaking wasp...
...seriously, I don't know what it is, but I can't get myself excited for this one. It sounds like the worst of the Millenium series, for starters, and "Godzilla vs. Wasp", even if its technically a Godzilla CLONE Wasp, sounds less interesting than "King Ghidorah AS A GOOD GUY!" "the Coolest Mechagodzilla yet!" "Said Mechagodzilla teamed up with Mothra!", and "Godzilla Final Wars, where Godzilla is the most bad ass he's ever been, Gigan returns, and there's HUMANS KICKING ASS FOR ONCE"
-
I just remember one Godzilla in which they revealed that Godzilla has a second brain in his tail and that Rodan is Godzilla's brother.
-
Thankfully IRC saves my chats, Meeple. I'll go ahead and watch S.O.S now. The one I added to my queue with two Godzilla movies only lets you play one T_T
-
I just remember one Godzilla in which they revealed that Godzilla has a second brain in his tail and that Rodan is Godzilla's brother.
Yeah, that's Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II.
<nitpicking>
And it wasn't "Rodan is Godzilla's Brother." It was Rodan is the Step-brother of "Baby" (aka Godzilla Jr.) Not as screwed up as it sounds in the context of the movie, though; "Baby''s Egg was a parasite egg in Rodan's nest, so there is some logic there.
Still weird to call them "brothers" but they didn't try to pretend they were blood relatives at least!
</nitpicking>
-
I watched The Mist recently. Really good movie. One of the better King adaptations. Not surprising, as its by the same guy who did The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption. In some ways its a throwback. Monster designs are rather 80'sish, but I found that charming. It's not really scary, but it's still a hell of a good entry into the horror genre, especially since most other modern horror movies (this was made in '07) are just torture porn. The ending is unexpected and totally rocks.
-
I just remember one Godzilla in which they revealed that Godzilla has a second brain in his tail and that Rodan is Godzilla's brother.
Yeah, that's Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II.
<nitpicking>
And it wasn't "Rodan is Godzilla's Brother." It was Rodan is the Step-brother of "Baby" (aka Godzilla Jr.) Not as screwed up as it sounds in the context of the movie, though; "Baby''s Egg was a parasite egg in Rodan's nest, so there is some logic there.
Still weird to call them "brothers" but they didn't try to pretend they were blood relatives at least!
</nitpicking>
All I know is that the version I watched, Rodan showed up to attack them and they were all like "That makes sense, since Rodan is Godzilla's brother." Totally calm, even though he was breathing radioactive fire at them. And then he like, healed Godzilla's tail brain by spooning him.
I saw less weird things when I confused the "drowsy eye" warning not to mix with alcohol on a bottle of pills with a "winking eye" coyly suggesting that I mix the contents with alcohol.
-
I explained the brother the thing. As for the rest...there's a reason I said "You don't watch Kaiju movies for plot." The reason you watch Kaiju movies is for cheesiness, special effects and/or action sequences between the Monsters and possibly Military (the Military ALWAYS loses, but they can be fun spectacles to watch at least nonetheless, and you can place bets on "How long will they last?" <_<.) Everything else you just sort of turn your brain off, so if Kaiju has shades of an interesting plot in the mix, all the better! But you don't bank on it.
This is why Final Wars is so awesome. Toho basically realized this, and instead of GODZILLA PLOT, we get Matrix, Star Wars and Wu Tang movies in the Human Filler, so really, every you look, things are getting their asses kicked, and we even got an American Commando Wielding a Katana who outbadasses EVERYONE in that movie, monster and human alike, Godzilla excepted.
-
I watched The Mist recently. Really good movie. One of the better King adaptations. Not surprising, as its by the same guy who did The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption. In some ways its a throwback. Monster designs are rather 80'sish, but I found that charming. It's not really scary, but it's still a hell of a good entry into the horror genre, especially since most other modern horror movies (this was made in '07) are just torture porn. The ending is unexpected and totally rocks.
I'll second that. All I saw was the ending where it diverged and it was pretty damn awesome. "Have you ever heard someone screaming their soul out?"
-
I watched The Mist recently. Really good movie. One of the better King adaptations. Not surprising, as its by the same guy who did The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption. In some ways its a throwback. Monster designs are rather 80'sish, but I found that charming. It's not really scary, but it's still a hell of a good entry into the horror genre, especially since most other modern horror movies (this was made in '07) are just torture porn. The ending is unexpected and totally rocks.
I'll second that. All I saw was the ending where it diverged and it was pretty damn awesome. "Have you ever heard someone screaming their soul out?"
Yeah. Thomas Jane rocks.
-
Especially in Homeless Dad. "I just want my kids back."
-
Ha. I popped the ep in and hey, it IS him.
-
I watched The Mist recently. Really good movie. One of the better King adaptations. Not surprising, as its by the same guy who did The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption. In some ways its a throwback. Monster designs are rather 80'sish, but I found that charming. It's not really scary, but it's still a hell of a good entry into the horror genre, especially since most other modern horror movies (this was made in '07) are just torture porn. The ending is unexpected and totally rocks.
I'll second that. All I saw was the ending where it diverged and it was pretty damn awesome. "Have you ever heard someone screaming their soul out?"
I'll third it - when I saw it a few years ago, I said the same thing!
-
Animorphosis - Willem Dafoe in a Seven style movie! Apparently this is not a good movie according to the internets. I don't actually know I quite enjoyed it. It has Willem Dafoe being Willem Dafoe which is to say acting like a motherfucker. Dude is awesome at what he does and what he does is make you his bitch. Just a damned fine actor. Throw in a giant dash of art fag in there and some corpses and it makes me happy. It isn't splatter or gore porn it isn't even remotely scary or thrilling, it is much more an interesting character study piece and that is exactly what the whole movie is about. The themes are not subtle by any means, you get exactly what is on the tin, but who the fuck knows about art fag shit without being told about it anyway? So there you go. There is this movie, it is called Animorphosis, you might get some enjoyment out of it if you enjoy mutilated corpses and middle aged men talking.
-
Demolition man- Is still hilariously over the top and awesome. To quote soppy, I want taco bell after seeing that movie.
-
Demolition man- Is still hilariously over the top and awesome. To quote soppy, I want taco bell after seeing that movie.
Best product placement ever.
-
You don't have the Pizza Hut version?
-
But how do you use the shells?
-
d'ya know, I ran into a link on TV Tropes where Sly actually tackled that question. Lessee if I can't find it...
Heyhey, there it is. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30865
It's kinda squicky, by the way. But then, we all knew it must be.
-
Vertigo - Fuck yes Hitchcock. Good acting, good direction and some fucking amazing shots (The aerial shot of the church just after the climax of the film? Oh my gods that was good). Not shocking if you know me and my seeming obsession with people not the leads, Barbara Bel Geddes gets my nod for favourite in the film. Disgustingly tragic character in far more mundane ways than everyone else in the movie, but part of a shorter character arc than the overarching one of the overall plot and yet to me far more tragic for it, perfectly framed by the overall melodrama of the main plot in all its fantastic absurdity.
I will think about picking up more stuff from her maybe (other than Dallas).
-
Godzilla vs. Megaguirus: The last Godzilla movie I've yet to see and finally saw it! I had an interesting way I wanted to write for it, but meh, too lazy.
Its...a generic movie. Godzilla 2000 mostly existed to show off Godzilla with new special effects, some CG, and an excuse to change his design a little...and then surprised people by even tossing in another monster (Orga) into the mix, so there was even a fight...and the new monster in question was even kind of cool to boot. This movie was just a generic follow up; I appreciate how they brought back insects from Rodan, but meh, whatever. Just a very formula movie, and beyond the Godzilla Body Slam (which...was sort of ruined by how lazy they were with the shot; they seriously just suspended the guy and have the camera zoom up; you can explicitly tell HE'S NOT MOVING, so there's no real illusion. If this was an older movie, I'd let it slide, but for a movie in 2001? There's really no excuse.) As i expected, its clearly the worst of the Millennium series...hell, probably worst of all the movies from Godzilla 1985 and after (if you look at Godzilla movies before and after, you'll notice there's a considerable difference in style, let alone special effects quality.) It doesn't help that Megaguirus is a pretty boring monster.
It mostly stands out cause while the visuals and special effects are by no means bad, just the entire Heisei and Millenium series are generally good movies, but this one felt subpar. Felt like one of the lesser Showa movies with better special effects, and lacking the general cheese factor that makes them amusing. Its not horrible or anything, just...a cheap attempt to work out another Godzilla movie. I can see why they forced the director of the next movie (who happened to be the director of the Heisei Gamera trilogy) to replace Varan and Anguirus with Mothra and King Ghidorah in GMK; they needed to make the movie look more appealing, and up the sales, cause I get the feeling Godzilla vs. Megaguirus wasn't very popular...
(Then again, neither was Godzilla vs. Biollante, and that was actually not a half bad movie, though from what I understand, that was more "less people watched it out of lack of interest", rather than it being outright scorned, since it seems generally positively received among people who DID see it.)
-
I saw Ninja Assassin. 5/5 for entertainment. 10000000000000000000000/1 for Rain's motherfucking stomach and ass hotness and I want to have his fucking CHILDREN GOD GIVE ME THAT ASIAN NOW.
Yes.
-
*shakes fist* >:(
"RAAAAAAAAAIIIIINNNNNN!!!!!!~!" </colbert>
-
Quite right. Anyway, I would say this movie is similar to a common slapstick gore and outrageous action scene Japanese flick, but it really does have some great action scenes. The end resolution with the female character is pretty predictable, but there is badassery that is acceptable. Music could have been better, but whatever.
-
Saw Tokyo S.O.S (Meeple!!!)
First Godzilla movie ever. I didn't feel too much of a disconnect from the story since it was a sequel besides the relationship of the faeries with the uncle. I did not know that Mohtra was literally a moth, but that's because I wasn't thinking properly. A lot of it was slapstick to me, and a lot of it felt like I was watching a live action Gundam movie when it came to the people. I'm not really impressed by Mechangodzilla or Godzilla or Mothra, but Mothra's larvae were pretty cute. I'm kinda upset that Mechangodzilla wasn't even really Godzilla - he was just shaped like Godzilla with Godzilla's bones and shot out extra missiles and was able to take Godzilla's attacks without imploding. The movie was cheesy enough, but adding my own narrative out loud during some of the slower parts of the battles really made my experience genuine. [: I'd give this a 3/5. Definitely more impressive as a whole movie than I thought it would be - had some cute moments, like the quick pan to Godzilla's eyes and then he tail sweeps MechaG. Why does Godzilla always go to Tokyo? Why doesn't Tokyo just.. relocate?
-
the whole Fairies and Uncle thing is apparently a reference to the movie Mothra...I think...even though I saw that movie and don't remember the character in question and...yeah...the important stuff was basically highlighted in the movie proper.
And Kiryu (aka Mechagodzilla in Tokyo SOS) is the closest we get to a genuine Mechagodzilla in that regard; the other two are just giant robot dinosaurs that vaguely resemble Godzilla. Kiryu at least has the Spines and the Bones factor. THe first one, in credit, did initially start with fake skin that makes it look like Godzilla, but once that's blasted off, he whips out the artillery of lasers and missiles (before hand, he has a Fake!Atomic Breath, which is yellow instead of blue); Mechagodzilla II is just a lot of lasers and an electrical wire.
Dunno what you were expecting with a Mechagodzilla...the only thing I could think of "Godzilla but runs off machinery instead of being actually alive", which...closest we get there is the original when he's pretending to be the actual thing. After that, closest we get is Mecha King-Ghidorah whose a genuine cyborg, but he's not Godzilla as you'd expect by his name <_<
(I don't mean that in a snide way, more just curious what you were expecting in Mechagodzilla other than "Giant Robot meant to resemble Godzilla")
-
Vertigo - Fuck yes Hitchcock. Good acting, good direction and some fucking amazing shots (The aerial shot of the church just after the climax of the film? Oh my gods that was good). Not shocking if you know me and my seeming obsession with people not the leads, Barbara Bel Geddes gets my nod for favourite in the film. Disgustingly tragic character in far more mundane ways than everyone else in the movie, but part of a shorter character arc than the overarching one of the overall plot and yet to me far more tragic for it, perfectly framed by the overall melodrama of the main plot in all its fantastic absurdity.
I will think about picking up more stuff from her maybe (other than Dallas).
Hell yes Hitchcock.
...
Rewatched Hunchback of Notre Damme for some reason. I guess after rewatching Mulan and that being really good, I had high expectations. The film had...moments, and on paper I like how it breaks with the Disney mould (main character doesn't get the girl, main character is ugly) but overall it wasn't really moving me.
-
Why doesn't Tokyo just.. relocate?
Tokyo is cursed. If they moved it, disaster would merely pursue it to the new location.
Speaking of Godzilla...the parents own the nineties American version for some reason and they put it on while I was there last week. Had never seen it before because I hate the filmmakers (why haven't Devlin and Emmerich been catapulted into the sun yet?) and had no wish to watch them deface a childhood icon. Movie was precisely as bad as expected. Stop talking like there's actual science going on here, there isn't. We don't need attempts at technobabble; just say "Radiation made Godzilla really big" and then have him knock over buildings. That's the formula, how do you screw it up? And then for the second half of the movie they just go, "Oh hey, did you guys see Jurassic Park? Cool, so did we." Movie was a waste of time and Jean Reno. Also..."Mayor Ebert?" Taking a swipe at critics who don't like your movies, guys? C'mon, that's Shyamalan-level lame.
At least we watched The Natural, too (seen it before, but not for a few years). Only sports movie I can think of that I actually like. Also watched Star Trek...which I had seen in the theater, but I remain baffled by everyone making such a big deal out of it. It's a perfectly average action movie with Star Trek names slapped on it. There's not much of a story and it generally fails to make me care about anyone in it. Overhyped.
-
Speaking of Godzilla...the parents own the nineties American version for some reason and they put it on while I was there last week. Had never seen it before because I hate the filmmakers (why haven't Devlin and Emmerich been catapulted into the sun yet?) and had no wish to watch them deface a childhood icon. Movie was precisely as bad as expected. Stop talking like there's actual science going on here, there isn't. We don't need attempts at technobabble; just say "Radiation made Godzilla really big" and then have him knock over buildings. That's the formula, how do you screw it up? And then for the second half of the movie they just go, "Oh hey, did you guys see Jurassic Park? Cool, so did we." Movie was a waste of time and Jean Reno. Also..."Mayor Ebert?" Taking a swipe at critics who don't like your movies, guys? C'mon, that's Shyamalan-level lame.
As James K. Rolfe (aka the Angry Video Game NErd) said in his Godzillathon:
"Clearly, this movie owes more to Jurassic Park than it does to Godzilla!"
he also made a comment that the Lost World's T-rex Rampage in LA was a more accurate representation of Godzilla style rampage than what the movie "Godzilla" actually had. I'd have to watch Lost World in full one of these days, but it wouldn't shock me (considering IIRC, the monster's rampage in "Godzilla" was very...begnin. Destruction wasn't that big, he had to be PROVOKED into it, and...yeah. Lets ocmpare this to Godzilla whose basically just "Yawn, I'm bored, I think I'll blow up a large Japanese City today, and possibly half the military in the process...maybe I'll be lucky and a giant monster will get in my way to boot!")
Speaking of which, Cid, now would be a good time to see Godzilla: Final Wars, if only to see the Imposter get destroyed in 13 seconds <_<
-
Drag Me to Hell: 0/10 because she kills her cat. Okay, more seriously, Mandatory Twist Ending is why I hate horror movies even when they're done by a competent director (I only bothered to watch this one because of Sam Raimi); it being telegraphed well in advance doesn't help matters.
The fact that they literally shoot that trope with a shotgun is [one of the many reasons] why Army of Darkness is awesome.
-
It wasn't just mechagodzilla, it had godzilla's bones. As I told you that was my biggest issue since Mechangodzilla decided to have a "will" at the end of the movie! Plus he sucked at hand to hand combat which I think Godzilla was pretty snazzy with - what, tail tripping big things and all.
-
Well, they made 2 generic Robotic Godzilla's in the past 2 series, I guess they wanted to make something a bit more original for the 3rd one. I mean, first one was villainous (and partially existed as a throw back to when Godzilla was a villain, not a hero, while keeping him heroic hence the "Fake Skin" thing he had at first; it was basically there for Godzilla vs. Godzilla!), the 2nd one was meant to stop Godzilla after his reboot into villain stage that Heisei did, both were just giant robots. I guess they felt making the 3rd one more of a cyborg lent itself to be a little more interesting, or at least, added a new spin on a character like that.
You don't have to like it, just putting things into perspective here; this is the 3rd "Mechagodzilla" character, so just going "Hey, another Mechagodzilla, with a 3rd design!" probably was just going to be "bah, boring." At least this way, they could add moral bullshit in a (sad) attempt to make the human side interesting!
Anyway, that out of the way...
Gamera the Brave: Having finished Godzilla series recently (with the worst of the Millenium series), I went on to watch the only Millenium Gamera movie, and finish off that series (Ok, so I never saw Gamera vs. Jiger and Gamera Super Monster, but the former is Showa Gamera and the latter is apparently the WORST GAMERA MOVIE EVER, so I doubt I'm missing much). Considering the 90s Gamera was actually pretty good, and did well to salvage Gamera, I had at least moderate hopes for this movie.
Unfortunately, it was overall disappointing. I will state that its merely "disappointing", as opposed to "nearly unwatchably bad" like most of the older films.
Now when I read a quick preview, I learned that this movie is actually a sequel to the original 8 Gamera Movies of the 60/70s. As in...the bad movies. My general thoughts?
"Oh, so its related plot wise, but it should be on par with the 90s movies, at least, for special effects!"
I had forgotten what "Related to Showa Gamera" actually meant though for his character. A quick recap!
Showa Gamera: He's the friend to ALL CHILDREN!!!! This includes having a vocal theme song sung by 1st graders.
Heisei Gamera: GUARDIAN OF THE UNIVERSE!!! He can also Falcon Punch with his AMPUTATED RIGHT ARM.
I really don't have to say much more; the 90s Gamera (aka Heisei) is a bad ass, the Showa is a joke. This is contrast to Godzilla where Showa was more "Cheesey Pro Wrestler" thus fun it that guilty pleasure sort of way, while Heisei Godzilla just bleeds awesome...and even Showa Godzilla has his bad ass moments (His Terror of Mechagodzilla entrance (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHF8F140efI&feature=related) comes to mind) despite all the cheese. Showa Gamera is just pathetic, its a shock he was actually pretty cool in Heisei!
Anyway...basically, I had forgotten that and yeah...so the movie starts off actually like the Heisei, just back in the 70s, set around the time after the last Showa movie ended (...from what I can tell, Gamera Super Monster isn't canon cause its just a lot of stock footage of monsters + new stupid footage of humans.) It starts off with Gamera fighting...3 Heisei Gyaos...
I am saying to myself "Wait, why not just base it off the Heisei then? Gamera 3 ended with him fighting a swarm of Gyaos, why not just extend from there?" BUt lets not get into that...what's weird is the Gyaos are clearly smaller than the one in Showa, so you'd think and...wait, Gamera plot analysis, LETS MOVE ON!
its actually a pretty cool spectacle, watching him nuke one Gyaos, then the others attack, and he self destructs and...yeah, it was actually a pretty neat opening. But wait, Gamera is dead...this of course means we won't see Gamera for a while.
The movie is basically about some kid finding an Egg at some weird glowing rock, it hatches and becomes a turtle! He takes it home as a pet, and names it "Toto" cause that was the nickname is deceased mother gave it...turns out this turtle has SUPER POWARS!!! and can fly. For the next 40 minutes of the movie, its about the kid and his turtle, and how its growing up astronomically fast, such that in like 5 days, its as big as those Tortoises that live 150 years already...naturally, he has to get rid of it since he can't keep it a secret.
It was at this point what i realize I got myself into; this is a children's Kaiju movie, not a General Audience one :(
Anyway, as you'd expect, Turtle comes back, now much bigger, after the NEW Giant Mosnter appears, they fight, turtle evolves and such, eventually wins, the kids help out. They really wanted to remind us that Gamera was "FRIEND TO ALL CHILDREN!" back then, and not "GUARDIAN OF THE UNIVERSE!" Corny as the latter title is, at least THAT Gamera displayed levels of bad assery you'd expect from a popular Kaiju.
The special effects were good at least, and Gamera himself looked passable enough, though they displayed him more as "Cute" rather than "Monstrous"
...wait, I take that back; TOTO looked Cute but I guess the logic is "he's not a full adult, even when he's big." The actual Gamera in the beginning of the movie looked about the same he did in the 90s movies (probably the same outfit just refurbished), which was decent enough!
Then we have Zedus, the new guy. Ok, you know Jurassic Park? You know that spitting monster? Imagine a super enlarged version of him, but purple. That's this guy. He's the single most bland generic boring monster design yet. I was sad cause the the 90s Gamera? It started off with Gyaos, the only Gamera monster who was original and can be taken seriously to some degree, followed up with Legion who was pretty neat looking, and then Iris whose flashy as hell. So Zedas being bland and stupid...yeah, disappointing. The fight sequence wasn't bad at least; it did have the cheese factor!
So...yeah, while not unwatchable bad, it was still disappointing to see the movie go back to the "THIS IS FOR KIDS!" roots instead of the "everyone can have fun watching this!", especially since the 90s movies were actually good. Whatever, maybe I'll MST3k the older movies now or something if I hate myself <_<
If you're still reading this rant...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
-
If you're still reading this rant...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
Can't... look... away... from... HypnoMeeple...
-
ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOMEEPLE!
-
Ninja Assassin: Basically everything you want from an action movie. Massive violence, nage-gamas, and Ugly Old Men that kick ass.
New Moon: My family isn't gay for Twilight like I am, so I ended up being 36-year-old male sitting in theater by myself. Good adaptation of the book. Actually, better than the book because they drastically shortened the emo. Fight scenes were brief but very well done.
-
Ugly Old Men that kick ass.
Hm. I was gonna pass on that, but you have said the magic words, my friend.
-
Brazil - what 1984 couldn't achieve as a movie. 5/5.
-
Pan's Labyrinth. Really dark stuff; I had some issues with some scenes where I felt there should be a sense of more immediacy, but 4/5.
-
London Voodoo - Cheap movie I picked up. It has a positive view on Voodoo, but you still watch and the way they go about doing stuff still makes you go what the fuck (Check ths shit out, I am going to cover this scrap from tins in honey). It isn't horrible, but it isn't good and completely fails to be compelling. It is a standard 90 minute fair and by the end I was just bored and wanted it to end sooner. The characters are just to normal but not flawed enough to be believable or comforting. Just dull and it has been so long since I have watched an honestly dull movie that I forgot what it was like. Probably slightly not as bad as I feel like it is, but it still isn't good either.
I don't even know what to take from this. I should watch more generic movies so I remember what they are like instead of just watching shit movies or awesome movies? Meh at $7 I don't feel ripped off, it is the 90 minutes that I feel bad about.
-
Just saw "Gojira". No, I don't mean "Godzilla: king of the monsters", I mean "Gojira."
Yes, there's a difference, and I'll explain why, but first off, let me put things into perspective:
I hate people who whine about changes between Japanese -> English based on localization. Oh no, they changed some dialog! They removed a minor scene! They censored this! Boo fucking hoo, if the general content is there, its fine. Its understandable in the case of Persona 1 (for all that the game is shit) in how they basically removed an entire alternate story-line mode, which yes, that merits complaints. Its understandable if there's a gameplay change that makes things harder for no good reason making the game much harder than it was intended. But when its the usual "wah, they spelled the name differently!" whiners, I just get angry.
This even extends tot hings like FF2us vs. FF4. Yes, FF2us is a butchered version of FF4, but you know, its still the same general game, just easier. The only time it matters is for gameplay discussions about difficulty and what not...well, and translation but hush.
So why did I specify Gojira here vs. Godzilla: King of the Monsters?
Well, frankly, the two are practically totally different movies. Half of the movie "Gojira" was cut out for the sake of the extra Raymond Burr scenes, and the general flow of the original was so much smoother than the American counterpart. They really are two different movies, despite the same plot, and sharing a lot the same scenes.
For example, the character Dr. Serizawa. In the American, he's just some guy who HAPPENS to be Steve Martin (aka Raymond Burr's character) friend, who HAPPENS to discover the way to kill Godzilla, and there really isn't much more than that.
In the japanese version? Its handled much differently. They go into detail about the moral dilemma he has of using the thing, the extra scene where he burns his notes is powerful after he had a whole scene where he talked about this being his life work, and he even says "Even if I burn my notes, I still have the knowledge in my head, what's to stop politicians from interrogating me til I give them what they want?" To add to this, for the first good chunk of the movie, Dr. Serizawa is portrayed sort of as a Mad Scientist and looks like he'd be a bit of a human villain, especially considering his shady profession and role in the plot...but by the end, he's clearly the most honorable guy, and you feel sorry for him, a genuine tragic hero.
What makes the difference is that we actually learn stuff about Serizawa rather than the very basics.
There's also visuals that were completely cut out that just add to the general power the movie has. One such scene is when Godzilla is rampaging, we see a mother, cornered against a building, holding her young children, crying in fear about how they will "be with their father soon" as she can do nothing but watch helplessly as the monster slowly comes closer to their inevitable death. The following scene where we see all the people injured, the japanese choir girls singing, the images of the city being destroyed...there's a lot of stuff the American version dumbed down cause of the whole Xenophobic tendencies American Audiences had back then.
It really is a much different experience. The end of the movie is somewhat tragic; yeah, the monster is destroyed...but at what cost, and whose to say ANOTHER won't pop up and if they do, what the fuck are they doing to do? (and thus, the movie "Godzilla Raids Again!" is born...but that movie is a cheap sequel, for all that it did introduce Anguirus) The American was just "the monster is destroyed...and Dr. Serizawa with it..." and that's it. IIRC, the American version played the same music that played when the Monster was rampaging (The slow piece anyway), so its more a "OMG HORROR SCENE!" Japanese version, they played the music that played during the scene where we see all the injured victims, giving a far more tragic tone (for Dr. Serizawa, naturally, NOT the Monster; Godzilla is portrayed as nothing less than a bad guy in this, a monster who exists just to destroy shit.)
So yeah, for all that American movie wasn't bad (For its time), the Japanese version is clearly superior and comes off as a much different experience.
Branching from that...
Watching the movie now, after seeing the others...its really quite amazing how they evolved from this big tragic horror movie with some of the most disturbing and powerful images for a Black and White Film (at least that I've seen) to...well...Godzilla: Final Wars, where its basically just "Awesome Action Movie with giant monsters kicking the shit out of each other." Then again, Godzilla: Final Wars has a perfect opening showing the evolution of the movies through the 50 years to that point.
-
So this is where we tell Meeple to watch Negadon right?
Edit - Not to say it is better, it is just really good homage to it.
-
I suppose, Gref.
Just saw Avatar. Good movie, but not great. Tried to make the 3D IMAX show, but it was sold out, so we saw it in regular ol' 2D. Spoilers ahoy!
First the good. The movie is gorgeous. Not just good looking scenery, but the Na'vi people themselves are fucking amazing. They look completely real and it's never jarring having both them and humans in the same scene. George Lucas wishes in his wildest dreams his people could've done this. It helps the movie in such a positive way and I AM convinced that the effects developed for this movie will only benefit filmmaking. The world really breathes with a complete ecosystem and it's just so interesting to see. One of the interesting things I noticed is that initially the Avatars look fine, but as you watch the movie and get to really know the Na'vi more the Avatars really stick out like sore thumbs and you begin to see something wrong with them, so tip of the hat in the movie's favor as far as that goes. The story is nothing you haven't seen before, but it works.
The bad... yeah, I get people saying that since it's a movie you can't develop characters that much, but there's a difference between attempting it and a bunch of cardboard cutouts interacting. The Na'vi culture is just carbon-copied from african tribal life so badly that it's... painfully generic. The villains are alright... always love Giovanni Ribisi but he was underutilized. The General was a stock cutout but worked. They DO have a terrible problem of being terrible capitalists. Scientist informs you of basically a global biological network that could have applications for anything from data processing, medicine and biotechnology, which is billions upon billions of profit potential, but nope! We gotta mine that ore which never really gets explained WHY it's so valuable except that it's LOTS OF MONEY! Plus... Unobtainium? You're fucking joking. Granted, the scientific community is not known for their creativity so I can honestly see it happening. The biggest problem is the ending, which is just kinda... what? No problems with the big victory ending, but they just kick the humans off the planet. Uhh... whats gonna stop them from just coming back and nuking the shit out of you? Nothing. It's not resolution, it's just a cheap tree-hugging copout.
The love scene is also incredibly awkward and laughable, for all the reasons you'd expect. Oh well.
Despite that... it'd be worth seeing again in IMAX 3D... might have to get to that honestly.
-
Gran Turino: Gook gook asian zipperhead wetback slant eyes MY CAAAAAAAAAAR.
Thaaaaaaaaaat about sums up the movie.
-
Zombieland- Surprisingly not a lot of zombies. It was still highly entertaining, if only for the movie randomly stopping working during the dancing scene with Crista and Columbus.
-
I suppose, Gref.
Just saw Avatar. Good movie, but not great. Tried to make the 3D IMAX show, but it was sold out, so we saw it in regular ol' 2D. Spoilers ahoy!
First the good. The movie is gorgeous. Not just good looking scenery, but the Na'vi people themselves are fucking amazing. They look completely real and it's never jarring having both them and humans in the same scene. George Lucas wishes in his wildest dreams his people could've done this. It helps the movie in such a positive way and I AM convinced that the effects developed for this movie will only benefit filmmaking. The world really breathes with a complete ecosystem and it's just so interesting to see. One of the interesting things I noticed is that initially the Avatars look fine, but as you watch the movie and get to really know the Na'vi more the Avatars really stick out like sore thumbs and you begin to see something wrong with them, so tip of the hat in the movie's favor as far as that goes. The story is nothing you haven't seen before, but it works.
The bad... yeah, I get people saying that since it's a movie you can't develop characters that much, but there's a difference between attempting it and a bunch of cardboard cutouts interacting. The Na'vi culture is just carbon-copied from african tribal life so badly that it's... painfully generic. The villains are alright... always love Giovanni Ribisi but he was underutilized. The General was a stock cutout but worked. They DO have a terrible problem of being terrible capitalists. Scientist informs you of basically a global biological network that could have applications for anything from data processing, medicine and biotechnology, which is billions upon billions of profit potential, but nope! We gotta mine that ore which never really gets explained WHY it's so valuable except that it's LOTS OF MONEY! Plus... Unobtainium? You're fucking joking. Granted, the scientific community is not known for their creativity so I can honestly see it happening. The biggest problem is the ending, which is just kinda... what? No problems with the big victory ending, but they just kick the humans off the planet. Uhh... whats gonna stop them from just coming back and nuking the shit out of you? Nothing. It's not resolution, it's just a cheap tree-hugging copout.
The love scene is also incredibly awkward and laughable, for all the reasons you'd expect. Oh well.
Despite that... it'd be worth seeing again in IMAX 3D... might have to get to that honestly.
I agree. Dances with Wolves IN SPACE!!! Also a few world-building holes (SPOILERS why the hell were the mountains floating? why, on a world where everything is six-legged and four-eyed, are the Na'vi bipedal and binocular? why does every living creature have a USB cord? why is there a predator-prey relationship between animals that can neurally connect to one another? END SPOILERS).
The only major flaw I saw is that it is said to be a James Cameron original. Though he does say he credits every SF/F book he read growing up as a child, his "tribute" to these things is about as heavy handed as Paolini's Eragon series. You go ahead and ask Alan Dean Foster what he thinks of Avatar.
In summary? It was a shameless pastiche, holes plugged in with cliche. It was still a moderately successful story and the several characters they developed were able to carry it. And it was really, really goddamned pretty.
-
I agree. Dances with Wolves IN SPACE!!! Also a few world-building holes (SPOILERS why the hell were the mountains floating? why, on a world where everything is six-legged and four-eyed, are the Na'vi bipedal and binocular? why does every living creature have a USB cord? why is there a predator-prey relationship between animals that can neurally connect to one another? END SPOILERS).
The only major flaw I saw is that it is said to be a James Cameron original. Though he does say he credits every SF/F book he read growing up as a child, his "tribute" to these things is about as heavy handed as Paolini's Eragon series. You go ahead and ask Alan Dean Foster what he thinks of Avatar.
In summary? It was a shameless pastiche, holes plugged in with cliche. It was still a moderately successful story and the several characters they developed were able to carry it. And it was really, really goddamned pretty.
The mountains were floating most likely due to some kind of ridiculous electromagnetics. Hinted at by the radar and instrumentation not working up there. The planet is a giant hard-drive/computer, I'm surprised there's ANYWHERE radar/electronics work at all. It seemed only the "horses" were six-legged. The predators were all 4 legged, as were the hammerhead rhino looking dudes. Guessing th Na'vi evolved from one of said four legged predators. Agreed on the four eyed thing though, but I can't recall if the predators had them or not... It seems that the predator/prey relationship exists because they're pretty much wild animals until they've connected for the first time, at which time they're "tamed". As for why the Na'vi don't just go around taming everything in sight? Well, obviously because they're more in-tune with nature and they're just not that kinda species and they'll totally call you in the morning, baby, they promise.
Would like an explanation on how that USB cable came about though. Still can't figure it out.
There are key differences that set it apart from Dances with Wolves, but it is still in essence the same movie, or at least the same type of movie.
-
The mountains were floating most likely due to some kind of ridiculous electromagnetics. Hinted at by the radar and instrumentation not working up there. The planet is a giant hard-drive/computer, I'm surprised there's ANYWHERE radar/electronics work at all. It seemed only the "horses" were six-legged. The predators were all 4 legged, as were the hammerhead rhino looking dudes. Guessing th Na'vi evolved from one of said four legged predators. Agreed on the four eyed thing though, but I can't recall if the predators had them or not... It seems that the predator/prey relationship exists because they're pretty much wild animals until they've connected for the first time, at which time they're "tamed". As for why the Na'vi don't just go around taming everything in sight? Well, obviously because they're more in-tune with nature and they're just not that kinda species and they'll totally call you in the morning, baby, they promise.
Would like an explanation on how that USB cable came about though. Still can't figure it out.
There are key differences that set it apart from Dances with Wolves, but it is still in essence the same movie, or at least the same type of movie.
Yeah. It's funny how the extremely sensitive and complicated neural interfacing doesn't have any glitches whatsoever in this electromagnetically charged no-man's land. Or that the mechs had no trouble. Or the ships, other than the nav. So was it just interfering with specific, random wavelengths or what?
I do wonder why it is only the Na'vi who have learned to interface with the world and other creatures. I mean, you kind of figure it would happen on /accident/, and you got to admit that a parasitic co-dependence could develop from that. Why not? That's biologically advantageous. Plenty of potential for symbiosis or even just plain exploitation.
Alas. The "native peoples" cliche held strong. It was The People and people, and why can't we just get along?
Don't get me wrong, though, I really did enjoy the movie.
-
Possibly can handwave it to say that it only affected metals native to the planet, as well as the species there evolved with it so they're used to it. Which would also be a ridiculous physics breakthrough as some sort of Theory of Native Magnetics or something. I wonder if a human's nervous system could even function in such conditions.
As for the Na'vi interfacing... probably just a product of their sentinence mixed with mutation that allowed it to happen. Give them a few thousand years and they'll surely keep going. Of course, when the humans get back with nukes it won't matter much. Cause diplomacy is a dirty fucking human art, let's keep Pandora pure for Pandorans. Honestly. I think the ending wouldn't even have been that bad if they didn't go for the ridiculously over-the-top dialogue "Send them back to their dying world" bullshit.
Speaking of... otherwise, dialogue was a mixed bag. Some good, some bad, but it had EXCELLENT moments of puncuating a scene. Weaver's "Oh shit..." was awesome.
And yeah, I did enjoy the movie too. You can't really talk about a movie this much or in-depth if you didn't enjoy it.
-
Saw Sherlock Holmes with the family. Fun stuff. Think House, but they beat people up instead of the medical stuff. I know House is supposed to be Holmesesque, but it's also accurate to say that this version of Holmes is Houseesque: cantankerous, uncouth, wily Holmes and long-suffering Watson.
Anyway, good piece of fluff. Character chemistry is just great, Robert Downey Jr. is great, and the rest of the cast ain't too shabby either.
-
Saw Avatar on Christmas cause I wanted to be a stereotype damn it!
Anyway, I went in the movie with 0 expectations. By which I mean I knew absolutely NOTHING about the movie other than "it has blue people in it." Saw it mostly cause my sister said its something to see while I was driving her to the airport.
I came out...uh...I'm not sure what i think of it. I guess it was entertaining, but I'm not sure if I can say if I genuinely LIKED it. I dunno, I guess it was worth the money I paid for it.
Yes, that's right, Meeple watching something Non-Kaiju for once, act shocked.
-
Saw Sherlock Holmes with the family. Fun stuff. Think House, but they beat people up instead of the medical stuff. I know House is supposed to be Holmesesque, but it's also accurate to say that this version of Holmes is Houseesque: cantankerous, uncouth, wily Holmes and long-suffering Watson.
Anyway, good piece of fluff. Character chemistry is just great, Robert Downey Jr. is great, and the rest of the cast ain't too shabby either.
This alone makes me want to see it. <_<
-
(http://excellentdevice.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/robert-downey-jr-photos-004.jpg)
This alone makes me want to see it. <_<
-
Robert Downey Jr.? Fucking in.
-
He is Sherlock fucking Holmes himself. This, like Iron Man, is the perfect role for him.
-
No, there was only one perfect role for Robert Downey Jr. The rest were merely damned good.
-
Shattered Glass: Well, first, the fact that this actually happened is simultaneously terrifying (Jesus Christ, they just let a guy get away with making shit up like that?) and hilarious (because it happened to The New Republic). It's a very good movie, though. The only quibble I've got is how Christiansen played Glass as slime from the first minute, which makes you wonder how it took everybody so long to realize they couldn't trust the guy very far. (The answer being, of course, that they didn't; in real life, by the time the Hack Heaven scandal broke, many of his co-workers already thought he was a fraud.)
It's also funny that, given his writing style and his remarkable ability to make up stories, Glass could have just written novels and made good money that way, instead of becoming a professional douchebag.
-
Sherlock Holmes: Good fun. The actors all do a very good job, and the script manages to make the inevitable anti-hero, House-ish Holmes stay reasonably true to the stories. If they make a sequel, I'll see it.
-
Okay, I've seen a lot of movies over winter break (my sister is 7 months pregnant, and worried that this is her last chance to see movies ever. Also, airplane movies).
In chronological order of when I saw them...District 9, G-Force (didn't see end), Invictus, 10 things I hate about You, Brothers Grimm, Avatar, The Fantastic Mr Fox, Brothers (didn't see start), Sherlock Holmes, Up in the Air, Memento, Napoleon Dynamite, Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs
I am now going to attempt to rank them by how much I liked them (which is really hard, because most of them are very good for completely different reasons).
#13: G-Force:
I heard it was bad, but it was the end of a really long day of flying, and I was in the mood for a turn-your-brain-off movie. It was so much worse than I had even imagined. Nothing but action scenes of hamsters using bazookas would have been much, much better than this movie.
#12: Napoleon Dynamite:
I think I laughed once. You know, I suspect this might appeal to the kind of people who enjoy The Office. Which is to say not me. It's also likely that the humor was rather male, which did not resonate with me.
#11: Brothers:
I didn't see the start of this, so perhaps I was missing context. Buuuut...cinematography and directing was weak. Before modern cinematorgraphy and it's camera cuts, really ancient movies used to try to be just like observing a play, so they put the camera in the "best seat in the house" (middle front of the theatre). That's what this movie felt like...especially when they were actually performing the play of Julius Caesar (about 20 minutes worth of just filming the stage from an audience location). Don't get me wrong, strong acting, but there were a lot of scenes that should have been made shorter, and frankly weak director choices in camera.
#10: Brothers Grimm:
It's a film with HEATH LEDGER and MATT DAEMON under the directorship of TERRY GILLAM (guy who directed Monty Python and the Holy Grail). How could it possibly go wrong? Short answer: it doesn't. It's just weird (and not in a comedic way like you might expect from a Monty Python type). Well...and it feels slow in places.
#9: District 9:
Don't have a whole lot to say about this film; it does what it does, and it does it reasonably well.
#8: Sherlock Holmes:
I'm incredibly impressed with how close to the original writing this is (well, except with more explosions and fighting). I mean, it recognizes that Dr. Watson is a freaking doctor, and smart with plenty of deductive reasoning, and a ridiculous risk-taker. It then correctly portrays Sherlock as this out-of-control whackjob where "dangerous" "unreasonable" and "unhealthy" don't even begin to describe him, yet he's so observant he gets kept around. Certainly the best Sherlock Holmes rendition I've seen.
#7: The Fantastic Mr Fox:
It's a Roald Dahl story, so it's weird and bloody, and kinda awesome. Done in a claymation way, and a lot of very smart cinematographic choices. It also uses clever visuals (switching from claymation to any of a variety of statues for interesting and awesome visual depictions).
#6: Memento:
You know, for most of this movie I was sort of like "yeah, whatever, this is a cool idea but not actually that fun to watch this way", but the end of the movie, my god. I won't be forgetting this movie any time soon.
#5: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs:
You know, working around animators and learning bits and pieces of what they do has made me into a bit of an animation nerd. It's to the point that I seriously respect the Ice Age movies when most people on the internet are like "WTF, who even likes Ice Age?" I wasn't even planning to watch this, but I saw a bit on someone else's screen, and just thought "damn, the way they're moving is really eye-catching." It also helps that it's about both food and mad science (two of my favourite things).
#4: Invictus:
Morgan Freeman plays Nelson Mandela. He's just taken the presidency, and decided that the best way to achieve racial unity is to have the South Africa rugby team win the world cup. Yes, really. It's definitely worth watching. I wouldn't be surprised if it won the Oscar for "best film". So you might ask, "why is it only #4, then?" While I totally enjoyed watching it, and thought it was an excellent movie, I'm just never going to personally care that deeply about a sports film. (Well...maybe I would if the sport was Starcraft or Ringette, but those movies have not been made).
#3: Avatar:
Side note: saw this in 3D; dunno if that would colour my judgment (or even which way--I think I might have preferred it in 2D, honestly).
Anyhow, on the one hand, I'm kinda embarrassed to have this so high; the plot is pretty formulaic (seen it in romantic comedies, except Avatar has worse acting than romantic comedies). The fantasy is a combination of a lot of things I've seen before. And yet it was just really emotionally powerful. To some degree the really clichee movie plots exist because they work on human emotions, and this movie just clicked on that level, at least for me.
#2: Up in the Air:
George Clooney plays a guy who goes around firing people for a living. Completely breaks with normal movie plot in dozens and dozens of ways, but that's not what gets it so high (Invictus also does that, but is much more seamless about it--you don't even really notice it when you're watching Invictus. Up in the Air easily could be more clicheed, and it's sometimes jarring when it's not what I expected). It's interesting, they say if people don't enjoy the last 10 minutes of a movie, they won't enjoy the movie--and I didn't enjoy the last 10 minutes of the movie, and walked out thinking I guess I didn't like it that much after all.
So...what got this movie to #2? Some of the conversations in this movie are just plain brilliant. Brilliant discussion topics. Brilliant writing. Brilliant acting. It really made me think about a lot of things I take for granted.
#1: 10 things I hate about You:
I consider the vast majority of the romantic comedies I've seen to be good but not great. Generally above average, and always entertaining. It's very, very rare that I consider a romantic comedy to stand out as much better than others. In fact it's happened twice. The last time, was Wedding Crashers. This time it's 10 things I hate about you. When it comes down to it, my ordering for #8 through #2 was fairly arbitrary; I could probably scramble them and still be reasonably happy with the order. My #1 just stood out, though.
Now I want to be clear here: 10 Things I Hate About You is a romantic comedy. It doesn't even stray that far from the romantic comedy mold. It just does it really well. Featuring Heath Ledger and Julia Styles before they became big. Brilliant and funny writing. Excellent acting. Never had me thinking "I wonder when this movie will end" or "wow, you did something different just to be different, how 'artistic'." (To be fair, I would also say these two things about Sherlock Homes, Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, and Invictus). Bottom line is that (for me) 10 things I Hate About You hit all the right chords and none of the wrong chords.
-
Napoleon Dynamite is a bit more a masculine thing than an Office thing, because fuck the Office.
10 Things is indeed great. It was one of the ones that made me really sit up and pay attention to Ledger. It gets bonus points for having a Spiderbait track as the main song to it rounding out a good movie with a pretty solid soundtrack to boot. Double plus good Australian representation in the movie.
-
10 Things is also an adaptation of Taming of the Shrew, one of my favorite Shakespeare works (though I much prefer Much Ado). But they do it in a way where they don't hit you over the head with it, which was nice.
Anyway, I rented Terminator: Salvation, among other things, a few days ago. And you know what? You can tell where this could have been a pretty good movie before Christian Bale decided he wanted to play John Connor and that John Connor needed to be in the movie a LOT MORE!!! The kid who played Kyle did a pretty convincing job of pulling off that sort of wired crazy that Biehn gave him in the first one, which was fitting since you'd be oscillating between cornered animal and paranoid lunatic growing up in that environment. Also enjoyed the continuity nod with the shotgun (that's how Kyle secures his sawed-off in the first movie).
And hell, the whole sequence where they fire up a jeep and flee the city, find a bombed-out 7-11, and have to run from giant robots and flying HKs was really cool. But shortly after that point you can see where it starts going to shit, because the rewrites to make Christian Bale more important start showing up. There were two revisions of the script and either one would have been preferable.
First, he wasn't going to be in the movie at all; just a voice on the radio that Reese (and other survivors, presumably) would listen to, and he'd give out robot-fighting tips and tell people where to stay away from. That made sense to me, surely the leader guy wouldn't be running around fighting shit personally, right? Well, then Christian Bale comes in and now he does. And then Christian Bale decides he doesn't fight enough shit so he spends the third act fighting all kinds of shit.
So next revision, he dies saving his father from the T-800 prototype, but they surgically graft his face on to Marcus so that people don't find out that he's dead, because he's important. Which would also explain why John supposedly could fight terminators by himself and win, and all that other shit he could supposedly do. Of course, that doesn't work either, so they rewrite it again. And now Marcus decides he wants to be euthanized so that they can transplant his heart and replace John's with it.
Nobody really seems to care that much that it will kill him. Also, even though it's noted earlier in the movie that simple antibiotics are hard to come by, let alone anything more advanced, they manage to do a full heart transplant on a table in the desert under some camo tarp. Yep. So Marcus, who was decently sympathetic, has to die so that John, who spent most of the movie being a raging douchebag, gets to live. Yay.
-
So, on during the 50-some hours I spent going to and from Florida, I watched the following movies;
Coraline
Pulp Fiction
Sin City
Silent Hill
Resident Evil: Extinction
10 Things I Hate About You
Star Trek
Aladdin
I only have one thing to say from having seen all of those;
http://captionsearch.com/pix/thumb/i96v5pflr5-t.jpg
-
#5: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs:
nrwbsndfvqwervbi WAIT WHAT THEY MADE THAT INTO A BLOODY MOVIE?!?!?!?!
-
Yeah, that was pretty much my reaction. Don't investigate any further, it can only end in pain.
-
Saw Sherlock Holmes with the family. Fun stuff. Think House, but they beat people up instead of the medical stuff. I know House is supposed to be Holmesesque, but it's also accurate to say that this version of Holmes is Houseesque: cantankerous, uncouth, wily Holmes and long-suffering Watson.
Anyway, good piece of fluff. Character chemistry is just great, Robert Downey Jr. is great, and the rest of the cast ain't too shabby either.
I think this version of Sherlock Holmes added more action to the name of SH. Fortunately they were able to have Watson's character shine, as in the television series, Watson was pretty meek and always within the shadow of Holmes. Really, this version upgraded the characters and kept their quintessential idiosyncrasies tied with the typical sardonic and sarcastic nature of many SH character types. I actually think Jude Law makes a fine Watson. I didn't care too much about Watson's love story, but I love the way the love story focused significantly less on developing man and woman relations rather than the brotherhood Holmes and Watson forged. The same can be said for Holmes' love story with Rachel McAdams, but perhaps this is because RDJ stole the spotlight from her whenever he was on screen and it really aided in developing a more frenetic Holmes than anything else.
-
Yeah, that was pretty much my reaction. Don't investigate any further, it can only end in pain.
Huh, forgot about the book. Glancing at Wikipedia it looks like it maintains a lot of the original book's plot points, though certainly adds a bunch of backstory.
I do think you're missing out if you skip this movie, though. The more I think about it, the more I think this is in the running for my favourite animated movie.
-
Blame it on Fidel - 5/5. French film starring Julie Depardieu, Stefano Accorsi and Nina Kervel. In a quick summary, it's about a Anna, a girl living in with an affluent, bourgeioise family - but with parents who are progressive and political activists. After they remove themselves from their rich surroundings to immerse themselves in their passions, Anna has to adjust to ideogolical and political differences within her now extremely modest household compared to her original friends and teaching from nuns, and bourgeioise grandparents. For a nine year old, she is extremely witty and able to withstand answers parents finally indulge to their teenage children. Good music, wonderful characters, extremely down-to-earth and empathetic to middle and lower class family lifestyles. Supports international awareness too. I love the movie nonetheless. If you're into learning French, the pronunciations aren't so bougie thick that you wouldn't be able to comprehend "faire economiser" from "tu faits."
Though it's a child story, it starts off with a child character that is mature enough to question her surroundings and create some clarity in order to form a cohesive belief system. I thought they could have expanded on her father's background and her mother's background as they get into a large argument about her mother's previous interest in marrying a Spaniard because it is exotic and challenged her family's beliefs - the scene at her father's forgotten mansion could have had a couple more minutes added to it, but overall it's good stuff.
-
Watched Avatar in the iMax theatre in Osaka. Overall good stuff, I didn't feel like I wasted my money or time. Movie does some good things with world-building that I would -love- to see more films use in the future, so hopefully its success will be the start of a trend for this in cinema.
Watched Disney's latest Princess-cashcow. I really liked the adaptation of the traditional fairy tale of the Princess and the Frog into an early-1900s New Orleans setting. Though I suspect this owes more to the children's book that Disney based this movie on than anything Disney added to the film. In fact, the portrayal of New Orleans in the movie is so over-the-top that it's pretty unappealling to me. It's like they sat around, making a list of everything they could think of that made them think of New Orleans, and they're like "We need that in this movie, preferably in rapid succession, in case the audience forgets we're in New Orleans!".
A lot of the animal characters were pretty terrible, too, but that's Disney, and I'll let it slide.
Now, that said, the movie has a LOT more good things about it than I was expecting. The two main characters are both nicely fleshed-out and don't feel like stereotypes (though they still fit nicely into their respective archetypes, but at least these archetypes are atypical for the Princess and the Frog story, again probably owing more to the children's book). More importantly, for a romantic story from Disney aimed primarily at selling more Princess merchandise, the two main characters actually have romantic chemistry. And a realistically-developing relationship. And they're funny. It's really the highlight of the movie to watch these two interact.
Also, I need to make a special note about the main character's best friend, the spoiled rich debutante girl. She's... probably one of the most likeable characters in the cast. It's nice to see a non-demonized version of a rich person. While horrible, spoiled rich people certainly exist, this is perhaps the first time I've seen a 'spoiled girl' character who was actually compassionate and caring... though she was still somewhat flawed and self-centered, so it wasn't a 'Princess Jesus' character. I think I'm doing the character an injustice with my poor description, but all of her scenes with the main character were another high point in the film.
Animation! God, I love 2D animation. The movie's gorgeous. Go see it for that.
Music is Broadway-style musical stuff again. I never felt embarrassed listening to the songs (well, the villain's song was kinda meh), which is a nice step-up from a lot of Disney songs. I should note that I found the Cajun Firefly's song to be particularly endearing and not-at-all what I expected when I heard the first chords of a musical number FOR A CAJUN FIREFLY starting up. The non-vocal songs are all heavily Jazz-influenced, so it was overall a great treat.
Tiana is going to sell A LOT of Princess merchandise.
-
Speaking of Disney!
The Emperor's New Groove: Awesome. The recommendation I read called it "the best Warner Brothers cartoon Disney's ever made" and that's about right. Really great gags, every voice actor is spot-on, and the writing is very sharp and doesn't worry at all about plot when it can be funny instead. Everything involving Kronk in particular was gold. Best line: "Well, you got me. By all accounts, it doesn't make sense." Honorable mention to the whole diner sequence.
-
Princess and the Frog. . . . . .
...... Mmm, I'll see it one day. I have my reservations and hatred for Disney that I fail to disassociate with their newfound progressive assimilation.
-
Speaking of Disney!
The Emperor's New Groove: Awesome. The recommendation I read called it "the best Warner Brothers cartoon Disney's ever made" and that's about right. Really great gags, every voice actor is spot-on, and the writing is very sharp and doesn't worry at all about plot when it can be funny instead. Everything involving Kronk in particular was gold. Best line: "Well, you got me. By all accounts, it doesn't make sense." Honorable mention to the whole diner sequence.
Indeed. I think this movie went under the radar because its preview was so...misleadingly happy and dull. Great flick.
-
Speaking of Disney!
The Emperor's New Groove: Awesome. The recommendation I read called it "the best Warner Brothers cartoon Disney's ever made" and that's about right. Really great gags, every voice actor is spot-on, and the writing is very sharp and doesn't worry at all about plot when it can be funny instead. Everything involving Kronk in particular was gold. Best line: "Well, you got me. By all accounts, it doesn't make sense." Honorable mention to the whole diner sequence.
Indeed. I think this movie went under the radar because its preview was so...misleadingly happy and dull. Great flick.
I agree with everything quoted here. Emperor's New Groove was one of the most biggest pleasant surprises ever for me.
-
Storm Riders. Years ago when I first saw it, it was a solid 5/5. Watching it again, I see so many shitty attempts at integrating CGI with martial arts that it looks ridiculous, extremely fake and took away from much of the action scenes. If I see someone punch someone, I want to see the punch connect, please and thank you. Unfortunately it didn't have any element of mockery for itself so it fell short completely. Cloud was emo and so was Wind. Maybe I was into this because I loved Cloud in FFVIII. Conquerer was a very unintimidating conquerer and it appeared that Sword Saint stabbed the living shit out of him. They never explained why Sword 23 was a move that relied on the projection of oneself's image, which doesn't explain jackshit about Muse poking him and Sword Saint dissipating into tiny molecules. Only good character I see, who I originally thought was shitty as hell, was Mud Buddha.
3/5.
-
Ping Pong Playa starring Jimmy Tsai. Unfortunately I noticed (and after listening to my friends who are Asians) that Asians do take that backseat to many racial jokes. Ping Pong Playa pretty much inserts one of my angry Asian friends into it, so they can dispell Asian stereotypes and the assumption of female asians as exotic. 5/5.
-
Cloverfield: Finally got off my ass and saw this...ok, I was sitting on my ass the entire time, but quiet!
Honestly, wasn't too impressed; its probably something that needs to be seen in the theatres, but whatever. I give the movie props for trying something original, trying to make you feel immersed in the action, but eh, the camera was too shakey, lighting was off so it was hard to see shit, and...well, the movie was short at least, as I don't think I could have stood much more of it. I realize these things were an attempt to capture the realism like "This is what it would look like if an amateur actually did film this shit", but that doesn't mean its not annoying!
There were a few things that did bug me about the movie. First off, the Monster. Its design is just horrible. You can make an ugly monster, but it doesn't have to look like some claymation reject freak that you half assedly thought up. Seriously, its uninspired, and looks more like a deformed human than anything. Doesn't help we don't get a decent shot of the monster.
Next off, with that in mind, it led to unbelievable Monster surviving Military attack nonsense. Its this fleshy, thin, seemingly not well statured creature...I'm sorry, but after a point, I find it hard to believe that Missiles and Tanks can't harm a monster, and this has crossed the line. The monster isn't even particularly stand out in size for these things.
See, when we see Godzilla do it? He actually looks like he's made of tough stuff; he's scaley, and you can at least suspend belief enough to say "Rockets just don't hurt him." He's also somewhat more steady built too.
The Cloverfield monster? It clearly looks and gives off a frailer appearance than the American Godzilla, and that thing got taken down by just repeated Missile Volleys.
Call it random whining, but there's a difference between "Suspend belief" and "yar, our monster is da strung!"
Oh, yeah, another thing that annoyed me? Monster felt inconsistent in size. Other Monster movies, the monster is pretty much always the same size, and we can see this based off building scalings. The Cloverfield monster? His close up shot gives us the impression he's King Kong size (20~ feet tall), but distant shots seem to imply he's more standard Kaiju size (150~ Feet)...just argh! MONSTERS DO NOT CHANGE SIZE FOR CONVENIENCE OF MOVIES JUST SO WE CAN HAVE THE GUY GET EATEN IN A SCENE. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY!
It also acted in unbelievable ways. Ok, if planes are firing at it, why would it climb up an arbitrary sky scrapper, then leap about 500 feet and smack a harmless helicopter, just cause the Protagonists happen to be in it? I could understand it if they were closer or something, but I didn't get that impression.
Just...yeah, the movie thrives on its unique style, but its a pretty generic monster movie that futzes up a few basic concepts and added in a pretty poorly designed monster to boot. Overall, I'm unimpressed.
-
I give the movie props for trying something original, trying to make you feel immersed in the action, but eh, the camera was too shakey, lighting was off so it was hard to see shit,
The Blair Witch project got tons of attention, and predates Cloverfield by about 9 years. So no, that's not original at all.
(Side note: the Blair Witch project is kinda crappy too.)
-
Considering how many movies are nothing but cliches in storytelling, being the second one to do something is still pretty original. *shrug*
-
I give the movie props for trying something original, trying to make you feel immersed in the action, but eh, the camera was too shakey, lighting was off so it was hard to see shit,
The Blair Witch project got tons of attention, and predates Cloverfield by about 9 years. So no, that's not original at all.
(Side note: the Blair Witch project is kinda crappy too.)
And last I checked, Blair Witch was *NOT* a giant monster movie. A horror? Probably, at least from what I understand, but one horror does not yield the other, considering what they aim for and what not.
Its like saying Poltergeist is better than Friday 13th. True or not (I haven't seen either), you can't compare them beyond "which movie scared me more?" One is more paranormal, surreal horror, the other is a teen slasher movie. They aim to scare in different ways, if that makes sense.
So...yeah, I'm sticking by my "original" claim.
-
I am just going to say that shakey cam isn't original, it has been done for years by your parents when they were filming their own porno films.
There are more horrible abuses of it than Cloverfield as well (Quarantine, beat up the zombie with the lens of your camera yes yes!), but none of this makes it a good technique choice. I can put up with it and sometimes it does work (Blair Witch is kind of crappy, but it was very good at what it is, amuses me that it bothers you but you liked Paranormal, they are very much in the same boat Met, cheap horror movies that do their best to be effective on a shoe string and they do indeed work), but in so many times it is used it is just horribly abusive to your audience. Quarantine is the worst I can think of, but Cloverfield doesn't really get much out of it and the way it shifts perspective all the time just comes out of it ultimately feeling gimmicky and worthless.
-
It occurred to me another problem with that style that clashes with general giant monster movies.
Giant Monster movies usually have some sort of explanation for the appearance of the monster, and part of the interest factor is where the monster came from and how they get rid of it. Cloverfield sort of slams into this, as unless some random military personnel picks up the camera or the guy gets into a genuine military standing like "We need you to go with our troops to document this, cause our current devices are shit" kind of fails.
At the end of the movie Cloverfield, you really know nothing new about the monster, and while the whole "DID THE MONSTER DIE OR NOT?" factor has that cliffhanger feel to it...cliffhangers ONLY work if there is going to be a genuine sequel (Matrix Reloaded, ignoring all other problems with that movie and how Revolutions was a pile of shit that followed, had an appropriate use of a cliffhanger, for example.)
I mean, freaking GAMERA THE INVINCIBLE, which is one of the worst giant monster movies I ever saw, at least got the whole "give some explanations, no matter how bullshit, for the monster!" Cloverfield, cause of its style, failed at that.
What Cloverfield really should have been, and maybe this is cause of the Nostalgia Critic but I think back on it and it would have helped, is take some already known monster, and portray the movie from that camera's point of view. I mean, even if they just reused the American Godzilla, that'd have been enough; we know about him, so the explanation nonsense needed for the monster is finished, now we're just focusing on the people and the reaction to it!
But instead, they used some ugly shit monster that we get very few decent visuals of, with no info on other than its vague appearance and...ugh. Yeah, maybe I'm whining, but as someone whose into giant monster movies, and the fact that Toho, despite making about 40 some odd giant monsters, had some sort of explanation for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, even obscure shits like the 2 from War of the Gargantuas, there's no excuse a modern movie couldn't at least just have some military guy, even if he's just off to the side while the Camera Man bitches and moans, saying "The monster is a creation of all of Hollywood's idiocy taking on physical form and manifesting in New York cause they're asstards!"
-
Avatar: My thoughts can be best summed up with this infographic.
(http://cdn-www.cracked.com/phpimages/photoshop/9/9/1/16991.jpg)
Otherwise, very pretty movie and while its script was utterly generic and ham-handed its take on a functioning global hive mind was pretty damn neat.
Also, lol chekovs rhino.
-
You forgot Dances With Wolves
-
I didn't forget it, I've just never seen it.
-
(http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/epic-fail-avatar-plot-fail.jpg)
-
Ahahahaha, that's the funniest thing I've seen in years. Haha. Whoever did that is full of win.
-
Sherlock Holmes - This is a movie made specifically for me. I really appreciate it that people do this kind of thing for me.
Edit - Seriously I cannot go enough into detail about how perfectly this is put together for my tastes, it goes well beyond Robert Downey Jr. being himself and Jude Law the smooth pimp. Everything from the action sequences, the violence (OH MY GOD THE DELICIOUS VIOLENCE), the smart cinematography (paying off brilliantly with the credits, very nice way to just flex), well done side characters (Why thank you Lestrade's actor, nicely done work) and to round it all out the soundtrack is sublime. Beethoven being used quite tastefully all throughout and then BAM Rocky Road to Dublin because I love me some up tempo folk tunes.
If you want to watch good cinema then you should watch this. It is raw, touching, incredibly slickly produced and honest to god Hollywood Cinema. Sure it isn't ground breaking, but it reminds me why I ever even bother watching this kind of movie, because sometimes they are done RIGHT.
-
(http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/epic-fail-avatar-plot-fail.jpg)
Yeah, those are always fun:
http://harrypotterwars.ytmnd.com/
-
Sherlock Holmes
Good stuff, for sure. One thing that really made it work was the bustle of activity that pervaded every scene. Chaotic streets, shipyards, a slaughterhouse! Commerce! Filth! Progress!
-
Sherlock Holmes
Good stuff, for sure. One thing that really made it work was the bustle of activity that pervaded every scene. Chaotic streets, shipyards, a slaughterhouse! Commerce! Filth! Progress!
Robert Downey Jr. being sexy doesn't count?
-
Sexy mens always count =-)
Yeah want to see that one myself.
Angels and Demons- Didn't think I'd enjoy it as much as the first movie (yeah yeah it got to me, maybe it had something to do with Tom Hanks and muzac >.>) but it ended up ok.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
I called Patrick at the beginning of the movie, then got red herringed by Strauss and the Swiss Guard dude, kind of went huh at the scene where Patrick goes he's got the gun shoot him, got carried away by Patrick's apparent badassary with the helicoptor, then went oh right duh at the final revelation >. So yeah enjoyed it *flees*
-
Inkheart. 3/5.
Paul Bettany was the only good actor in the entire movie. Average. Cool concept, but a bit too Jumanji-like.
-
Beethoven being used quite tastefully all throughout and then BAM Rocky Road to Dublin because I love me some up tempo folk tunes.
Please tell me they used the DKM version.
-
They did not, the entire soundtrack is played classic folk style, but yes, I have been listening to the DKM version for a today just because of it.
-
Avatar: Kind of meh for the first 2/3rds of the movie, but the last third was enjoyable. Found myself rooting for the Colonel because he was just too badass to lose. Actually enjoyed looking at all the human hardware more than the planet. Rear-view mirror on an exosuit = win.
Gran Turino: I want to have Clint Eastwood's babies.
Role Models: KISS. Nuff said.
-
Kung Fu Panda: Sister and parents were gonna watch this in movie room, so I decided to join them cause I haven't seen it yet.
Pretty formula animated movie. Guy wants to be something, but obviously doesn't fit, somehow ends up with the group he aspires to be like but they all hate him barring that one old master who believes in him, but after some time, most of the others accept him barring that one elitist, bad guy appears, main thinks they failed for whatever reason, dramatically returns when all is lost to save the day, everyone is happy! (...except the bad guy whose either dead or just totally screwed for life.)
Of course, I was expecting exactly that, so I can't say I was disappointed. It was generally fun to watch, funnier than I expected, etc.
-
Kung Fu Panda: Sister and parents were gonna watch this in movie room, so I decided to join them cause I haven't seen it yet.
Pretty formula animated movie. Guy wants to be something, but obviously doesn't fit, somehow ends up with the group he aspires to be like but they all hate him barring that one old master who believes in him, but after some time, most of the others accept him barring that one elitist, bad guy appears, main thinks they failed for whatever reason, dramatically returns when all is lost to save the day, everyone is happy! (...except the bad guy whose either dead or just totally screwed for life.)
Of course, I was expecting exactly that, so I can't say I was disappointed. It was generally fun to watch, funnier than I expected, etc.
But was the opening animation (his dream) not completely awesome?
-
Kung Fu Panda was fun, just...unimpressive, in most ways. The fight scenes weren't great, the comedy wasn't too fresh, and so forth. Still worth a watch.
Coraline: Awesome. Captured the spirit of the book perfectly, had a great cast (including Keith David in something not for TV! Good.), and was generally spot-on in every way that matters - they changed nearly every fine detail of the story, but I don't care at all. Watch it.
-
Keith David was...the cat? Forgot about that.
Coraline was fun, yeah.
-
Kung Fu Panda was fun, just...unimpressive, in most ways. The fight scenes weren't great, the comedy wasn't too fresh, and so forth. Still worth a watch.
Pretty much this. It was decent, but it should have been better/funnier considering what it was.
Only movie I can recall watching at all recently is Up (in the exact same way I watched Panda... while on a plane with nothing better to do). Excellent for what it is: touching, funny, and an enjoyable little adventure. Pixar knows their stuff. Also the beginning of Up is shockingly and disturbingly similar to the beginning of Grandia 3 (the similarities mercifully end there).
-
Re: Meeple vs. Cloverfield
Cloverfield is shit. I agree. The fact that you think Cloverfield is shit because it's not Kaijuu leaves me puzzled. Yes, there's a giant monster in Cloverfield... that doesn't mean it's supposed to be a kaijuu film... >.>;;
Re: Avatar is Pocahontas in Space
Yes. So yes. At least they cribbed a decent base story (for all that Disney's version has nothing to do with historical fact).
-
Re: Meeple vs. Cloverfield
Cloverfield is shit. I agree. The fact that you think Cloverfield is shit because it's not Kaijuu leaves me puzzled. Yes, there's a giant monster in Cloverfield... that doesn't mean it's supposed to be a kaijuu film... >.>;;
It sucks because it was supposed to be a kaijuu film though.
-
Wait seriously? And here I thought Meeple was just rambling about something for no other reason than he's Meeple and makes weird associations.
-
eh. the movie is what it is. no sense comparing it to what might have been, and no sense calling it a (bad) kaijuu movie when it doesn't seem like one. a rose by any other name, and all that.
edit: doesn't mean it can't suck. haven't seen it, so I couldn't say.
-
You know, I had a whole big rant following Grefter's statement, but I won't get into it. I'll just say that of all the Giant Monster movies I saw, they either:
A. Don't try at Horror, but either suspense or something totally different (I get the feeling the original King Kong was less a horror movie and more an all out spectacle; remember, this movie was made in the 1930s; its why the movie may be one of the best movies of all time, instead just plain decent.)
B. Fail at horror miserably cause Giant Monsters, oddly, don't work very well for a horror format.
"Godzilla: King of the Monsters" was really the only Giant Monster Movie that really got the "Horror" thing down properly, cause it did things that no other movie really attempted. I'm not just saying this cause I'm a Godzilla fan, but...well, if you see Godzilla: King of the Monsters and compare it to just about any other Giant Monster Movie, you'll understand (or alternatively, the Japanese counterpart "Gojira" works too; I specify that cause the movies are different enough to be considered two different movies, though they both illustrate my point.)
And even THAT movie doesn't really scare you, it more just leaves a disturbing feeling.
To say "Cloverfield wasn't suppose to be Kaiju"...I dunno. Shaky camera aside, it pretty much fits all the criteria of Kaiju other than "is Japanese." So I guess that means its merely "Kaiju styled" <_<
-
But Cloverfield is clearly supposed to be a Horror film. It's primarily aimed at using 'mysterious monster' to give you that 'something's going to get you' feeling. It's far closer to Friday the 13th than Godzilla. Alternately, you could label it akin to some of the cheesy Disaster films which are quickly becoming their own genre. Cloverfield is a lot more like Final Destination or Day After Tomorrow than Godzilla.
Comparing it to Kaijuu just doesn't work.
Granted, still crap.
-
I was under the impression that Cloverfield was supposed to be a Godzilla-style movie, as told from the point of view of the people in the buildings he knocks over in the first five minutes of a rampage.
-
I was under the impression that Cloverfield was supposed to be a Godzilla-style movie, as told from the point of view of the people in the buildings he knocks over in the first five minutes of a rampage.
Pretty much, yes.
Its *NOT* a Friday the 13th style movie. That's a slasher movie, where people are dying left and right. Cloverfield, all of like 2 people actually die the entire movie. That's not comparable to Friday the 13th.
We actually see the monster, is the other thing, its just retarded at how it handles it.
It fails at the "Something is going to get you" feel too; the only moment you get this feeling is in the subway, when those lice attack, and that more came off as poorly choreographed action scene (due to movie's style) and...yeah...
Its definitely more like Kaiju from a different perspective than your Friday the 13th thing.
And Cloverfield is not a "Disaster" film. Disaster deals with a Force of Nature and BECAUSE its a force of nature, you can't do shit about it, and there's no way to prepare for it even knowing its coming (or alternatively, the people know there's no time). Cloverfield does not deal with that; one of the big things about a Disaster Film is how you KNOW shit is coming down and you KNOW nothing can be done about it. Part of the allure, perse, is seeing just how people manage to cope with this shit.
-
http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_12553.html
Here you can see quotes from the Producer of the film saying how it is Godzilla but with an American and "insane and intense".
So it is a Kaijuu movie.
-
Speaking of Giant Monster Movies that attempt to NOT be Kaiju...
King Kong (Peter Jackson Remake): Saw it. Was fun and entertaining, but the movie really was a lot longer than it needed to be. I understand they're trying to play up the emotional side of things, but there felt a lot of needless slow moving parts that hurt the overall pace of the movie. The scene where he's hanging on the Empire State Building, and just him and the girl are constantly looking at each other, slowly back and forth...yeah, ok, we get the point, its tragic, it was easy to display that in a scene 1/3rd the length.
Other than that? The movie did show respect for the original 1930s version. Takes place in the 30s, though this did lead to requiring some setting building, to remind us of the current mood and technology of the time, etc. Ok, that's fair. The boat scenes...well, guess they wanted some character development, which is fair, but all of these I felt could have been done a little faster.
Again, the movies biggest flaw is its length; its a 2 hour movie spread across 3. Making it longer than the original was appropriate, but seems they went a little overboard here.
I will state that I like how they played up the whole "Kong is the victim, NOT the villain" thing in this movie rather well, showing that they did actually do their homework by watching the original, and noting how Kong did like nothing wrong, and all his actions were pretty justified. Especially since they did show him having a calm, gentle side. Didn't hurt that the Female Lead wasn't just screaming the entire time like she did in the original, making the whole Beauty and Beast Subplot more believable.
Overall, decent movie, and retained respect for the original movie, for the most part, while just giving it more of a modern feel, which is about all you can ask for in a remake.
Now I'm tempted to see the Original again just for contrast purposes.
And yes, while I do like Kaiju, it is nice to be reminded how you CAN make Giant Monster movies that are *NOT* strictly Kaiju style, and King Kong's about as Non-Kaiju as you can get (especially since he predates Kaiju by a good 20 years.)
Oh, and I must say, the movie clearly took some pages from Jurassic Park. The way T-rex's looked and the fact that there were arbitrary Velociraptors in the movie...well, do I need to say anything more <_<?
-
I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell:
Amazing film. Tucker Max, regardless if these are true stories is brilliant.
Dance monkey! Dance for your dollar!
-
I rented GI Joe simply because it was rated "PG-13 for Pervasive Mayhem." So I figured, hey, what the hell, I'm down for pervasive mayhem. It is... wow, mind-scrambling bad. I had absolutely no expectations and it somehow still managed to shock me. I think I summed the movie up when I remarked to my brother, "you know shit's getting ridiculous when the one using the most practical tactics is A GOD DAMN NINJA."
So, yeah. Writing's bad, acting's bad, the movie has eleven extended flashback sequences give or take, and those crazy super-suits they hyped up in the commercials get used for a chase scene halfway through the movie and never seen again (though they are used to spray 10mm machine gun fire in the direction of a speeding van once while on a crowded street in Paris during the middle of the afternoon in a crowning moment of ridiculous).
-
Inglorious Basterds:
Finally watched this.
What I expected: Brad Pitt and TF2_Scout go around killin' Nyazis.
What the movie delivered: Exactly that.
What I expected: Not much else. It's a Quinten Tarantino movie, so it's going to run mostly off of Rule of Cool and succeed. Lots of campy blood will abount.
What the movie delivered: Holy shit.
Many things distinguished this film from others in my mind. First, there's the fact that most of the film was in foreign languages, as appropriate to the scene. I'm not sure about recent films since I don't watch movies, but usually in films characters from foreign lands speak English with a stupid accent, yes? Or at least it's all in one language, depending on the target audience. Not this movie--so much to the point that they lampshaded it, and the accent in an actor's German became a largely relevant plot point. Hadn't expected that.
Number two: It portrayed a lot of the Nazis as human--even Goebbels was given a moment of humanity toward the end. Given how the movie was billed, as a Nazi-killin' good time, I had expected that they would have been Indiana Jones Nazis--storyless antagonists.
Number three: Holy shit this movie managed to be profound. There's one moment at the end, (spoilers) where we see Hitler and Goebbels and the rest of the Nazi scum laughing it up, enjoying a movie where some German soldier snipes a bunch of Allies. It's pretty clear that we're supposed to find this sort of display disgusting, horrifying--Nazi behavior.
Then in the next scene the protagonists burst into the theatre from a balcony and start firing into the crowd while the theatre owner burns down the building after locking all the Nazis in. The scene is very satisfying; who, in our society, wouldn't love to see Hitler take a shotgun to the face, while the top members of his Reich die in a fire?
And that's when it strikes--I, the viewer, am no better than the Nazis. The laughter and joy the Nazi audience gets from viewing "The Nation's Pride" is no different than the joy I got out of seeing "the face of Jewish Vengance" (as the movie itself titled that scene).
And that's the message of the movie. I don't think it was an accident--the subject of how the Allies are morally little different from the Nazis (but just less extreme in their actions) comes up a few times in the movie. For instance, when they're playing the guessing game in the tavern.
Of course, the film doesn't take that message that far--in reality, the Nazis did unspeakable things and the movie ends with the Allies getting the last punchline, and I wouldn't have the movie end any other way. Still, it manages to make one question one's own view of the world, and reminds the viewer that they could easily support atrocities under the right circumstances. Kudos, Tarantino. I might have to respect you as a storyteller now.
-
There is bonus points in there for Cinema as a weapon as well, you see quite clearly there with what Goebbels was doing and the counter with what Shoshana does at the end. Also of note is that the stock footage used when they are explaining that the film is highly flamable is form a film where a kid is tricked into delivering a bomb in a film canister.
And there is a fucking David Bowie song in the soundtrack.
Tarantino made the movie just for me it seems.
-
Bolt: I didn't really have any desire to see this movie...but Mandy did, and she wanted to watch it with someone, and well, it was short, so why not.
I did miss the beginning, but eh, doubt I was missing much.
The movie was...utterly formula. Just like Kung Fu Panda, it was ridiculously easy to call exactly what was going to happen before it happened...heck, I figured out the general sequence of events in the ending less than half way in, outside of the last scene, which is mostly cause there were a number of cliches that they could have drawn from, all of which can be summed up as "He moved on with his life, and is happy about how things are...oh yeah, his new friends found some way to benefit from this too."
No, I'm not spoiling the movie, its just so damn formula.
But being formula wouldn't be such a bad thing if it was fun to watch...just it kind of wasn't. Humor kind of fell flat, the excitement wasn't there, and...yeah, definitely one of the lesser films.
Can't say I went in expecting much, and I can't say the movie did much to prove me wrong. As I said, if it wasn't for the fact that Mandy guilt tripped me into watching this (...she's good at this stuff, those of you at DLC4 can probably see why), I'd probably not bothered to ever watch this.
-
Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths - Excellent. Good fights, funny nods to comics continuity that don't get too obtrusive, really good cast, and a plot that hangs together well and doesn't feel cut short (given that these things are held to 70 minutes each, that can be a problem). Not as good as The New Frontier, but what is?
Edit: Also, if you want to (and can ignore Hal Jordan being in it), you can take this as a new DCAU installment, set between the second and third seasons of Justice League. It fits perfectly.
-
The Wolfman would have been better if Del Toro didn't seem like he was on laudanum.
-
The Blind Man Zatoichi - 4/5
Sukiyaki Western Django - 3/5
Fast and Furious - 2/5
Trainspotting - 3/5
Julie and Julia (if I ignore the profits that Julie is getting) 5/5 (OH, and ignore Julie completely). If I just think of Meryl Streep it's a 5/5. If I remember that Julie exists, 2/5.
3:10 to Yuma - 3/5.
Inkheart - 3/5.
Outlander - 3/5.
Paris, Je t'Aime - 4/5.
Dexter Season 1 - 5/5.
Dexter Season 2 - 5/5.
Spartacus Ep 1 & 2 - 4/5. It's going to start going down if there's as much sex as it gives off.
Ping Pong Playa - 5/5*. Golden. Love it.
Frontiers - 5/5. Who knew the French could pull off a really disgusting horror flick?
Stand and Deliver -5/5. Seen this my third time. Probably the last. "Oh, so you're the finger man?"
Shakespeare in Love - 5/5. Seen this my 6th time, not the last. >_>
The Babysitters - 3/5.
.....
Next movie? Up!
-
El Bola - 3/5. Absolutely no resolution which the entire movie was begging.
Inglourious Basterds - I'm prefacing this with the fact that I do not like Quentin Tarantino's bodies of work. Too much excess dialogue I find useless, and action packed within the last 15 minutes. IB wasn't as bad like Deathproof, but totally didn't keep me interested besides the minute appearances of the Inglorious Basterds. 3/5.
About to watch Zombieland. Up comes via DVD this Friday! [:
-
Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief - Labours Of Herculues abridged with one story cribbed from the Odyssey. Alright.
Crank - This was awesome, amazingly over the top action movie of win.
Crank: HIgh Voltage - This was even more over the top and even more win. Porn actors on strike "DO YOU WANT ME TO FUCK THIS CAR?"
Worth watching.
8mm - Caught the end of this again because my brother was watching the commentary. I was still absolutely enthralled by this movie. I don't quite know how I got through the end again though, it is still a hard watch, but I guess it was past the hardest parts. If you haven't watched 8mm yet though you should watch it.
-
Zombieland- Pure fucking win. The fact that I already love Woody and Bill helps the case though.
Dexter Season 1- Good... not amazing like everybody told me it was.
Dexter Season 2- Little better than the first, still not as amazing as it was hyped to be. I think the fact that the new female antagonist was utterly unbelievable didn't help.
On a side note. Community is an awesome show.
-
From what I hear, the things people like about Dexter is the inconclusive morality - whether or not he is truly justified, evil or good.
The thing I particularly like about Dexter are the characters. They're one dimensional and play quite well into the separating branches of story. Dialog is interesting, and the monologues of Dexter are funny to me.
The crazy lady in Season 2 and Dexter's odd relationship based off of the Dexter from Season 1 that was extremely calculated, did seem extremely out of place.
-
I think Lithgow is the best Dexter antagonist to date, honestly. He's fucking awesome at it.
-
Main antagonist during a season? Is he in later seasons (IE, not 1-2)?
-
He's in season 4, and I believe he won a Golden Globe for it.
-
Anyone seen the Book of Eli? I'm thinking of taking a girl out to see it. Her request.
-
Up - very good movie. I also like the fact that the protagonist was an old man and the epic Star-Warsish fight on the floaty thingy was awesome. Story premise was fine, characters were golden, lines were necessarily hilarious, design was beautiful. Mmm, only qualm I would say I had . . . none.
5/5.
Law Abiding Citizen - good shit. Did not like the ending. Necessary, I suppose, since I don't believe he'd ever be able to live a calm life. Both should have died, anyway. A follow up on the law system would have been nice. Could guess who his accomplice was when they panned out a view of a warehouse next to the prison.
4/5.
-
A Shot In The Dark: I honestly can't remember if I'd seen this before, but it rules. Peter Sellers was a genius, Blake Edwards still is, contain your surprise.
-
Dodgeball - Is fucking hilarious. I laughed pretty much forever.
-
Anyone seen the Book of Eli? I'm thinking of taking a girl out to see it. Her request.
It is basically Fallout 3, but a movie and you are a black dude.
-
La Cage Aux Folles: Saw the original. Its...uhh...weird, though the last 20 minutes or so are hilarious in that ridiculous sense. I suppose that's the point; they need all that set up so the last 20 minutes just sort of train wreck, while you still being able to follow it.
-
M. Butterfly - I don't think I've ever seen Jeremy Irons kiss a man. Very poetic movie. 5/5.
Zombieland - 3/5. Not enough zombies/action. Filler "want a family" dialog. Good action with Woody Harrelson though.
Paranormal Activity - 2/5. Boooooooring. If the movie was like the last 5 seconds, maybe it would have been better.
9 coming on Monday.
-
Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian: Being the only other book in the series I've read besides the Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe, I figured why not?
This movie gave me the following impressions:
-Wow, they diverged quite a bit from the book, contrast to the previous movie which followed it rather well
-Wow, I really don't remember Prince Caspian nearly as much as I remembered its predecessor!
Things I do remember involved such like the book opening with the 4 siblings in the train station, just having idle banther, eventually leading to "Wait, why are we by the ocean!?" instead of the nonsense with Peter and his superiority "I'M AN ADULT AT HEART DAMN IT!" complex. Well, no, the movie started with Prince Caspian retreating from his castle, which...isn't too bad; that's merely making the movie more chronologically which fits for a movie and makes the beginning a little more interesting, but relative to the book, yeah, the stuff in the "real" world felt unnecessary cause I don't remember them actually dealing with that shit in the book, and felt like they were just trying to force some character traits again to bring out more development that the book didn't have.
I mean, one thing I remember explicitly about the book was that Caspian was definitely the protagonist, NOT Peter. The 4 siblings were introduced first, but then they meet a dwarf and we get into a rather long narrative about Caspian, and its pretty much about him. Maybe my memory is faulty (The book was significantly less memorable than the Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe), but I remember more focus on Caspian and less on Peter. There were other minor plot points that I know they changed; for example, I remember it was Edmund who figured out it was their castle they were standing in the ruins of, and through deductive reasoning, NOT Lucy. Minor point, but its stuff like this that when you remember things specifically, the changes stand out, and there was no real reason to change that, minor as it was.
I also remember thinking Prince Caspian was significantly younger than the Movie displayed him...but maybe that was me being young and naive at the time, but that's definitely the impression I remember thinking.
Either way, first movie was better by a significant amount, this movie had more action and stuff, but...meh, wasn't as fun. Then again, first book was also significantly better than the second, so yeah, guess that's to be expected!
-
I want to say that Caspian was 11 or 12 in the book? Younger than Peter definitely.
The sad thing about that movie though is that I don't think it did terribly well, so I'm not sure they're going to do Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which is a shame.
-
IMDB lists it as being in post-production, for what that's worth.
-
I remember it was Edmund who figured out it was their castle they were standing in the ruins of, and through deductive reasoning, NOT Lucy
I'd imagine that was a change made to give the girls more of a role in the story; the book is a bit dated in that regard. I remember thinking that book in particular actually came off as rather sexist when I reread the series as an adult a few years back, but no longer remember what specifically prompted those thoughts. To be fair, Prince Caspian is my least favourite in the series by quite a ways so my memory of it isn't going to be very good. I've actually heard that the movie is better, since it gives Peter a shred of character depth (something nobody has in the book!) but I've never seen either movie myself.
-
Closer: Didn't like this one at all. The movie amounts to a collection of scenes showing terrible people at their worst moments, with little to establish why anybody should care. The most absurd example is a one-year time jump from Jude Law's character admitting that he's been stalking Julia Roberts, to Law and Roberts having fallen in love and having a year-long affair. When Law's character first admitted to it I thought he was delusional, and I still say that makes more sense than what actually happened. Also, Portman's performance was the worst I've ever seen her give, including Star Wars.
Edit: What the fuck she won awards for that? It was like listening to a community-theater actress read her audition piece.
-
The Stand: First time I've ever sat down and seen the miniseries, in spite of being a fan of the books.
Good: Casting/acting. It was for the most part accurate. Kudos to the casting for Tom. That was literally the actor I envisioned when I read the books before the mini series came out. It also shows off the utter depth of Lloyd's damnation as well or even better than the books do. He isn't sympathetic at all, just a two bit criminal who leaps at the chance for life and to be important for once in his life. Flagg's actor did a fantastic job as well.
Bad: The bad casting jobs. Gary Sinise didn't physically fit the part of Stu. He was just old enough chronologically but looked too young for the part. Not a big deal, he did a good job.
Molly Ringwald as Franie was not only an inaccurate casting for the age, Ringwald did a terrible job with a tough role. Franie isn't sympathetic in the least in the movie considering how little time they spend on her PoV, but she is played as an *insufferable* bitch and it annoys the hell out of me. Oh well. Other than that, the miniseries was a lot of fun and almost sticks 100% to the books outside of the very end which suits me fine.
-
So the magic ghost hand ISN'T the original ending for The Stand?
...Thank fucking god.
-
La Femme Nikita - seen it my bagillionth time. Realized that the subtitling is ridiculously off-balance. IE, there's some typos when the person says huit, but the number that shows up is 7. When someone says s'il vous plait, there's an extra sentence that adds too much context to that phrase. Etc. Good movie, but I feel that her last mission was a little too anti-climatic now. Still a 5/5. I'm a Luc Besson/Jean Reno whore, so sue me.
9 - I think that this has the best animation that was executed with its artistic vision that I've ever seen. There are way too many subtleties, such as 1's sagging eyes visually represented in his lens, the eyebrows stitched in, a salt shaker top, etc. Light was amazing, fog/special effects was amazing. A sad story, really. Two anticlimatic movies in one night. Not a bad ending, but definitely not what I was expecting. Since there was no humanity left (I'm not spoiling anything by saying that), the too-open ended ending makes it a bit disappointing for the adventure. Typical characters, but thankfully the meter of the movie continually rises. Action packed compared to many other animation movies. Impressive. Not a 5/5 because of the ending. Gave Le Femme Nikita a 5/5 because of nostalgia. Wouldn't say this is exactly a kid's movie - I don't think the point of animation necessities G-rated movies. Yeah. Good movie overall. Up was much more comedic, but 9 is on a different level of entertainment.
-
Black Dynamite- 11/10. 10 points for the movie, 1 point for using the phrase "Kung Fu treachery."
-
So the magic ghost hand ISN'T the original ending for The Stand?
...Thank fucking god.
Nope, that is the end of Vegas and Flagg. The book adds a bit more.
Spoilers:
It takes long months for Stu and Tom to get back to Boulder, and Flagg has a cameo where he appears somewhere in south america. They just cut out a lot of the filler about what happens to the free zone after Flagg's gone and what Stu and Franie do after she gives birth.
-
The Secret of Kells - this came out in NYC, went to see it with my sister who happened to be in town. Very, very pretty animation. Highly recommended for art dorks (read: Idun), but I'm not sure there's enough in there for anyone else to care about aside from the visual style, which may be best described as Celtic Okami. On the other hand, a movie that has a plot but doesn't go out of its way to tug your heartstrings is pretty refreshing in a way. Short movie, anyway, and worth the time.
-
You wound me Jim.
Alice in Wonderland - Why are people not talking about this and going to watch it? This is really quite good. Not in the same way that Sherlock Holmes justified Hollywood for me again, but good in the way that you know, Tim Burton justifies his existence once again. It is quirky and well told, very true to the source material. Johnny Depp is of course absolutely wonderful in it and Stephen Fry is a marvelous Cheshire Cat who you can spend hours listening to on loop. The animation for the Cat is also superb, absolutely great. Those are just the things and characters I fixate on though (being things that mirror some of my more general neurosis, though that can be said of most of the entire Alice universe). Anne Hathaway gets praise for doing what must have been fairly difficult the entire time (she does everything with proper elegance. Bends and swoops and ducks and swerves like the total caricature that the White Queen is of Grace/Elegance/Royalty) and she pulls it off. It looks awkward and it must have felt it, but that is exactly what it is meant to do (you should not have to turn around a full circle just to walk 2 paces and use a telescope, but she does).
I don't know, there isn't much to say. It is Tim Burton, it is Lewis Carrol done correctly in full LSD haze, it has an amazing cast and a sky high budget that is put to use. Worth watching.
I saw it in 2D for obvious reasons with impaired vision and have heard the 3D does not do much for it, but beautiful nonetheless. Go see this movie.
Oh and it isn't really for kids, but that goes with both Alice in Wonderland and Tim Burton. They ... bedazzle and confuse them and make them think (which is why every child should be read Alice in Wonderland or at least watch a classical interpretation of it), but it is every bit as much there for the parent/the stoners as these things will ever be.
Blah blah blah Tim Burton strong female lead done right way more so than your normal Disney female blah blah blah.
-
I went and saw Alice with Andrew Friday night in IMAX 3D. I was underwhelmed.
The main hitch was the actress playing Alice. Maybe I just didn't "get it," but she felt so flat and uninspired the whole time. It made understand why it went from thing to thing a little more clunky. My teeth grated a la nails on the chalkboard at her return to not-(w)Underland.
Enjoyable movie, though. The 3D did what 3D does best: add depth, not camp. It was very, very pretty and had fantastic design elements.
-
Spoilers for a shitty movie you don't want to see, but have probably already seen!
Ocean's 12: This movie is beyond bad... seriously. The entire movie is to steal something they already stole? Why the fuck did they go through the trouble of getting caught in the first place? It makes no damn sense!
-
Yes. The worst part is when they have the Julia Roberts character pretend to be Julia Roberts and everyone acts like this is actually supposed to be funny. If there's one word that characterizes Ocean's 12, it's "lazy."
-
My sister spoke about Ocean 12, how she watched the first 15 minutes of it, then turned it off cause everyone was acting out of character and that is never a good sign.
Pity, cause the first movie was actually kind of neat.
-
My sister spoke about Ocean 12, how she watched the first 15 minutes of it, then turned it off cause everyone was acting out of character and that is never a good sign.
Pity, cause the first movie was actually kind of neat.
Not really... say what you will about the second movie, no one really acted out of character.
-
But Ocean's 12 is the one with the crazy laser dance scene, isn't it?
-
Okay that looked cool, but IIRC there is one seriously wrong issue with that.
They mention early in the movie that the lasers are random.
They then show the guy practicing some little dance in his backyard.
Then they show guy doing his dance to dodge the so called random lasers.
Now... unless the dance was different and just looked identical to my untrained eye then these so called random lasers were not random at all, which would make me wonder why the cast said they were. Great intel assholes.
-
But... LASER DANCE.
-
Late response, but the real star of Alice in Wonderland isn't Alice, but everything else in the movie. When you set the mundane character up against a world as fantastic as Wonderland, the mundane will lose.
-
But..shouldn't Alice be interesting in her own right? I mean, she certainly wasn't pedestrian in the books.
-
In some bizarre dystopian way, dead Alice in (w)Underland is a perfectly Tim Burton-esque way to portray the character "all grown up."
On the other hand, the final scene still really bugs me and would especially do so in this suggested context. She's supposed to be a young woman who "comes into her own" by the finale, and I just don't see how she gets there. Maybe that, too, is commentary in its own way, but if so it is extremely poorly executed. I think I agree with Ebert's assessment -- the third act is all kinds of disappointment.
-
But..shouldn't Alice be interesting in her own right? I mean, she certainly wasn't pedestrian in the books.
You can be interesting on your own, but be totally outshone by everything else. When it comes down to it, she's still an ordinary person and everyone around her is an opium hallucination. The coolest real person you know is probably still not going to be as cool as James Bond.
-
But... LASER DANCE.
I concede, best... movie... ever
-
Oh don't get me wrong, the ending is bad. She goes off and gets a career of her own! Way to go! What is that job? Colonial Trader! Hooray, women can be scummy imperialists as well ^_^_^_^_^_^_^_^_^
It is better than your standard Disney woman, but it is heavy handed and stupid in ways that they don't want you to think about.
The ending has nothing to do with Wonderland though. Everything about Wonderland is worth going to see and is a good movie.
Edit - The fight with the Jabberwocky is the logical ultimate conclusion to the entire plot. It may not be terribly satisfying because the Alice character is dull, but the plot is just a vehicle to watch stuff happening. Alternately you can be a giant faggot and say it is something about the dull inevitability of growing up and choosing that shitty fucking Career over making out with your crazy Johnny Depp for all of eternity (Stupid choice).
-
Alternately you can be a giant faggot and say it is something about the dull inevitability of growing up and choosing that shitty fucking Career over making out with your crazy Johnny Depp for all of eternity (Stupid choice).
Past experience tells me that you CAN make the awesome choices in life, and have things turn out pretty good.
-
I would say you have quite clearly chosen the equivalent of making out with crazy Johnny Depp for all of eternity for yourself so far.
-
Cop Out was awesome
Hot Tub Time Machine was awesome
and Hot Rod has one of the best endings in cinematic history!
-
Hunger - 4/5. Very tactile movie. About the Hunger Strike in Ireland against British control. I would really categorize the later part of the movie as a huge monologue - there's about a 20+ minute scene where there's little camera change of conversation about why the Hunger Strike needs to go through. I wasn't bored in the least. Unusual, since I'm used to American cinema specifically changing vantage points every chance it gets. Good movie. Unexpected.
Hancock - 3/5. Chat knows what I don't like. Funny movie nonetheless.
Next movies: Night at the Museum 2, and Audition. I loved the first movie - second was suggested by chat. OH. Saw the beginning of Let The Right One In and fell asleep after the girl jumped down off of a high platform when the kid was stabbing a tree. Was very, very tired that night. Need to rewatch.
-
Hunger - 4/5. Very tactile movie. About the Hunger Strike in Ireland against British control. I would really categorize the later part of the movie as a huge monologue - there's about a 20+ minute scene where there's little camera change of conversation about why the Hunger Strike needs to go through. I wasn't bored in the least. Unusual, since I'm used to American cinema specifically changing vantage points every chance it gets. Good movie. Unexpected.
I hadn't heard of this before so I just looked it up and went, "HOLY SHIT zombie Steve McQueen directs movies." If only.
-
I jus saw black Dynamite, and wow. Why can't all movies be like this? Superfunkyperbaliscious~
-
Alice in Wonderland - Pretty good. Kept me amused. Don't bother watching it in 3D; unlike Avatar, the 3D was mostly used for tacky "WHOA COMIN' RIGHT ATCHA!" moments, so it didn't justify the use of the technology to me. March Hare was my favorite character for whatever reason; dude does way too much amphetamines kno'm'say'm? Storyline was kinda silly but duh.
To all the people going "I don't get the change at the end" . . . from a storytelling perspective, yes the ending is trite, done before, and doesn't really make much sense since Alice doesn't have that much of an impetus to change. However, if you're taking the entire movie as a metaphor for Alice going off and doing hallucinogens in the forest (not that far out there), it makes enough sense. LSD/mushrooms/etc are a time of seeing lots of weird shit and also completely re-evaluating your worldview so it worked as far as I'm concerned in that framework.
And, honestly, if you're going to take issue with that, you might as well take issue with a Victorian-era young woman having anything to do with a business and not simply getting married to the person her parents had arranged for her. And if you're doing that, you are spending too much time trying to analyse the plot of a movie where A LITTLE GIRL SLAYS A DRAGON.
Anyway, it definitely is Lewis Carol meets Tim Burton meets Johnny Depp so it's worth seeing regardless of the amounts of drugs you do. It's also just way better if you do because they certainly kept the innuendo up and the little nods will make you smile.
-
I hadn't heard of this before so I just looked it up and went, "HOLY SHIT zombie Steve McQueen directs movies." If only.
I don't get it. Maybe it's because I don't watch en-- OOOh. HUNGER. ZOMBIE. HUNNNGER AND ZOMBIE. I get it.
Don't feel like backspacing. Anyyyyway.
Night at the Museum 2 was as good as Night at the Museum 1 in terms of entertainment and humor. Ending was kind of lame, but the Smithsonian rocked and that was expected.
Next.
Momma Mia.
Also, Netflix is running a lot of instant queue'ing for Akira Kurosawa like Rashomon, Seventh Samurai, Ikiru, etc. if anyone is interested.
-
It's because the director of that movie is apparently named Steve McQueen, which is also the name of a cool actor from the sixties (who is now dead). Watch The Great Escape.
-
Steve McQueen died from being too badass. (Lung Cancer from contracted from wearing an asbestos suit while racing his many, many cars.)
-
Guess I didn't get it. :P
Wiki'd it and now I do. Huh, never even knew who this guy was. But this is coming from someone who doesn't really care about names unless it's something I really like. Obviously I just haven't seen it. Great Escape will be added once it's on IQ.
-
Great Escape is fantastic and McQueen was the man.
Alice in Wonderland - Went and watched it in 3D to see how that goes with my vision impairment. It kind of works but makes me sick in the stomach, glad I hadn't eaten that day. Still stand by the movie is worth watching for the LSD and pffft Alice.
Men Who Stare At Goats - This is awesome and you should watch it. A bit of Three Kings a touch of Big Lebowski and just a whole lot of fun. George Clooney is a Jedi trained by Jeff Bridges and he is on a secret mission in Iraq with Ewan McGregor along for the ride. This is awesome and the actual plot synopsis.
-
Charlie Bartlett- Kinda saccharine, kinda squanders a lot of good potential, but still really enjoyable. Drunken Robert Downey Jr. never hurts either.
-
Screw how deep a movie is.
Mamma Mia! was hilarious.
5/5
Mamma Mia~ Here I go agaa~ain, my my, how can I resist you~~~~~~?
-
Screw how deep a movie is.
Mamma Mia! was hilarious.
5/5
Mamma Mia~ Here I go agaa~ain, my my, how can I resist you~~~~~~?
/me facepalms.
Not at you, just at your tastes.
-
Not at you, just at your tastes.
I'm not angry. Just disappointed.
-
Disappointed in your taste.
Chicago is far better.
-
Screw how deep a movie is.
Mamma Mia! was hilarious.
5/5
Mamma Mia~ Here I go agaa~ain, my my, how can I resist you~~~~~~?
HELL YES, MAMA MIA IS THE BEST MOVIE EVER!
(I think I might be serious--certainly the movie I enjoyed the most).
-
Hey. Mamma Mia is frickin sweet. I haven't seen Chicago yet. But supposedly Mamma Mia!'s faired better revenue-wise, keeping in mind the MM is newer and Chicago is older. Isn't there a new Chicago or a new dvd set?
Good Hair - 4/5.
Ah. A movie I can identify with. Hilarious though - everything I talk about in my day-to-day activities. Noticed a lack of light-skinned girls and the perspective of dark skinned girls being emphasized. 'Tis fine. I am dark. Was going to watch this with my boyfriend so he could stop asking me questions about weaves, perms, braids, cornrows, etc. etc. but apparently I called his job when he was doing some kinda test and pissed him off. Oh well. Off to Netflix!
-
Zombieland: Trips plays Woody Harrelson, Super plays a little girl, and Melee weapons are broken.
Also don't run ahead and start the horde event in Dark Carnival 2 what the hell is wrong with you.
-
Dibs on being Bill Murray, then.
-
BILL. FUCKING. MURRAY.
Possibly the best Bill Murray cameo to date.
-
She's outta your league: 3/5: Had it's funny moments... but also had it's dumb fuck moments... the end makes it lose half a point
Hot Tub Time Machine: 3.5/5.: Funny...but too man type casted characters. Be original comedies...
Battle of the Titans: 3/5: Badass fighting... BUT ZERO FUCKING TITANS IN THE MOVIE. HOW DO YOU HAVE A BATTLE OF THE TITANS WITH ZERO TITANS...
-
Hot Tub Time Machine: 3.5/5.: Funny...but too man type casted characters. Be original comedies...
What do you mean by "Man type casted"?
-
I don't know but it sounds hot. Also it is an 80s movie, of course everyone is type cast.
Shutter Island - I am late off the boat on this one but WATCH THIS MOVIE WATCH THIS MOVIE WATCH THIS MOVIE. Scorsese fucking owns me. I was going into it fairly tentative. A trailer for Kick Ass really killed the mood a little at the start (Seriously Cinema dudes, don't fucking lead into Scorsese off "It is shaped like a big cock"), but cryptic mystary stuff and I was happy just to get some great cinematography out of it even if I didn't like the movie. Then it got going full swing and wow. You can see the main twist pretty early on and be right, but they play the whole movie so straight they will keep you guessing the whole time. Just awesome awesome cinema. I have been saying that a lot lately, but this is totally true, great year for me and cinema so far even with everything coming out on 3D.
-
Percy Jackson and the Olympians: Generic children's stuff. Female lead is terrible. Hades and Persephone were fun though.
How to Train your Dragon: Quite good actually. Much better dragon-riding movie than Avatar at least.
-
Princess and the Frog: Finally got around to seeing this.
Honestly? Its kind of boring and slow moving, and didn't really emulate what made the 90s Animated Disney movies great. The humor wasn't as consistent or fresh (felt like they were trying too hard most of the time), songs are completely immemorable, and the formula was old.
Note that I didn't see Pochahantas (SP?) or Hunchback of Notre Dam, though it sounds like those two were a considerable step down compared to the other movies of the era (and the fact that Kingdom Hearts has barely even acknowledged their existence thus far can't be a good sign), so I can't comment on those. Still, just about all the main animated (2D) Disney movies of the 90s except maybe Tarzan were fun quality stuff. Princess and the Frog felt like it was trying to emulate that, only now with better animation and technology for some more impressive visuals, which I'll grant was actually pretty good, but they fell short as they really missed what made those 90s classics good.
Should note that I think those 90s Disney Movies are the highlight of Disney Animated movies (starting with Little Mermaid, at least); all the ones before really lack something for whatever reason. From what I can remember, their idea of comic relief was for the most part "Cute animals/characters who are just 'aw' inducing" to lighten the mood rather than being genuinely funny, thus entertainment wasn't nearly as high. There is one big exception in the mix, and that's Sword and the Stone, which is just awesome, my only regret is not seeing that movie ENOUGH! (I've watched a bunch of the others a shit load of times, Sword and the Stone I've seen scattered a few times throughout my life, and like only once from start to end.)
So yeah, back to the movie at question, felt like it tried to bring back what made those movies from a decade ago awesome and...didn't really succeed. Honestly, felt like Little Mermaid Redux at times, only slower moving, worse music, and the characters were frogs most of the movie!
-
Thirst - 3/5. Realized this was by Wook after all of the very odd psychological stuff started happening.
Ong Bak 2 - 4/5. Ending confused me due to lack of education about a lot of the religious aspects. Awesome action. Expected.
Gremlins 2 - lol. That's the rating. Very witty movie. 3/5.
The Usual Suspects - 4/5.
Shrink -3/5.
Haven't been able to watch many movies. Fail.
-
Cannibal! The Musical - It's on Hulu now so I watched it. Heh, all the Indians were Japanese people.
"What tribe is this?"
"We are... Indians!"
"Well, yeah, but..."
"What, you don't believe that we are... Indians? Of course we are. We have so many Teepees. Look at all the Teepees we have."
-
Been on a theater binge via ultimate boredom.
She's Outta My(Your?) League: 5.5/10- It was... entertaining some of the time, but the pacing was pretty lame. Loses about 2 points for the final scenes in the airport, which was fucking stupid. Yes, it's a silly comedy but after having "somewhat real" scenarios happen during the move, you can't just end with a scene that would get most of the characters arrested 1280312831208 times each.
Hot Tub Time Machine: 6.5/10- Funnier than She's Outta, but still pretty generic in the humor. Token black guy, kid who wants to be a kid from Superbad, token asshole, and the main that is supposed to make it all work. Rgr rgr rgr. Regardless, kept me entertained most of the time.
Clash of the Titans: 6.5/10- Odd title for a movie with ZERO fucking Titans in it. Didn't see it in 3D, but it was entertaining for the most part. Bit of advice though. If you go see this, go expecting some action and a complete lack of a plot. After thinking about this movie I realized it actually sucked beyond belief. Poor/no character development, epic plot holes, and so on. But since I went in just looking to see shit get killed, this didn't bother me during the movie. If I had gone in expecting a real movie, proly woulda been like a 3/10.
-
Gremlins 2
So good!
"Casablanca...colorized! With a new happy ending!"
-
Plus the awesome Hulk Hogan cameo.
-
Plus the awesome Hulk Hogan cameo.
Supposedly, in the theaters, there were 3 variants of that cameo. One with Hulk Hogan (which was the one released to video and such), one with John Wayne and one with...forget the 3rd guy. I can't verify this, but my friend insists that this was the case.
-
I'm pretty sure John Wayne died in the seventies.
*checks*
1979. I think your friend heard some silly rumor and didn't bother to check it. (This seriously reminds me of one of those stupid urban legends you'd hear in elementary school. Like, someone's NES glitched out while playing SMB3 and YOSHI made a cameo or something, it only happened once and no one was there to see it but it really happened, totally!)
I remember Gremlins 2 faring much better than most unplanned sequels do, but I haven't watched it since like middle school. Suppose I'm due for another viewing.
Oh yeah, I watch stuff too.
The Men Who Stare at Goats: Not as enamored of it as Grefter was, but it was fun. Certainly the best use of Boston ever.
-
Hmm...apparently, this is actually the case:
At one point in the film, Dante attempted to involve his audience in the story by making it seem as if the gremlins had taken control of whatever theatre wherein Gremlins 2 would feature. The film seems to be broken by the gremlins, who then engage in shadow puppetry over a white screen. Professional wrestler Hulk Hogan then appears in a cameo appearance and intimidates the gremlins into running the rest of Gremlins 2; this joke was inspired by a similar stunt in William Castle's film The Tingler (1959). The studio feared that people might leave the theater if they thought the film had broken; Dante therefore secured the inclusion of the sequence by assembling some people for a preview of the film. When the scene was shown, the real-life audience found it enjoyable and stayed in the theatre. Dante later described this scene as one of the most widely enjoyed jokes in Gremlins 2. When Gremlins 2 made its debut on home video, the filmmakers altered the scene, to make it seem as if VCRs had been broken by the gremlins. This time actor John Wayne forces the gremlins into continuing the film, although voice impersonation was needed since Wayne had been dead since 1979.[3] Notably, a clip from Falling Hare, a film released in 1943 featuring Bugs Bunny and a gremlin, appears in this version.
Bolded part is the significant stuff.
So yeah, seems like there is some truth to this claim.
-
That's funny. I watched a DVD of it a few years back and it was certainly the Hulk Hogan version.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCC5C5n6_PE
Well there ya go. I remember watching a rental of it back in the VHS days and seeing the Hulk Hogan version too, but this doesn't exactly look cobbled together so it must've been released this way somewhere.
-
Randomly re-watched the Little Mermaid. Superb characters, but the movie as a whole was really not as good as I remember it being.
Definitely some failure of suspension of disbelief moments--like the "kiss the girl" scene--Sebastian's singing for the benefit of Price Dude (who has a name, but less personality than his dog, so I'll just call him Prince Dude). This all implies that either Prince Dude understands Sebastian, or that it's the equivalent of Sebastian yelling at the movie screen "NO, DON'T GO DOWN THERE" to characters that obviously can't hear him. Okay, the second option seems a lot more sane, let's go with that. But then when Prince Dude is trying to guess Ariel's name, Sebastian whispers her name to him. Okay, so much for the logical option, I guess that means Prince Dude understands Sebastian. Which brings up an interesting question--why isn't he freaking out that the entire swamp has broken into song around him? Or is he used to hearing random songs break out in his near vicinity apparently about him when he thinks he's totally alone? 'Cause that would freak me out. And speaking of being able to understand Sebastian, why doesn't Sebastian explain the situation rather than have Ariel pantomime stuff? Okay, maybe he wants to keep hidden, but he could be the disembodied voice of suggestion that speaks to Prince Dude while he sleeps.
I also couldn't help but feel that despite having a female main, and a female villain, that the cast felt male-dominated. Ariel talks less than...all the major characters she interacts with (Flounder, Sebastian, Triton, Scuttle) and that's when she does have her voice. Ursula, has few scenes, and comes across as a creepy gender neutral in her scenes, at least in voice (which is a fantastic fit for the character, to be fair). I dunno, it's something I've been noticing recently--listening to radio, flipping through TV channels--if someone's talking, they're male 75% of the time. Not that you can't have a brilliant movie of all-male characters (Inglorious Basterds jumps to mind as coming close) but, it's just...I was expecting the Little Mermaid to buck the predominant trend (seems reasonable given the two most memorable characters are female), and...it really doesn't.
-
It is Disney girl, it does not buck trends and it certainly still doesn't do a great many favours to feminism and it most definitely wasn't doing it any around the time of Little Mermaid. Ursula sounds like a dude because she is modelled after a drag queen (obvious statement). Although yes the central points of the entire plot that is chock full of females is a Prince and Triton's rather large triple pronged weapon. Welcome to Disney.
Inglorious Basterds comes close? You wound my heart with such words. Next you will say Robert Downey Jr is just kind of alright at playing a toked up drunkard.
And El Cid, Men Who Stare At Goats is someone making movies just for me, so yeah, I wouldn't expect others to be quite as enthralled by it. Well worth a watch even if you aren't quite as into that whole kind of deal though. Edit - Wow, checking what I originally posted it wasn't even quite as glowing a review of it as I have been giving it in person and you still picked that. Suffice to say, I fucking loved that movie.
-
That's funny. I watched a DVD of it a few years back and it was certainly the Hulk Hogan version.
Yes, "DVD" is not "VHS", so that doesn't exactly disprove anything. DVDs are noteworthy for often doing things as they were in the theatres, or sometimes using versions never before seen at all, or what have you. Basing a VHS off the DVD version is basically poor idea.
I've only seen the Hulk Hogan version, but the only way I saw the movie was through HBO or whatever, and we just recorded the movie that way, so never saw the official VHS release, so I can't verify it.
My guess is the original VHS had the John Wayne version, then a later version of the VHS came out having the Hulk Hogan version like the theaters initially had, and all subsequent versions had the original Hulk Hogan version, meaning finding the ones with John Wayne would be really hard. Like CK said, the Youtube vid doesn't seem like an amateur, cobbled together thing, so it probably was released in someway somewhere. My guess it was in the initial release only and after a point, they released the version with Hulk Hogan and they just kept it that way.
-
Inglorious Basterds comes close? You wound my heart with such words. Next you will say Robert Downey Jr is just kind of alright at playing a toked up drunkard.
Umm...what I meant was that "Inglorious Basterds is an awesome movie that comes close to having no females." Inglorious Basterds does not, in fact, have all male characters--there's jewgirl, who could be argued to be the main character, and British spygirl who has one scene but it sets up the whole endgame.
-
Yeah. On TV the version thats always shown is the Hulk Hogan one.
And another amazing movie with no females? Glengarry Glenross.
-
Chocolate: A Thai movie about an autistic girl who for no apparent reason has the power to instantly master martial arts by watching them on TV. She uses this power to go around beating the shit out of gangsters until they give her money. It is fantastic.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCC5C5n6_PE
Well there ya go. I remember watching a rental of it back in the VHS days and seeing the Hulk Hogan version too, but this doesn't exactly look cobbled together so it must've been released this way somewhere.
I stand corrected. I'd be surprised if the DVD version doesn't have the alternate scene as an extra, actually.
-
MC I can think of a few movies with no males, but I'm not sure if any are family friendly...
-
Or is he used to hearing random songs break out in his near vicinity apparently about him when he thinks he's totally alone?
He's in a Disney movie. I'd suggest that he is, in fact, used to it.
Also, I don't even remember who Scuttle is and I watched that movie way too many times as a kid, so I'm not really sold on him being more important than Ariel/Ursula. <.< Overall seconding Grefter (although: Mulan hype here) but yeah.
-
He's the seagull.
I dunno, Little Mermaid struck me as fairly anti-female by necessity due to... well, the whole premise being a shallow love affair to start with. I feel like the other disney of the era is considerably better? But my perspective isn't exactly the same as yours, of course. Certainly despite being a better movie on the character front you'd find a fairly lopsided gender split in dialogue in Beauty and the Beast too.
-
It's Disney. They're all about reinforcing Fundie morals You know, "Hate some Jews!!!!"
-
Also, I don't even remember who Scuttle is and I watched that movie way too many times as a kid, so I'm not really sold on him being more important than Ariel/Ursula. <.< Overall seconding Grefter (although: Mulan hype here) but yeah.
Oh, Ursula/Ariel are the two most plot-important characters by FAR. Just...there's a lot of characters around them who won't shut up and therefore get more lines whenever they have a shared scene. Granted, any one supporting character may get fewer total lines because they don't have a lot of scenes (like Scuttle the seagull). It's mostly a comment on "nearly every scene in the movie has a male character who does a lot more talking than Ariel."
dunno, Little Mermaid struck me as fairly anti-female by necessity due to... well, the whole premise being a shallow love affair to start with.
Anti-female and lacking in female voices...don't imply each other in the slightest. You can have lots of female characters and be anti-female. You can have few female characters and be pro-female.
And...honestly? I'm fine with having some ditzy female characters. I mean, it's not like the "stupid male henchemen" stereotype hasn't been beaten to death. Honestly, feminist-approved characters are nice and all that...but just because a character isn't an amazing-role-model physicist doesn't mean you shouldn't make her female.
-
Umm...what I meant was that "Inglorious Basterds is an awesome movie that comes close to having no females." Inglorious Basterds does not, in fact, have all male characters--there's jewgirl, who could be argued to be the main character, and British spygirl who has one scene but it sets up the whole endgame.
Ahhh alright then, Von Hammersmark is German double agent, not Brittish spy girl and she has a good 3 solid scenes, the bar where she gets shot and two interrogations one with Brad Pitt jamming his finger into her wound and the one with Colonel Landa which leads to her strangling. Shoshanna of course has far more scenes than that and while not as great as the other Actress is very good and far more central to the plot than Von Hammersmark is. At the end of the day everyone in that theater was dead with or without the bombs because of Shoshanna and Marcel, but I don't need to lecture you on this when I am agreeing with you, it is just a film that I have watched and analysed a bit overly much, but so long as it is clear that we agree the movie is awesome.
And...honestly? I'm fine with having some ditzy female characters. I mean, it's not like the "stupid male henchemen" stereotype hasn't been beaten to death. Honestly, feminist-approved characters are nice and all that...but just because a character isn't an amazing-role-model physicist doesn't mean you shouldn't make her female.
I think I speak for everyone here when I say that I am thoroughly sick of ditzy big breasted females in movies and they should all be replaced by Andrew (with big breasts).
Edit - I think that you miss one of the issues though mc in that you can be amazingly anti-female with a cast of lots of females by having no female voice at all. They may not imply each other, but when you do one poorly it really speaks a lot for the other. A movie with a strong female voice and a small female cast tends to be a really damn well made movie (potentially none if you have a fucking amazing movie). It isn't necessarilly causal relationship and what you can say about one doesn't mean a lot for the other, but they do have a very strong relationship.
-
The breasts do make the cabana boy.
-
Regarding TLM being anti-female... well, yeah, it kind of is. Let's face it, when the first non-intro song is pretty much "Our dad is so great, look at us being pretty and singing", you know what you're getting into. Ariel comes across a lot better in the TV series (especially since there's no Eric to basically derail her focus).
And you know, I was going to counter Gref's Disney misogyny claim, but I really only came up with three or four decently interesting female characters with presence in prior TLM features. (For the record, my list: Malificent, Cruella Deville, Madam Mim (notice a trend?), maybe Miss Bianca. If I was including mixed live action/animated, Mary Poppins and possibly Jessica Rabbit).
-
Edit - I think that you miss one of the issues though mc in that you can be amazingly anti-female with a cast of lots of females by having no female voice at all. They may not imply each other, but when you do one poorly it really speaks a lot for the other. A movie with a strong female voice and a small female cast tends to be a really damn well made movie (potentially none if you have a fucking amazing movie). It isn't necessarilly causal relationship and what you can say about one doesn't mean a lot for the other, but they do have a very strong relationship.
I'm pretty sure I said exactly that in my post. *checks* yes, yes I did:
"Anti-female and lacking in female voices...don't imply each other in the slightest. You can have lots of female characters and be anti-female. You can have few female characters and be pro-female." ~me
I think you missed what I was saying, which is that I'm happy to go for quantity over quality. We've all seen a dozen movies where there's one token, strong female character who is a Ninja, and a Computer Hacker, and a Medical Doctor. Those movies where there's 10 males, and 1 super-competent female. I'd be perfectly happy to keep the same plot and swap the genders here--10 females and 1 super-competent male. I'm fairly sure people would call this misogynistic, and I'm also fairly sure I don't care and would enjoy the movie quite a bit.
I think I speak for everyone here when I say that I am thoroughly sick of ditzy big breasted females in movies and they should all be replaced by Andrew (with big breasts).
You can have idiot female characters without them having big breasts--Twilight proves this.
-
Gonna second Mulan here. She is like the only competent character in the entire movie. Every male character basically fails. (Been a while so forgive me if I leave someone/something out.)
Dragon- I think they specify that he is a failure of a dragon
Other soliders- All textbook comic relief dumbshit dunces
Training dude- I believe he was competent... to the point that he could train Mulan, but he didn't do shit to stop the bad guys.
Bad guy- He seems competent because he manages to take over the city with like 8 people or something, but he also loses his entire fucking army to Mulan. So despite his moments of glory, he still fails for letting thousands of men get owned by an avalanche.
-
You said that they don't imply each other and state how the counter can happen, but that very thing can imply a relationship between the two, it just happens to speak strongly about the quality of a movie more than anything particular about feminism.
Regarding Mulan, a female character sacrifices herself to protect the central male figure in her life through deceit and cunning all the while being helped by the male guardian spirit of her ancestors. In the process of protecting her father to make time she pines for the first strong male figure to enter her life. She then gets discovered as a female and banished from the army as a deviant and told never to come back in spite of proving to be quite capable. Apparently there is then a discussion about how doing this was to prove that she could finally do something right (because she never could have before by being female, she had to be a MAN to do something right). Then the Huns attack and everyone proceeds to ignore her warnings because hey she is just a girl. The Huns sneak in to the palace and hold everyone hostage, so again the female is off to save the day through deceipt and general trickery. She saves the day and then turns down any offers of power or positions of respect to go back home to her strong male figure (Father) and gets followed home by First strong male figure she came accross and they presumably live happilly ever after. Now I quote Wikipedia on this with what seems to be a direct quote Shang, having been advised by the Emperor that 'you don't meet a girl like that every dynasty,' reminding us that being a competant female is truely exceptional.
Yeah I am not exactly holding this up as an amazing banner of progressive entertainment. Also of note, this was a good 9 years after Little Mermaid came out and I was specifically noting that up to that point Disney certainly wasn't winning anyone over in the Feminism department. So go Disney you went a long way in a decade, good work. Even worse is that is the best example you have and that was twelve years ago. What have we had since? Line after line of PRINCESS DREAM PINK FAIRY HEARTS HEARTS HEARTS merchandise. Nice to know they are keeping it on the bleeding edge 40 years on since the Second Wave happened. 30 years after it started we got the story of how once there was this really rad chick in China, now she is part of that Disney Princess line so we can watch her dress up and prepare for tea parties. You know. Just like in the movie.
Edit - This isn't to say it is a bad movie, it is just another movie that is focussed on females in relation to the males that define their story, this is not exactly rare in entertainment in general. Just saying it is no Vagina Monolgues or something.
-
I love what Grefter has said. Also part of the issue with defining main female characters through their relationships with males probably stems from Disney's focus on princess or princess-like stories. I rarely see vice versa in Disney movies. A great movie that shows the characterization of a female unusual to animation films for me is Coraline. Good stuff. Watch it.
-
Met the dude who made Coraline a while back. Got a ton of directorial freedom because he was playing with his own money.
-
7 Pounds - 5/5.
Will Smith is consistently doing amazing movies. Apparently the movie was not well received in box office standings, but I don't really give a shit about that. This is an extremely vivid and corporeal sentimental movie that is methodically engaging. It amazes me because it's not one of those fantastical movies with random shoot-em ups, or time loops or any other odd unquantifiable thing. The experience was so real. The character relationships (besides his brother) were pertinent to the overarching theme of repentance, and the inconsistent use of time for storytelling made the execution of the storyline a bit more intriguing. I don't like being spoon fed in my movies, and despite the possibility of its predictability (Uh, who could deduce the ending from the first 40 minutes even?), even knowing the outcome helps establish a deeper connection between the characters. A very, very good movie. It's on a different level that the Pursuit of Happyness, where essentially the outcome results in success and 7 Pounds is more of an internal remorse/bliss combination for all the characters involved. I did not particularly like the scenes with his brother, but I believe his brother's role was primarily one to add one more dimension of depth that Will Smith's character derives inspiration from and the measures he would take to execute it. That is all.
-
Regarding Mulan, a female character sacrifices herself to protect the central male figure in her life through deceit and cunning all the while being helped by the male guardian spirit of her ancestors. In the process of protecting her father to make time she pines for the first strong male figure to enter her life. She then gets discovered as a female and banished from the army as a deviant and told never to come back in spite of proving to be quite capable. Apparently there is then a discussion about how doing this was to prove that she could finally do something right (because she never could have before by being female, she had to be a MAN to do something right). Then the Huns attack and everyone proceeds to ignore her warnings because hey she is just a girl. The Huns sneak in to the palace and hold everyone hostage, so again the female is off to save the day through deceipt and general trickery. She saves the day and then turns down any offers of power or positions of respect to go back home to her strong male figure (Father) and gets followed home by First strong male figure she came accross and they presumably live happilly ever after. Now I quote Wikipedia on this with what seems to be a direct quote Shang, having been advised by the Emperor that 'you don't meet a girl like that every dynasty,' reminding us that being a competant female is truely exceptional.
Yeah I am not exactly holding this up as an amazing banner of progressive entertainment.
See, I see that film a bit differently.
The military draft comes for an old cripple who can barely walk, demonstrating the stupidity of a male-only draft. Mulan, who is quite obviously the better candidate, sees the stupidity in this rule and goes in his place.
The male guardian of their ancestors that they send is completely useless--can't tell the difference between a horse and a cow, gets her caught cheating during training when she had done no such thing, advises her to punch a guy in the back of the head and then slap him on the behind and then yells insults to him causing her to make enemies and get in a fight the moment she walks onto the camp, and later lights a firecracker alerting the enemy to their position. Basically he's more of a hinderance. I wouldn't read too much into the fact that at first she's fooled into following his advice--even in 19th century England, men and women didn't talk too much, and if they did they were expected to get married (one of the culturally weirder parts of Jane Austen books to me).
Despite the adversity, Mulan is soon the head of the class. They move out (because the male guardian forges orders) and she makes the smart tactical decision to cause an avalance. All this causes the commanding officer to say "Ping, you have earned my trust."
Side note: I wouldn't say she pines over the first male figure in her life--she denies liking him, and she never has a moment where she says "oh my god he's hot" even when she's alone. Arguably her actions betray her somewhat, but not to the point that any of the other soldiers notice (they don't even call her a suck-up).
So...anyway, they discover her gender, and go "OH MY GOD HE'S A TRANNY! By law all trannies must be put to death!!!" and the commander responds "No, a life for a life, I'm not going to kill someone who saved me. But I'm no longer sure I can trust you."
Then we come to perhaps the most interesting conversation in the movie. "Maybe I didn't do it for my father. Maybe I did it for myself, because I never fit in as a woman. Maybe I hoped I'd fit in as a man, but I was wrong." *cries* (Or to translate: maybe Mulan really IS a tranny). The male guardian tries to cheer Mulan up by showing her the female reflection and saying "look, you're pretty," at which point Mulan turns away (oh my god he IS a tranny!) So...then Mulan sees six huns pop out of the snow (compared to the millions that arrived) sees them walking towards the city of a million people and thinks "Oh I will need to personally fight them off! I can postpone going back to my hated female life! Hell yes!"
So anyway...the remaining soldiers arrive in the capital, all looking horribly downtrodden and guilty for losing Mulan. On hearing Mulan's voice, the captain immediately responds with a hopeful "Mulan?" (Note that he has only heard this name exactly once). Before changing his tone to "Oh fuck, dude, you shouldn't be here I was supposed to kill you. Get lost." So Mulan's like "I saw huns in the mountain, trust me." And he's like "Why should I trust you? You deceived me the entire time I knew you."
Mulan goes up to some total strangers in the crowd and says things like (direct quote from the movie) "Please sir, you have to help me," in a large city...and gets predictable "don't touch me" results. The incompetent male guardian chalks this up to sexism and laments the unequal treatment of women.
So...Mulan is proven right, and somehow in a crowded square, six huns take the emperor hostage. The Captain and his crew try to break down the door, Mulan sees the strategy they're using, and decides that it's going to take too much time. She determines that the best way to speed things up is to use more trannies! So she gets three of the men to crossdress (including applying full makeup) as part of her "faster" solution. Naturally this fits these "men" psychologically to a T, and one of the soldiers asks "does this dress make me look fat?" Also, they all seem to know how to walk...and kick in a full length dress.
Natrually the trannies singlehandedly take out all the guards, but then they send in the only non-tranny in their group, and he gets knocked out. So Mulan stays behind to make sure he doesn't die and to make sure the hun can't follow the group with the emperor. Before proceeding to kill the hun using inferior weaponry, Mulan makes sure the hun knows that they've met before, and knows that Mulan is really a boy inside.
So anyway, once the hun is dead, the emperor makes this speech "I've heard a great deal about you Faa Mulan. You stole your father's clothing. Ran away from home. Started living full-time as a man. Became so successful in your new life that not even your commanding officer suspected. Oh, and I guess you also blew up my palace, broke the anti-tranny laws, and saved everyone in China. Whatever, you're a totally awesome tranny, and I'm going to bow to you now."
The Emperor offers Mulan a position in the council, but makes the mistake of calling Mulan a woman. Mulan politely declines making up some excuse about seeing family. So he insists Mulan at least take a medal, to get some level of family respect instead of the original hated life. Mulan hugs the emperor, the other soldiers hug Mulan, then the captain...holds back from hugging and says "uhh umm uhh...you're a good fighter?" Mulan's like "dude wtf?" and walks off.
So the emperor goes up to the Captain and makes the comment "the flower that blooms in adversity is the rarest of them all." And the captain's like "Sir?" And the emperor's like "Dude, that's like a slave from Georgia becoming a Shakespeare-level playwright. Hey, did you know we normally kill trannies in Ancient China? Funny story..."
So Mulan goes back to the old female life, goes up to her father and says "look, I know I'm a tranny and stuff, but hey, I got the sword of the kingdom and the medal of the emperor. Please don't reject me for being a tranny." And her father's like "the greatest gift and honour, is having you for a daughter." (At this point, Mulan's probably thinking "thank god he didn't disown me, because if this movie were at all realistic, that was highly probable.")
So...the lovesick captain follows Mulan home, but on seeing Mulan, loses all coherency again and says "you forgot your helmet. Wait, I guess it's your...hemlet...oh my god trannies make me so confused!" Mulan takes charge (the first actual move she's made on him) and says "do you want to stay for dinner?" Might as well keep reminders of the old male life nearby.
The moral of this story is that trannies save kingdoms. The more trannies the better. Also, parents shouldn't reject their kids for being a tranny, and you shouldn't mistrust someone for being a tranny.
-
Of course Trannies solve all your problems, but you are still showing the heart of the story as "It is awesome to be a dude, you get to puch guys and not be scared of anything".
-
The moral of the story is that any time you dress up as the opposite gender, you are going to be better than everyone of that gender. Any dude is one bad wig, two bags of sand and a soccer game away from winning woman of the year.
-
"It is awesome to be a dude, you get to puch guys and not be scared of anything".
That sounds like something a transman would say!
-
Exactly! Even if you don't take it negatively it is still an incredibly masculine movie.
-
That's because being a dude IS awesome. Making a movie about how being a dude is awesome is like making a movie about how hot sauce is awesome. Your audience just sits there and says "yeah, and?"
-
How to Train a Dragon: Being a fan of dragons and Mandy basically begging me to take her see it, I really didn't have an excuse, did I? Anyway, movie was entertaining at least, though I went in expecting a more Humor based movie rather than one of those "Cute, makes you feel good" movies; obviously knew it was intended for more general audiences of course, being a family movie does that! This isn't to say the movie didn't have its funny moments, but felt more like it was trying to get you to smile rather than laugh your ass off, if that makes sense; the trailers of the movie I saw seemed to imply the complete opposite go figure! Anyway, not bad for what it is, albeit, its predictable as all like all these movies.
Clash of the Titans: By this, I mean I saw the ORIGINAL from...whenever that movie was made, the one from decades ago! I had seen this movie a few times when I was younger and didn't really grasp it beyond "oooh, monsters!", saw it again once years later when I actually knew stuff about mythology, but only caught the second half. Finally seeing it again...its still enjoyable stuff. I must say, the special effects in that movie are bad ass considering they're Stop Motion effect for the most part. I say 'For the most part", cause I know there are some close up shows that scream "Lifesize model made here" and sometimes, there was obvious real actors in make up. These are by no means a bad thing mind, regarding using some other techniques alongside stop motion; you have to use what looks good, and always using blue screened miniatures supersized doesn't work for some shots, so you go with what looks best and generally movie did that, so yeah, that's all well and cool.
Why didn't I just see the remake? Well, mostly cause Mandy wanted to see the remake and I told her she never saw the original and probably should, and my parents agreed, and yeah, got her to watch that instead (it also cost less.) She enjoyed it, though she also immediately asked at the end "Why is it called Clash of the Titans when there are no titans!?"
But yeah, wasn't sure how I'd like the movie seeing as an adult now, nor how it'd stand the test of time. Considering everything these days is COMPUTER ANIMATED!!! (for all that I totally understand why, and don't think that's necessarily a bad thing), the fact that the movie still looks pretty damn good on its special effects is pretty telling.
-
There is no better argument for special effects the old way than the first minute or so of Bladerunner. The flying car coming in to land in the smog-filled city, and it backfires and spewing out a ton of real smoke is the kind of atmospheric (no pun intended) setup you can only get by using real props.
-
That's because being a dude IS awesome.
Frankly, I don't see the appeal.
I mean really, why would I want to punch someone? I'd rather be able to look at a baby without the mother shielding the baby from view. I'd rather be able to wear interesting clothing without bearing the judgment of society. I'd rather have other women willing to engage me in conversation at a bus stop. I'd rather be allowed to touch someone for emotional emphasis without people freaking out about boundaries. If I have a klutzy moment where, for example, I trip while crossing the street, I'd rather have people think "oh, she looks like she could use some help" rather than "LOL, n00b pwned himself; commence mockery; do not assist."
I mean...I'm a programmer. Other than opening jars and carrying groceries, I'm not sure when I would even use physical strength if I had it. And realistically, male or female if you want to punch people, you should probably take up Boxing.
-
You have a very strange view of what being a guy is like, but that doesn't surprise me at all.
-
Hmm...actually, that brings up a fascinating question--just how little DO I know about being male?
I honestly doubt I can answer that question myself. Umm...Grefter: let's suppose you were a college professor teaching a course on knowing what it's like to be male. What grade would you give me?
-
I am terrible at being male and I like it that way. :D Being a female freaking rules.
-
Erm... Just to chime in, can't recall the last time I wanted to punch anyone, at least seriously. And I don't think mothers ever hide their babies from me. The rest, can't say since they never really occur to me as things to want or not want.
-
Hmm...actually, that brings up a fascinating question--just how little DO I know about being male?
I honestly doubt I can answer that question myself. Umm...Grefter: let's suppose you were a college professor teaching a course on knowing what it's like to be male. What grade would you give me?
Well, just off the top of my head, I don't think I've ever been in an elevator with someone with a baby, turned and said, "Hey, is that your kid?" you know, as polite conversation, and had them freak out. Usually the response is "yes," unless it is not their kid, in which case the answer is no.
As far as touching another person goes? It's not about what you do, it's WHERE you do it. You don't touch a dude on the leg, just like you don't slap a woman on the tit.
-
Hmm...actually, that brings up a fascinating question--just how little DO I know about being male?
I honestly doubt I can answer that question myself. Umm...Grefter: let's suppose you were a college professor teaching a course on knowing what it's like to be male. What grade would you give me?
To be fair, you know ABOUT being a male, you just don't like it/understand the appeal.
-
Yeah Sopko pretty much got it on the nose, you demonstrate a basic understanding of the subject matter and can quite clearly stick closely enough to the Style to not lose marks, but your lack of interest in the subject prevents you from forming a clearly extension of the concepts into more complex forms truely needed to excel in this class. Also your attedance is way down and we have to dock marks for low attendance and not being able to participate in the Tutorials. You get a technical pass with a 4/10, but if you get more than 2 more they cannot count towards your degree.
Ciato on the other hand, in spite of claims of not being interested in the subject matter, listens to extra curricular supplements all about Dance, Fire and Lesbian Witches being trapped into putting on performances for the coast guard after a Police crime wave lapsed its protection when they could not make the payments required by the Chief of Police. So Ciato gets a 7/10.
-
but your lack of interest in the subject prevents you from forming a clearly extension of the concepts into more complex forms truely needed to excel in this class.
In all seriousness, I wouldn't say I'm completely uninterested in the subject. I sought out and read a book over Christmas for understanding men in the workplace, and what they're actually thinking in certain situations that women don't know about. I found the book pretty informative. (About half the stuff in the book really was news to me).
-
The Wood - An old movie that is still one of those movies that reminds me of me and my friends growing up.
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective - Lots of sexual innuendos I did not catch when I was younger. Still funny, and gets bonus points for Marino and having the Dolphins in the Superbowl. <3
The Proposal - Kinda cute, but seemed rushed or sloppy most of the time.
Clash of the Titans 3D - The 3D parts didn't seem to jump out at all. the again we were sitting kinda far back. Then again, this was the first 3D movie I have seen in a theater....ever? Movie was ok, nothing amazing, but not cringe worthy either.
Why Did I Get Married - I think this was my first Tyler Perry movie I had ever seen. Decent enough. Watched this so I could go see...
Why Did I Get Married Too - This. Not as happy as the first movie and ends kinda messed up on a bunch of levels. Still it wasn't that bad.
The Count of Monte Cristo - Awesome. It's just that the book is ten times better.
Twilight - ... They fucking sparkle in sunlight?
Cowboy Bebop: Knocking on Heavens Door - And finally a movie I recommended! Spike is a bad ass.
~
Yeah, been watching a lot of movies. Most are little dinner dates at my girl's house. I wonder if you can guess which ones are my movies and which ones she wanted to see? heh
-
Twilight - ... They fucking sparkle in sunlight?
Yeah, the Twilight movie somehow manages to ruin the Twilight book. It's impressive--you'd think "how on earth can you get worse than the source material?" And yet they do! Significantly!
Worse special effects than most TV shows, bad actors, and some awful dialogue that wasn't even in the book. The movie also largely fails at portraying the badass side of Twilight vampires (I mean come on: they drink the blood of Grizzly Bears; how do you screw that up so badly?)
-
Ciato on the other hand, in spite of claims of not being interested in the subject matter, listens to extra curricular supplements all about Dance, Fire and Lesbian Witches being trapped into putting on performances for the coast guard after a Police crime wave lapsed its protection when they could not make the payments required by the Chief of Police. So Ciato gets a 7/10.
I have something better for you
Naked pictures of your mother.
-
Clash of the Titans 3D - The 3D parts didn't seem to jump out at all. the again we were sitting kinda far back. Then again, this was the first 3D movie I have seen in a theater....ever? Movie was ok, nothing amazing, but not cringe worthy either.
Twilight - ... They fucking sparkle in sunlight?
3D movies do not work the way you are expecting them to methinks. Look up the tech behind them a bit and you may enjoy them a bit more since you will know a bit more what to expect. I honestly don't know how much it enhances the experience anyway though.
And for serious? Was that a shock that they sparkle or shock at the bad effects? If it was the former, duuuude where have you been for the last couple of years?
Ciato, I see no reason for this to continue. I don't have anything else to put in you. Now go back home, girl, and do whatever it is that you do.
-
Raise the Red Lanterns - 3/5. I was very upset with the ending because there was no resolution, which I suppose the movie was going for. Just didn't like it. Gong Li is one of my favorite actresses and to see her performance at a young age shows how she's developed significantly in the field of drama. Premise of the movie was interesting. The lanterns were beautiful. Some things were rushed and it seemed like the movie was going at a slow pace, which didn't make any sense to begin with.
Gran Torino - 5/5. Despite people claiming this is still another example of Little Brown Brother being pulled up by his bootstraps and decadent old white man adding meaning to his life because of that, the movie was shot great. Dialogue was great. The level of the violence that it did have was good. Wished they would have perhaps developed his relationship with his sons more though - IE, his second son was only seen at his funeral. This movie portrays that asians are extremely patient people when it comes to racism . . . . the asians here will eff you up about as quickly as a black person. Granted, I guess there is some notability to that because I feel like discrimination for asians is more "acceptable" under a lot of cases, in the sense that people don't start to riot. This is a bad thing. Good movie either way.
-
Ciato on the other hand, in spite of claims of not being interested in the subject matter, listens to extra curricular supplements all about Dance, Fire and Lesbian Witches being trapped into putting on performances for the coast guard after a Police crime wave lapsed its protection when they could not make the payments required by the Chief of Police. So Ciato gets a 7/10.
I have something better for you
Naked pictures of your mother.
So that's where they went!
-
Well, like I said earlier I had never seen a movie in 3D before. Mainly because I wear contacts/glasses and would have to wear contacts to enjoy the 3D effects. Also, wearing those shades along with my contacts had always strained my eyes giving me mild headaches.
I didn't want to watch the movie in 3D, but the group I went with all insisted that 3D was the way to go. The reason I mention the sitting in the back as a reason for possibly not getting the full experience or whatever is because my friends, the ones i went with said the closer you sit the better the effects are. I hardly bother to look into things more then that.
That was all I knew going into watching the film. Mythology films entertain me a lot more then most people, so I did find the movie enjoyable. It could have used more Gods, but you know...Hollywood and what have you. Also, I had never seen the original.
-
The reason I mention the sitting in the back as a reason for possibly not getting the full experience or whatever is because my friends, the ones i went with said the closer you sit the better the effects are. I hardly bother to look into things more then that.
I dunno if that's true but it sounds plausible.
They project two images with polarized light (so if you have trouble holding your head straight, 3D won't work >_>. I've also known people whose glasses had some polarization for sun protection, and wore them under the 3D glasses; yeah, one of the eyes is basically just black). So...as far as closeness goes, I'm assuming both images are projected at the same angle (i.e. you don't have two screens, one facing slightly left and one facing slightly right) so the distance between the images is a constant distance set by the screen. And 5 inches on a screen is a lot larger of an effect when you're close than when you're far.
-
The reason I mention the sitting in the back as a reason for possibly not getting the full experience or whatever is because my friends, the ones i went with said the closer you sit the better the effects are. I hardly bother to look into things more then that.
I dunno if that's true but it sounds plausible.
They project two images with polarized light (so if you have trouble holding your head straight, 3D won't work >_>. I've also known people whose glasses had some polarization for sun protection, and wore them under the 3D glasses; yeah, one of the eyes is basically just black).
Huh really? That would explain why others were complaining of headaches when we watched 3D Avatar and I didn't have one.
-
Yeah stuff like that has a big effect on the way the 3D displays for you, unless your theater is really dodgey though seats at the back should be fine considering how much they have to pay for the silverised screens to display 3D on properly the whole thing is setup -specifically- for the theater (You don't spend that much on a screen and projector aaaaand the 3D film stock just to be refunding ticket prices).
Nothing wrong with going to 3D and being underwhelmed or not even wanting to go (See previous post about me trying it out even with my damaged eye and feeling like throwing up afterwards), just saying knowing what to expect from the effects might help appreciate them better. The reality of most of the effects at the moment is just WOO THIS LOOKS KIND OF LIKE IT IS COMING AT YOU (just like it was the last 2 times 3D got trendy). It is just an illusion of 3D obviously and when you aren't expecting it to be that it can be very underwheming and feel really flat (Avatar is supposedly better use of it, but some of that would be James Cameron being talented and choosing his shots to actually use it as a part of the cinematography).
-
Re: MC's Mulan the Tranny Version:
You're really reading way too much into that... >.>;;
Just my general impression of the movie was that it was attempting to capture the feel of China in those times and how oppressed women were (are). The feminist message was 'Look what she can do without that oppression', regardless of what tactics she had to utilize to get out from under that oppression. The piece is too mired in the culture of its setting for me to read anything much deeper than that from it (without starting the literary wankering).
-
Watched a shitload of movies (new and older) since I last posted here. Don't think I have the time or energy to do a full, in-depth comparison on each one, but a short bit is fine. Some I chose to watch, others I...uh...didn't >_>
In the queue for this week: Zombieland, Inglorious Basterds
Twilight and New Moon: Ugh. From what I understand, from what people who've read the books told me, the movies follow the books pretty well. The first one is...watchable. I guess. The second one has to be the most boring and convoluted thing I have watched in ages. Edward is a slut and Bella is...ugh. Seriously, EVERYONE loves her? She has to have some mental problem - she's like fucking Ebony Darkness Dementia Raven Way...in fact, she seems almost exactly like her - loved by everyone, has a bland as sin personality...god. I just...the sheer stupidity is insane...obviously, I thought that maybe the books were different in terms of character presentation, but I've been told they really aren't. How the fuck did Stephanie Meyer get this successful? So...awful...
Shutter Island: Great adaptation of the book, great psychological thriller. I saw the twist coming, but a large part of it was still a surprise. Well worth my time.
Alice in Wonderland: Man, I have one thing to say to the stupid parents who took their kids here and complained it was too much for them - TIM FUCKING BURTON. Otherwise...Alice is boring as sin, but the rest of the characters' performances were badass, Depp especially. Another very good movie.
Forrest Gump: Wow. I have never seen it until now, and...wow. The movie lives up to its hype. It is excellent, filled with history, drama, and hilarity. Excellent movie, though of course, being in the medical profession, I wonder how healthy the lives of the two remaining Gumps will be, considering what happened to the other >_> Still, excellent movie.
The Princess and the Frog: As people say - best Disney movie in ages. Very unique, and the villain is fantastic.
....bleh. I can't remember the names of some of the others I've seen ;_; Guess they're weren't that impressive <_<
-
Man you have like almost the last 6 months of good/awesome cinema for me packed in there. Pick up Sherlock Holmes and Men Who Stare at Goats when you can and you have pretty much done it all.
-
Re: MC's Mulan the Tranny Version:
You're really reading way too much into that... >.>;;
Just my general impression of the movie was that it was attempting to capture the feel of China in those times and how oppressed women were (are). The feminist message was 'Look what she can do without that oppression', regardless of what tactics she had to utilize to get out from under that oppression. The piece is too mired in the culture of its setting for me to read anything much deeper than that from it (without starting the literary wankering).
Well yes. I was more trying to poke fun at the feminism reading of the movie rather than make any real comment on "Mulan is definitely a movie about ____." The point is more "if you want to read too much into something, you can."
-
The point is more "if you want to read too much into something, you can."
Pretty much always the point I make. "If you look hard enough into something, you WILL find it" is the way I put it though, cause people use whatever damn proof they find to display it.
-
Forrest Gump is one of my all-time favorite movies. <3
-
Twilight and New Moon: Ugh. From what I understand, from what people who've read the books told me, the movies follow the books pretty well. The first one is...watchable. I guess. The second one has to be the most boring and convoluted thing I have watched in ages. Edward is a slut and Bella is...ugh. Seriously, EVERYONE loves her? She has to have some mental problem - she's like fucking Ebony Darkness Dementia Raven Way...in fact, she seems almost exactly like her - loved by everyone, has a bland as sin personality...god. I just...the sheer stupidity is insane...obviously, I thought that maybe the books were different in terms of character presentation, but I've been told they really aren't. How the fuck did Stephanie Meyer get this successful? So...awful...
To my knowledge, the reason the books were so successful is BECAUSE Bella is bland and blank. It provides much less resistance for a tween girl to insert herself as Edward's one and only truest love that ever existed super special person than, say, a well-developed, interesting and unique female persona.
... actually, I want to go out on a limb and say that's pretty much how many females are portrayed in pop culture, and for precisely that reason. A woman's worth is in her context, not herself, etc. Stephanie Meyer just boiled it down to its most basic, pop-fiction formula and dropped it into the super-sexy vampire paradigm.
(Because you all want to hear my amateur take on gender theory in your Movies thread, I know.)
-
Bella's your typical silent main, then. And she has appeal for just the same reasons they do. Not a tough concept.
-
Bella's your typical silent main, then. And she has appeal for just the same reasons they do. Not a tough concept.
Nah, Bella fails at life more than your typical silent main. Like...most silent mains can play badminton without hitting several people. Most silent mains don't find themselves in probable death situations from which they need rescue quite so often. Most silent mains don't hear voices in their heads, and don't willingly do incredibly stupid things just to try and hear MORE voices in their heads. Most silent mains aren't so blatantly selfish and intentionally manipulative. I guess she matches the average stupidity of silent mains well-enough, though.
-
A woman's worth is in her context, not herself, etc.
Do keep in mind that Stephanie Meyer IS Mormon. From my experiences in Utah this is general belief there.
-
Why would you want to play badminton without hitting people? Nailing your opponent with the birdie is fun, and it counts as your point, too!
I still say the Bella/silent main comparison is apt, though looking at her compared to a harem anime main character is probably a closer fit, given how you describe her. Silent mains are void of personality in a generically heroic kind of way. Main characters of harem shows are more generically pathetic: stumbling, unable to express themselves, indecisive. Nice, to be sure, but unambitious.
They're all ciphers. The only difference is what minimal characteristics the author thinks form the appropriate baseline. (Or to put it bluntly, "how can I make my character as good as possible without having them be any better than how the worst of my target audience sees themselves?")
-
I like this interpretation of Twilight as a Harem comedy for people with no concept of humor.
And of course you can interpret a movie in a lot of ways, it is damned fun mc and the world is a better place because you can write things about how Mulan is about trannies.
This of course completely does not change the point of the argument that Mulan is NOT about any particularly Feminist viewpoint and that as a flagship of "Disney aren't all bad about females" it does not do a great job.
-
Mulan is NOT about any particularly Feminist viewpoint
Oh, well yes. If nothing else, Feminism is strongly anti-violence, and particularly opposed to violence-against-women. To give you an idea, Buffy the Vampire Slayer is generally NOT considered a feminist work, since it's all about women getting into fights.
If anything, Mulan subscribes to the school of Buffyism--that women are physically stronger and better fighters than men for...no particular reason other than role-reversal.
Wait a sec...I'm going to check some release dates...
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: First aired in 1997
Disney's Mulan: Released in 1998
Hmm...I'll give Disney the benefit of the doubt here--1 year is not a lot of time to copy something.
-
Disney females are at least moderately distinguishable. If I held up a picture of Sleeping Beauty's boyfriend, Cinderella's boyfriend, and Snow White's boyfriend, could you even tell them apart? Aurora, Cinderella, and Snow White may not be beacons of personality or helpfulness but at least they aren't as generic looking and generic acting as possible.
In other words my point is that Disney is not great for looking for great characters, but this is hardly exclusive to females.
-
The point of my Mulan hype wasn't that it was a groundbreaking feminist work, but I'd certainly argue it was pretty good at what it did. Disney female main characters don't have the best history of being good role models, but in Mulan, girls could go to the film and see someone generally competent, capable, and having a spine. This makes it moderately feminist, at least. Girls aspiring to be Mulan is light years away from girls aspiring to be Sleeping Beauty, or even more recent characters like Ariel, Nala, and Jasmine. I don't think the importance of this should be downplayed by looking for ways in which Mulan itself falls short as a feminist work. Not to say Grefter's points on the subject aren't valid, but I do think that when Disney has clearly taken steps in the right direction we should congratulate that.
If nothing else, Feminism is strongly anti-violence
I'd be cautious about painting an ideal with such a broad brushstroke. I definitely consider myself feminist but I'm not sure about straight-up anti-violence, for starters. Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather live in a world that is peaceful, but I do think violence is appropriate in some situations, defending yourself from someone else's violence being the big one. It doesn't do 95 citizens much good to be pacificists if the remaining 5 are going to mug them. At the very least you need your law enforcement to be violent to control these people, and I'd suspect that if more people trained in self-defence (a form of violence) you'd see less muggings in general.
The disgust at violence against women, taking that as a euphemism for domestic violence, falls under feminism, since it was (and still is, sadly) a method for men to keep control of women. Of course, one reason it was/is so effective is because of a culture that tried to tell women they shouldn't be violent, ever (it's pretty easy for a man to hit his wife if he knows she won't hit him back)... which kinda plays back into my previous paragraph. This isn't to say I think giving girls self-defence classes in high school is the only or even best solution to the problem (general education to both sexes telling them they are equal is far more important), mind, but it's not entirely a bad idea.
-
I should clarify a little; the official "Feminist Theory" (as determined by English departments in universities...well possibly as determined by Gender Studies departments and used by English departments) is anti-violence. I've actually had a prof tell me that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is not really accepted as a feminist work.
Now, the academic use of the word "feminism" doesn't necessarily match up with the real-world. As it happens, I like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and don't really consider it to be a poor portrayal of women. And yes, I agree that self-defence classes are a good idea (although the thing with "self defence" is that, at least on paper, it's defence. It's different than being the aggressor).
And...now I'm just veering into a different topic, but domestic violence is an interesting issue, and not necessarily as gender related as people assume. The lesbian community actually has problems with domestic violence to the point that they put up posters for domestic violence support. You don't see posters for gay males...EXCEPT that from what I understand, domestic violence between gay males generally goes unreported. If you do call the cops, apparently they tend to respond with "oh ho ho, just a couple of guys having a scuffle. Break it up, boys." And then you have domestic violence towards men from women--this is a friend of a friend situation, but apparently one guy was getting beaten by his girlfriend, called the cops, and the cops arrested him, not her. "Domestic violence? Remove the man from the situation. PROBLEM SOLVED. High five, let's get doughnuts."
Okay, enough with that tangent. The interesting question is why academic feminism would take in the apparently unrelated anti-violence stance (beyond the realm of domestic violence). One answer that jumps to mind is that physical combat is an inherently unequal arena; wereas verbal conflict is fairly equal (women score higher on verbal tests, men have louder voiceboxes). Another answer is that the academic leaders in feminism are women, and standard brain psychology differences tell us that, for example, if a bunch of boys walk into a computer room, they'll scuffle for the best computer, whereas a bunch of girls, even amongst themselves, even back when kids are of equal strength, won't use physicality to solve the problem. (The evolutionary theory I've heard is that women spent a lot of their time pregnant...where shoving for a small gain is just too risky). So...get 100 such feminist academic leaders into a room, and then suggest "shoving is bad" and you'd get a lot of head-nodding and "that feels right to me", even if an anti-shoving stance doesn't do much to advance the female condition in the year 1990.
-
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: First aired in 1997
Disney's Mulan: Released in 1998
Hmm...I'll give Disney the benefit of the doubt here--1 year is not a lot of time to copy something.
Particularly when you consider it's a Disney animated movie well before CGI was sophisticated. Hell, ignoring that they would have had to have written the script and done all the music/voice work in that one year. Nevermind animating the bloody thing. Yeah, kind of impossible.
EDIT: And seconding MC's take on domestic violence. The way gender norms are constructed, it's always pinned on the male regardless of who was committing the violence (I have no idea about what happens in male-male relationships. Gut reaction says unless one's more emotionally female than the other it would go unreported because guys just fight sometimes, 'cuz testosterone is a prick. Honestly no real clue on that, though.) Not to mention that a lot of domestic violence from women towards men goes unreported, partially out of pride, partially because it's just more acceptable. I've had a friend whose girlfriend loved punching him in the arm or backhanding him in the chest when he said something she didn't like, and he took it in stride. Reverse the actions and then my friend would have gone to jail for a night. For all the awesomeness of feminism it doesn't usually address things like this. (Another, much bigger issue: custody battles and how they favor the woman nine times out of ten; feminists often treat the issue as a farce, and this in turn makes the men take feminism less seriously and fosters animosity between the sexes on both sides of the issue. Complex issues are complex!)
EDIT 2: As for why academic feminism is anti-violence... well, partially most academia is fairly anti-violence in my experience. Part of it is that violence and war are male-gendered activities, for no other reason than even feminists are mired in their own take on what gender norms are. It's all arbitrary labels anyway; these are just the ones that are in vogue.
-
Blah, the term Feminist and Feminism gets tossed around a bit too much. Feminism is anti-violence though? I never heard that. I want to look into it. The Women Studies department has a different standpoint.
August Rush - 3/5. Bleh. I have nothing to say about this movie except the lines were way too corny.
-
Blah, the term Feminist and Feminism gets tossed around a bit too much. Feminism is anti-violence though? I never heard that. I want to look into it. The Women Studies department has a different standpoint.
Kind of, but a caveat to that is that feminist/m is a label many would gladly adopt themselves, correctly or incorrectly. Now, you want a term that get's flung around like nobody's business regardless of whether it's appropriate (kind of like feminist/m), but nobody wants to be stuck with? Misogynist. "It's a man talking about how sexy he thinks a woman is! Misogyny! It's a man talking about how sexy the thinks women find him! Misogyny!"
-
I...yeah, I definitely don't know how to define that one.
I was going to say "male forming some conclusion about female" except it's not true that the misogynist has to be male--I've known lesbians to complain of misogyny from other lesbians. I've known lesbians who called themselves misogynists.
Although, I'm pretty sure we can conclude that misogyny has something to do with having thoughts about women. Which opens up an interesting philosophical question--if we programmed a robot whose sensors were incapable of detecting women (they get edited out of the input feed), would that robot be capable of being a misogynist?
-
Misogyny is definitely connected to the way one treats women compared to the way one treats men. If I call all women "kittens" I'm a misogynist, if I call all people that I'm just weird. If I say all women are incompetent politicians I am a misogynist, if I say all humans are incompetent politicians I am just a pessimist (some here would say realist <.<). etc. So yeah, that robot would not be capable of misogyny, presumbly.
-
I was going to say "male forming some conclusion about female"
That's definitely how some people use it, except that it's "any conclusion."
-
Kind of, but a caveat to that is that feminist/m is a label many would gladly adopt themselves, correctly or incorrectly. Now, you want a term that get's flung around like nobody's business regardless of whether it's appropriate (kind of like feminist/m), but nobody wants to be stuck with?
Gladly? Mmm, I'm going to have to just nod my head here because there still are women who refuse to label themselves as that, and it still resonates today.
However, that is pretty much in keeping with my point.
I'd say the examples that Dark Holy Elf offers are what I would consider sexist rather than misogynist.
-
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: First aired in 1997
Disney's Mulan: Released in 1998
Hmm...I'll give Disney the benefit of the doubt here--1 year is not a lot of time to copy something.
The movie that inspired the show came out in 1993 or so. I seriously doubt if they have anything to do with each other though.
-
Feminism isn't inherently anti-violence, it is all theory around gender and a demand for equality. There is a great deal of things in there tha trend it against violence though (one of them being that it is largely an area dominated by academics certainly).
Regarding Disney making steps in the right direction? I will go quote the Disney home page again.
All your fairytale wishes come true as you help Aurora, Cinderella, Snow White, Ariel, Jasmine, Belle, Pocahontas and Mulan dress up and prepare for tea parties, birthday celebrations, grand balls and many other royal events. Follow your dreams and experience a special place where happily-ever-after happens every day while you earn and collect regal charms for your exclusive Princess friendship bracelets...and have fun-filled adventures with the beloved Disney Princesses.
They haven't gone very far at all.
Buffy itself is again no Vagina Monologues (Which for the record even still get Feminist critique, Feminism is so broad that there is always one area of thought on it that can criticise something, which is a good thing), but Buffy, while tending to being overly enamoured with males is far from defined entirely by her relationships with men. There is 4 main males that have direct influence over her, Giles, Angel, Spike and Riley. Her weakest point in that is when she is with Riley and you know what happened that series? We got Willow's very slow realisation of her homosexuality. Buffy isn't a shining beacon (It certainly objectifies women and plays with stereotypes), but it at least has a tendency to play with Gender issues and Queer Theory, both of which are/were fairly fresh and relevant when it was being made (With Queer Theory really only coming to the fore in mid 80s). Which is leagues better than what I have taken from Mulan and miles and miles ahead of current Disney.
-
Oh, you won't see me arguing that Disney's promotions of its own movies remain total garbage. I remember when the teasers for Princess and the Frog came out people were commenting on the main character, a poor working girl, being the "princess" as ironic. Of course it was just so that they could market Disney Princess :) :) :) stuff for the movie, how naive of us.
Idun: Yeah, the examples weren't very good, though misogynist comments do tend to be sexist by nature so I don't think the distinction, in this case, is too important?
-
Bella's your typical silent main, then. And she has appeal for just the same reasons they do. Not a tough concept.
Appeal?
-
Bella's your typical silent main, then. And she has appeal for just the same reasons they do. Not a tough concept.
Appeal?
People with issues can project themselves on to them, duh. It's way harder to do when the character has any personality.
-
Or people who are just boring and therefore find to easy to see themselves within a person who doesn't have a shred of personality. I'll admit the question was solely on opening for silent main trashing.
-
I dunno. For all that I consider Bella a total idiot most of the time, and groan about her rare but utterly blatant Mary Sue moments when she does have them, I still somehow manage to project onto her every 10th scene or so--AP student who likes Jane Austen whose distant mother worries about her too much and who enjoys the occasional girlie thing but isn't excited about school dances = ok, I can relate to those aspects. This puts her way ahead of every silent main I've ever seen combined. Silent mains have no personality, and therefore nothing to relate to.
I mean, I know the argument people usually use is "you're supposed to make stuff up, that's the beauty of silent mains. I guess you must be imagination deficient." But I don't need a videogame to make stuff up; I just close my eyes and start inventing my world filled with my characters and my scenes.
-
Everyone should be projecting something onto silent mains no matter what your mental state is.
That something just happens to be vomit.
-
But I don't need a videogame to make stuff up
Most of them DO tend to be counterproductive towards it.
-
It's Complicated: Seems like it should be a really good movie--excellent actors, and a pretty interesting script. I wasn't feeling it all that much, mind; and maybe I was tired, but it also could be that the major characters were all 50+ in age, and I wasn't relating all that well.
Lost Boys: The first half of the movie I felt kinda like "what am I watching? Man, 80s drama and 80s special effects don't hold up that well." It got rather awesome in completely ridiculous ways towards the end, though.
Twilight: New Moon: Well...the first Twilight movie was unbelievably horrible compared to any of the books I've read (not to praise the books all that much--they're stupid but fun. It's just the movie was claw-my-eyes-out). But...part of the problem was how they couldn't effectively show much of the cool vampire stuff because they had less special effects budget than a fair few TV shows. So...I thought maybe by the second movie they were making a lot of money and decided to have more of a budget than a straight-to-DVD movie this time.
The second movie I found...more tolerable, but I rarely felt I was enjoying the movie. (There was maybe 40 seconds worth of footage that effectively depicted Alice being Alice, which naturally was full of win and awesome. The Laurent scene was solid, for all that I'm still facepalming about them making Laurent black when he should be ethnically French Canadian). For the most part I just wasn't into the movie, though. And while yes, the special effects have improved, it's mostly only enough to make the special effects scenes dull instead of painful. Going 3x the speed limit on a European highway weaving in and out of traffic...should be exciting; it wasn't. Vampire fights...geez, take a lesson from Dragonball Z or Matrix Revolutions. "They're moving too fast for human eyes to follow" can be done better than that. And...past that, for some reason I wasn't really feeling the Volturi, and I can't fully explain why (outside of disappointment that Jane was not a little girl--though I guess they want to sell their movie in Germany so had to mak her 20).
-
Lost Boys: The first half of the movie I felt kinda like "what am I watching? Man, 80s drama and 80s special effects don't hold up that well." It got rather awesome in completely ridiculous ways towards the end, though.
So the drama and special effects were 80s and the plot was 80s as well. Lost boys is win and great fun. Good times with Keifer Sutherland.
Edit - And you totally still need to watch Interview With a Vampire.
-
Kick-Ass: Not as good as I was expecting. I think the Hit-Girl/Big Daddy story overshadows the main character too much and the film loses its focus. But yeah, Hit-Girl is amazing and I expect MC to be avataring her soon. I got your non-violent feminism right here!
-
I think the Hit-Girl/Big Daddy story overshadows the main character too much and the film loses its focus.
I think Kick-Ass is basically just a PoV character, more than a main.
-
Godzilla vs. Smog Monster/Hedorah: Finally saw the rest of this movie!
Its...umm....er....best way to describe it?
Take a 2nd grade classroom session, with the focus primarily on Environmentalism, with a bit of Astronomy tossed in. Then toss in a GIANT FUCKING SLUDGE MONSTER and Godzilla into the mix.
I really have nothing more to say, the movie is that bad. Its really hard to explain just how fucked up it is, not just in its nature, but in all the random shit they shove in it.
The only reason to see this movie is if you hate yourself. The only reason to recommend this movie to someone else is if you really want them to suffer. This movie is comparable to bad Gamera films. COMPARABLE. TO. BAD. GAMERA. FILMS.
That is all.
-
What, Meeple.
-
Godzilla vs. Smog Monster/Hedorah: Finally saw the rest of this movie!
Its...umm....er....best way to describe it?
Take a 2nd grade classroom session, with the focus primarily on Environmentalism, with a bit of Astronomy tossed in. Then toss in a GIANT FUCKING SLUDGE MONSTER and Godzilla into the mix.
I really have nothing more to say, the movie is that bad. Its really hard to explain just how fucked up it is, not just in its nature, but in all the random shit they shove in it.
The only reason to see this movie is if you hate yourself. The only reason to recommend this movie to someone else is if you really want them to suffer. This movie is comparable to bad Gamera films. COMPARABLE. TO. BAD. GAMERA. FILMS.
That is all.
This was also my first Godzillia film! It's kind of a wonder I don't hate the genre, considering.
-
What, Meeple.
I question what you're questioning in my post. If its about the "see, don't see" part, I'm mostly saying "This movie is so bad, it can be considered a form of chinese torture" (ignore the Japanese origins.)
If you're wondering about the other stuff in the movie...I really have no way to explain it. I guess watch the Cinnemassacre review of it from the Godzillathon a few years back, just to brush the surface of how awful it is, to get some hints to the random shit tossed in.
To Gate:
Heh, yeah, that is something to wonder. I mean, my first one was Godzilla vs. Megalon, but at least that one makes sense as far as being enjoyable when you're a brain dead 5 year old (actually, that and King Kong vs. Godzilla were the only movies I had scene until I was in Middle School. well, my parents claim I use to watch Rodan a lot, but I seriously don't remember that!)
-
Kickass: Umm surprisingly slow paced for this type of movie. I thought it'd be comedy with a bit of action mixed in or action with a bit of comedy. Instead they throw in a lot of filler "character development" that is actually less believable than the 13 year old girl who takes on small armies by herself.
Had its moments though and the spoofiness or it kind of allows for the shitty writing. I found myself enjoying it more than Hottub Time Machine and She's Outta My League, but this movie isn't a 7. So I'll lower those other two to 5 evens and give this a 5.5 since none of the movies were actually all that good.
-
Nah, Meeple, I was just surprised really because so far you never mentioned a Godzilla film sucking so much. I guess I'll steer away from this one as I believe I do have a rubber-dinosaur-whale threshold anyway.
-
Men Who Stare at Goats- I adore this movie. I'm also not sure I could really recommend it to anyone.
This is just a movie that plays my strings well. It has a lot of humor, but in an understated quirky way that means you never really bust out laughing. It's always wearing a tiny little smile and you smile with it. The principle cast is excellent, all people I enjoy a lot in other movies. While set in the not-so-distant past of 200...3? 4? Anyway, despite this, it devotes a lot of time to backstory, and in its way is alternate history. While the bulk of the past segments are based on actual stories from a real unit of warrior monks, they blend in the simple fact that these men ARE Jedi warriors, and let the story follow from there. And yet, despite making it clear that the magic they practice is real, the entire story functions the same even if it weren't. Simple and down to earth but with a hint of magic. Great stuff.
So watch this if you like quirky, almost but not quite real sort of stories. Otherwise I dunno.
-
Meeple, you realize everything you say is just making me want to watch this movie to see how truly bad it is, right? (I have seen it before, but I was a little kid and don't remember it well.)
-
Idun: Well, thing is, I've only seen about half this movie and it was when I was younger. Thing is, its the only Godzilla movie I OPENLY STOPPED WATCHING OUT OF FREE WILL.
I can't say how I was able to sit through Godzilla's Revenge, I guess its the fact that this movie at least feels like one movie, just a really bad one. As in, its a sequence of events that are related, and stays topical, just it sucks a lot. Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster...I wanna say "its something that needs to be seen to understood" but that implies I am suggesting you watch this movie, and I'm trying to do the EXACT OPPOSITE. Best I can say is go find some sort of video review of it (The Cinnemassacre one works well enough.)
El Cid: Yeah, I know. Just do yourself a favor and watch Godzilla Final Wars right after it, to remind yourself why these movies can be enjoyable <_<
-
I'm sure if you go into the movie fully intending on MSTing the shit out of it, it could be fun~
-
ah, but that's cheating!
-
G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobras - 1/5. Hahahahaha.
-
G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobras - 1/5. Hahahahaha.
Hey it had some interesting action scenes. It just ruined it with all that talking in between.
-
G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobras - 1/5. Hahahahaha.
Hey it had some interesting action scenes. It just ruined it with all that talking in between.
So its FF7 Advent Children?
-
No. Advent Children has kind of stupid plot and breaks characters. G.I. Joe has a team of the world's most elite soldiers trying to find the target of the world's most dangerous terrorist organisation by having 5 guys drive around Paris in a jeep.
Edit - And Ice that sinks in the ocean.
-
My favorite part is where they're chasing a car down a crowded street and they're spraying TEN MILLIMETER MACHINE GUN FIRE at it. You know, to make sure that any bystanders will be punched full of holes as their cars are ripped apart by gunfire of that caliber.
-
What DIDN'T make sense was - that chick stole some random guy's bike right? How can someone hit her back wheel and she barely fishtails on a normal bike?
ALSO. The emotion/logic joke went too far. It was cute once.
Bitch shoulda died.
Dude doesn't have enough security in his office for an underground super fighting power group.
"I told you I would kill him if he touched you again."
"I heard you the first time."
WRONG!
*edit and speaking about cars, Rob, there was a lot of big shit coming out of that Hummer. That big ass gun that came out the roof? WHERE DID IT COME FROM!? THE TOP AND INTERIOR PARTS OF THE ROOF WERE SUPER FLAT.
-
My favorite part is where they're chasing a car down a crowded street and they're spraying TEN MILLIMETER MACHINE GUN FIRE at it. You know, to make sure that any bystanders will be punched full of holes as their cars are ripped apart by gunfire of that caliber.
I don't get what is wrong with that, it is what we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan after all. Accurate portrayal.
Quick guys we need to track that car! Put a ninja on it instead of a tracking device!
-
In it's defense, analyzing the plot of an old school kids cartoon is... well... I'm sure everybody has seen Transformers 2.
Not in it's defense. Even the cartoons didn't use 6 six old kids on heroin to write the scripts for them. (And this movie didn't even have Sienna Miller run around half naked for 1/4 of the movie. Apparently they couldn't find horny kids on heroin.)
-
I enjoyed GI Joe. I could not stand TF2
-
If I really wanted to analyze it, I would, but the movie pulled just a little too much bullshit. It wasn't even fun. They tried to stuff the movie with adequate background to develop their shitty characters and it failed. Plus the actors . . . the lines . . . too much cheese. It's like having to watch that live action Street Fighter all over again. Good when I'm young and am like "OMG GUILE," but very b~a~aad now.
-
But the live action Street Fighter is so bad, it's awesome (http://www.coke-babies.com/writing/streetfighter/streetfighter.html)!
Idly, I think what you've said about the GI Joe film is the kindest I've seen anyone be towards it. I have heard nothing good about it whatsoever.
-
Buncha stuff. Mostly a mix of random eighties stuff and movies I hadn't watched for a while and figured I should see again.
Barry Lyndon: Because apparently there are Stanley Kubrick movies I haven't seen and I need to fix this (unless they're called Eyes Wide Shut). If you like slow-moving period dramas with gorgeous cinematography and classical music, this is pretty cool. For most people the answer to that is probably no, but I am not most people. Scenery Porn is in abundance and I cannot look away.
WarGames: This is hilarious just for the technology on display. Eight-inch floppy disks! Modems that require you to physically connect the telephone handset! Those reel printers that use the blue-and-white paper and go REET-REET-REET when they're working! Nostalgia bomb. It's actually a fun little movie, though. I liked the intro a lot: couple guys go to work manning a missile silo, just a normal day, bitching about their replacements being late, that sort of thing. Out of nowhere, THIS IS NOT A TEST, LAUNCH YOUR MISSILES AT RUSSIA, END CIVILIZATION, ETCETERA. (It is a test, of course, but they don't know this and are quite viscerally disturbed.) I mean, yeah, it's a Matthew Broderick movie, you know that lovable little scamp's going to get away with everything, but it was a nice way of driving home that shit could go down and everything could end at any time. Most of the movie is fluff, but it's enjoyable fluff with a veneer of seriousness. Dated but still watchable enough.
Sneakers: Another one of those "I haven't seen this in a decade, so let's find out if it still holds up" rentals. It...kind of does. Story is fairly straightforward thriller material and there are plenty of plotholes, but ultimately it's just hard to care about that because every actor in this movie is goddamn badass. Ben Kingsley's too-brief appearances as the cynical, burned-out hippie of a villain are easily the highlights. I don't understand why this man is in so many bad movies. Really groovy jazz soundtrack here, too. I don't even like jazz, it just fit perfectly. More fluff, but more fun fluff.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: So I figured I should give this another viewing now that there's some distance from the hype and inevitable disappointment of the theatrical release. It is still pretty mediocre. Not anywhere near the level of travesty that the SW prequels were, but it still lets down the series legacy pretty significantly. It doesn't start out that bad; the setpieces in the first half aren't a patch on Raiders or Last Crusade at their best, but it at least seems like the movie might go somewhere fun. But then we get to the Amazon and everything falls to pieces: we get family drama (and not the endearing kind with Sean Connery), Indy instantly turns into a stereotypical worrywart of a father, there's giant ant silliness, goddamn monkey silliness, Shia whatshisface gets whacked in the crotch for cheap laughs, and just...bleh. I guess this was Lucas's half of the movie. There are a couple good lines spread throughout the movie and I can't say no to Cate Blanchett as a hot commie swordgirl, but this is really as complimentary as I can be here. Sad.
The Fall: I'm really not sure how fond I actually am of this movie, but damned if it isn't one of the most visually arresting things I've ever seen. It's worth watching just for that. Also has the most naturalistic performance I've ever seen from a kid. It's like no one told her she was actually in a movie. The plot, such as it is, concerns a crippled actor in a hospital entertaining a young patient with stories in the hope that she'll like him enough to steal him a bottle of morphine (which he intends to use to commit suicide). The stories get weirder and bleaker as the guy's mood sinks and the kid tries to take control of them and steer them (and by extension him) in a less destructive direction. The movie is, above all, unique. I can see a lot of people being turned off by the quirkiness, but it's definitely worth a shot. It also has Charles Darwin. He looks like this: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3043/2698226653_bffe27f997.jpg
Lifeforce: I don't even remember how I stumbled upon this one. Was looking at some random list of movies on Netflix, saw the title and went, "Huh, that sounds vaguely familiar," clicked. First reviewer there described it as "the Citizen Kane of naked space vampire zombie movies." You know I had to watch it after that. It is eighties bad, so about what you'd expect. Directed by Tobe Hooper, who I'm sure is a hack (Poltergeist I attribute to Spielberg's assistance; if Texas Chainsaw Massacre is actually good, I'm guessing that's a fluke. I'm not likely to find out since I despise slasher movies). It really feels like they just couldn't figure out which movie they wanted to make here. "Okay, we're on a spaceship filled with giant bat corpses--no, now we're in a lab in London and this alien girl's doing the whole quickening from the Highlander thing on everyone--nah, that's no good, let's jump to...an asylum, yeah. And we can have the furniture fly around. Remember when I directed Poltergeist? That was cool, wasn't it? Wait, we need an ending...We haven't done the zombie holocaust thing yet, have we? Let's just go with that." Nothing makes any goddamn sense, the effects are quaint at best (I burst out laughing when Patrick Stewart's face started melting; it just came out of nowhere) and the villain is this gorgeous French chick who spends most of her screentime walking around naked. So all in all, this one was a winner.
Suspiria: Decided to check this out because Dario Argento is supposedly a really awesome horror director or something. Not really seeing the hype. Admittedly this isn't my genre, but there were a lot of moments here where I found myself asking, "Why is this scene being dragged out so long? Does this moment really need to be in the film? Isn't there something else the camera could be doing with its time?" Most of the events in the movie you can call in advance; this isn't always a bad thing, but pacing issues stand out more glaringly when there's not much investment in or reason to care about the characters. Just being a horror movie doesn't give you an excuse to ignore those things. I dunno. See below for a lot of what I thought this one was missing.
The Changeling: Okay, this was cool. Good old-fashioned ghost story: guy moves into abandoned mansion, supernatural stuff happens, we get suggestions that something horrible went down there in the past, etc. Familiar setup, good execution. Shit doesn't happen just for cheap scares--it happens because something is pissed and wants to send a message. Everything that occurs is the result of a personal mission of the mysterious entity or of the main character. Everything has a direction that makes sense in context instead of being merely a calculated attempt to make the audience jump--and because there are actually, y'know, motives and stuff at work, it's much more effective at that. Nice little mystery with a creepy atmosphere. Also, George C. Scott. Definitely worth watching.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture: This is a bad movie. I knew it was a bad movie, but I hadn't seen it in like a decade and a fit of masochism took over, so, yeah. You can tell early on that something went terribly wrong in the production of this one. Our reintroduction to Kirk is...an inspiring shot of a square chunk of his face through the window of what amounts to public transportation. This is pretty emblematic of how the movie got everything completely backwards. Kirk spends like the first ten minutes talking to people we don't know about stuff that we don't care about; it's about half an hour before we see the goddamn Enterprise, and then we spend nearly as long LOOKING at the goddamn Enterprise. Seriously, it is Enterprise porn, and it just goes on and on and the audience can only lie there wondering when he'll be finished and roll over. I don't know what they were thinking. All of this is set to a Jerry Goldsmith score, which is cool, but the pomp is so overused as to make it boring. And they try to set up this character conflict where Kirk has to worry about whether he's actually a control freak who's just trampling people underfoot to get the ship back, but the writers never figure out what to do with this, it eventually gets subsumed by the actual plot, and then totally invalidated by the fact that his only apparent rival gets written out at the end of the movie. So uh. What were you guys doing, again?
This is just the tip of the iceberg. I mean, the movie's not completely worthless--I'm a sucker for futuristic super-structures and I still think the interior of the alien spaceship looks pretty cool; I'm also sufficiently fond of A.I. as plot elements that the story is kinda sorta interesting once it finally gets going, but dear lord does that take a while. It's just an objectively terrible movie with some superficial elements that almost manage to make it bearable. I'm just glad this load was a hit somehow, or we would've never got Wrath of Khan.
-
What makes Street Fighter good isn't that it is so bad, it is that it had Raul fucking Julia there to save it from itself. How do you have a horrible movie turn out awesome? But having a fucking genius completely chew the scenery something chronic and turn the whole thing into its own kind of camp cheese adventure. If GI Joe had Brian Blessed or Christopher Walken in it to play Cobra Commander then it might have been saved.
Also high five to the Cid for watching Sneakers and War Games (And that is the best description of a Dot Matrix printer ever, you brought a smile to me). I think you need to go on a massive Christian Slater binge or something.
-
The Drawn Together Movie: The Movie: A rather weak end to the series, but it has its moments. Such as Toot squirting Bam-Bam out of her uterus to club a guy on the head. Also 3-D glasses-making tutorial for the win. Fuck you, Comedy Central!
"Suck-My-Taint-Girl, I can't decide if you're an asshole or a pussy."
"Teehee, I'm a little of both."
-
Star Trek- meeeh. Okay so McCoy was great, and Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and Scottie had good character establishing shots. Pretty much the entire rest of the movie was a pile of meh. The plot's barely servicable for an episode, let alone a movie, the character I didn't name were just trying too hard and honestly broke up the scene with it, not nearly enough of the movie was McCoy/Kirk/Spock just playing off each other, and frankly I think the effects sucked; yes, technically shiny, but the don't give you any kind of sense of how the ships look or function. Like, when in TNG you have the Enterprise and a Romulan Warbird staring off, you get a great feel of "okay, these things are pretty evenly matched, the weapons are here and here, they can move around like this, these are the vulnerable points" and so on. The ships have a tangible quality. Here, they are silly CG effects. No substance to them.
The Kobiyashi Maru scene was also dumb. Way, way more camp than it should have been considering how built up Kirk's winning it was previously. He needed to at least look like he was taking it seriously and showing off how good at command he was, not just being a smartass (although sure, that too).
So yeah, blah. If they want to get this cast together and make a revised series out of them, that could go places. More movies I will not be spending money on without evidence of a lot changing in how the movie is made.
Superman/Batman: Public Enemies- Not bad. Just having the DCAU reunion thing going was nice, good action sequences. Lex falling apart at the end like that felt a little forced, but otherwise pretty alright. Kinda sad they didn't have more space for more cameos though.
Will have to see if I can find the Justice League special at the video place, hopefully they will still be open long enough to get it.
-
Also high five to the Cid for watching Sneakers and War Games (And that is the best description of a Dot Matrix printer ever, you brought a smile to me). I think you need to go on a massive Christian Slater binge or something.
I couldn't actually remember what they were called, yeah. I just remember my dad always had huge piles of that paper around and when I got bored I'd grab a stack to draw mazes that always wound up being like five feet long.
I can't think of a Christian Slater movie I'd want to watch again, so suggest something. (Okay, so he has a small part in Star Trek VI, but that doesn't really count as a Christian Slater Movie.)
And CK sums up pretty much exactly how I feel about new Star Trek. That and stuff like "Why the hell does the Romulan ship have such overpowered weaponry? It's supposed to be a mining ship. Who gives a mining ship armaments like this?" and "Guys, why didn't you notice your sun was going to blow up until like the day it happened? These things have pretty regular life cycles. The ones that stick around long enough for sentient life to evolve, at least. How the fuck does a futuristic, space-faring society not keep track of things like this?"
-
Writing failure.
-
And CK sums up pretty much exactly how I feel about new Star Trek. That and stuff like "Why the hell does the Romulan ship have such overpowered weaponry? It's supposed to be a mining ship. Who gives a mining ship armaments like this?"
I always assumed he stole and/or salvaged all his weapons. Since it's pretty soon after the end of DS9, there's probably tons of destroyed hulls floating around to pull weapons off. You don't need cutting-edge, experimental hardware to bust shit up if you go back in time 300 years.
-
I thought it was supposed to be a DIFFERENT sun going supernova that destroyed Romulus. The backstory of Star Trek 2009 is all kinds of stupid, just ignore it and focus on the TOS-era plot.
-
Well that's the problem in a nutshell. There's not enough TOS-era plot left to stand after you ignore all the continuity parts!
-
What I mean is you ignore all the stuff that happened in the future. Spock let Romulus get blown up, Romulan survivors come back for vengeance. Details of how and why just distract you by being dumb.
-
People discussing how if you analyse a piece of Star Trek plot to hard it goes to stupid
Yes. Yes it does. For everything. This is a reboot of ToS, not TNG. I don't -want- this to make sense. I want this to be Kirk punching things in the face and getting layed. Him getting promotions for doing stupid stupid reckless shit and hopefully in the future turning them down because fuck that being a space captain that punches things in the face gets you way more pussy. Spock getting some on the side from Uhura was a nice touch.
Also need more nods to John Cho as Sulu, good times. He and Simon Pegg pretty much make up the best of the humor in the movie.
Christian Slater movies to watch (Some of these I still need to watch myself, so a list for two!):
Gleaming the Cube
The Wizard (I HAD NO IDEA HE WAS IN THIS)
Young Guns 2 (cheating, but he is in it)
Pump Up The Volume (A movie that is a perfect representation of 1990-1992 before Grunge took off)
Robin Hood Prince of Thieves (Yeah I went there)
Kuffs
True Romance (If you don't love this movie there is something very wrong with you)
Broken Arrow (for many giggles)
3000 Miles to Graceland
Churchill: The Hollywood Years (what)
He Was a Quiet Man
Waaaay way less stuff from the 80s than I thought though, lots of groovy 90s!
-
"Ignore it because it's dumb" doesn't really work for me, though. Suspension of disbelief has to be earned and there's...not really anything else in the movie I can care about enough to make up for the stuff that annoys me. I mean, even ToS wasn't campy just for the sake of being campy. Plenty of that happened because it was the sixties, yeah, but it was also genuinely concerned with pushing what science fiction could be on TV. This is why it got a cult following that kept it alive ten years after being canceled. New ST does not attempt this in any way. J. J. Abrahms's whole "my Star Trek is grittier, sexier, and sparklier" approach just misses the goddamn point for me. It apes the superficial aspects and leaves out the soul.
Anyway...man, Grefter, the only one of those I'm sorta inclined to watch is The Wizard just to confirm its badness (I only saw it once in elementary school). 3000 Miles to Graceland is terrible in a way you shouldn't be able to achieve with that many Elvises.
-
True Romance involves the exact right number of Elvises and that is one. Really early Tarantino script done by somoene else, it has Elvis, it has cocaine and it has a crazy Christian Slater, gun fights and through it all an actually decent albeit somewhat abusive romance. Good times.
Also Pump up the Volume is great for copious amounts of Leonard Cohen.
Edit - Reading around some more it appears that the Winston Churchill movie is a piss take on action movie blockbusters and stars Slater as Winston Churchill a US Marine and there is a Princess Elizabeth who I am going out on a limb and will guess is probably the love interest (since that is what I would do if I was making fun of the genre). A shame it was released on 2004 and not 2001 to coincide with Pearl Harbor. I actually kind of really want to see this now.
-
Avatar - 6/5. Epic.
-
Avatar - 6/5. Epic.
Hey, if you like heavy-handed movies with awful dialogue about a guy who owns three private jets preaching to you about environmentalism, have I got a film for you...
-
Fern Gully?
I was more into the whole beat-their-asses thing moreso than save-the-forest.
-
Streetcar Named Desire came on Japanese TV late last night and I watched it for the first time.
Good movie, really well-told. The setting is far more repulsive than I had previously imagined it could be.
Also, it somehow manages to have the same subject matter of every Lifetime original movie ever, and it managed to tell it without being crappy.
Brando is suitably creepy, and Leigh is fucking brilliant.
I stayed up way too late watching it, though; and I was late to work... ;_;
-
I read the play back in the day, and without the actors' deliveries, you actually rather notice that everyone in the story is a stereotype. Fortunately Brando is awesome.
-
Awesomely horrible, yes. Shut the fuck up about the Napoleonic code already, Stanley, for the love of god.
-
How can you hate the wizard, Ciddy? ;_; It is late 80's/early 90's cheese at it's best.
-
I didn't say I hated it. It takes special effort for me to hate something.
-
It made the Power Glove legendary.
Also, I'm still waiting for a new Power Glove...
MAKE IT HAPPEN!
-
Tape a Wiimote to your forearm.
-
It made the Power Glove legendary.
Also, I'm still waiting for a new Power Glove...
MAKE IT HAPPEN!
Tape a Wii controller to a glove.
-
Be bad, you know, come on.
-
Beerfest- Pointlessly amusing and doesn't try and trick you into thinking the movie has a plot worth following. 7/10
-
The Descent Part 2 - 3/5. Noticeable drop in what story there originally was.
Rocknrolla - Has Toby Kebbell. 3/5.
Battle For Terra - 4/5. I don't know if I mentioned this one. Kind of bland character designs, but an acceptable storyline, good animation and some good environment designs.
Wilderness - 3/5. Has Toby Kebbell. See, fangirl.
Neo Ned - 3/5. Mom made me watch this. Almost threw up in my mouth when I saw it was about "IRR."
X-Files Seasons 7 Episode - Orison. Good shit. Scully cut her hair again.
-
Shutter Island: So...for the first half of the movie I was thinking "oh my god this is the worst movie I've watched like...ever." The ending is great, though. Walked away with overall positive feelings towards the movie.
The Lovely Bones: OH MY GOD. This movie is AWESOME. I mean, I went in having only heard an interview with the author of the book, so I knew it was about a girl who gets raped and murdered. What I didn't know was that they were extremely successful at making her likeable, they have a strong cast of characters with very memorable (if sometimes clichee) personalities, and that purgatory pretty much gave them an excuse to go overboard with awesome CG rainbows and butterflies. Best movie I've seen since...like...Mama Mia.
The Book of Eli: Saw the first hour of this. It bored me. Wow, so post-apocalyptic means you spend a lot of time alone walking on roads with no dialogue. Bored now. The main character wins 10-on-1 gunfights without a scratch or even ducking for cover? I'm not feeling any tension at all (I can only guess that he has some protection granted by God or something, but I haven't seen the whole movie). Maybe it gets better, but I saw nothing that appealed to me.
-
Saw Iron Man 2. Decent, not as good as the first one. Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke are effective, Scarlett Johansen didn't really need to be in the movie. I mean, we've really reached the saturation point for important characters by the time she shows up. They could've saved some time for important stuff by cutting her out. Goes for the Avengers buildup in general, really. Distracts from the actual Iron Man movie I went to see. Could've even done without Samuel L. Jackson, as the movie starts to slip off the rails when he shows up. Those health problems the hero's been struggling with? "Oh, lemme fix that for you." Tension dissolved without effort. There's a basic disconnect with the first movie in that that one was all about Tony learning to take responsibility for the consequences of his actions and this one sort of goes out of its way to avoid doing just that. One of the villains hates him for something he didn't even do; a mob of robots goes on a rampage explicitly to massacre civilians and apparently no one gets killed or even hurt. Obviously someone wanted to make sure this was kiddie-friendly, but it jars somewhat with how the first movie dealt with violence, which was sparsely but effectively.
Still worth watching because, hell, Robert Downey Jr.. Just could've been better. Story gets warped a little by trying to accommodate the groundwork for a completely different movie.
-
The Book of Eli: Saw the first hour of this. It bored me. Wow, so post-apocalyptic means you spend a lot of time alone walking on roads with no dialogue. Bored now.
It IS a pretty glaring flaw of the entire genre pretty much except for the Road Warrior, where they replaced their road scenes with car fights, and Fallout, where they replaced the weeks of walking with a map.
-
Iron Man 2: Saw this, was fun, but nothing special.
Sherlock Holmes: Also saw this! Also fun stuff. My father made the interesting comment of "You don't like the guy, but you still root for him"; can't say I disagree. Did like how they handled how they showed Holmes go from Point A to Point Q with evidence, and showed that he wasn't just ass pulling, going into showing that even slight details served a purpose. Death Note could learn a thing or two, since not all genius needs to be "hay, i second guessed j00!" like Light Yagami did, which gets old...fast...
There were actually some moments I did pick up on, but just disregarded them as unimportant. Like the part where the guy gets set on fire; I did notice that it was raining when he got in there, and it wasn't raining right after the meeting. Of course rain can stop within that time frame, so I just assume we're to think that's the case, but yeah, just shows attention to detail or something, which is nice.
So yeah, good stuff overall. I actually saw this in two sittings for reasons not really related to the movie itself, but whatever, felt like it didn't really detract cause outside of the big reveal of everything at the end, most stuff feels so short term, so its easy to just pick up where you left off.
Godzilla 2000: Rewatched this cause my brother happened to be watching it. All I can say is the movie should be renamed "Fuck you Roland Emmerich." Cause seriously, the only reason this movie was made (and the entire Millenium series by extension) was cause of that 1998 American "Remake" fucked up the premise so much. Supposedly, Toho actually tried to talk to Emmerich, to give him pointers and ideas, such to capture the style of their movies and make the movie enjoyable, and such, and he just went "Fuck you, I do what I want!" which explains...a lot. So the movie was made in retaliation, and you could see they were mocking him what with ID4 style Aliens Blowing Up Buildings, and heck, Orga midtransformation even LOOKS like those aliens.
That said, fun stuff. The dubbing is horrible, but its awesome at the same time cause it was INTENTIONALLY horrible, to tease the older movies. And the whole "Well we're fucked" ending is a nice touch. Though, the CG looks really bad in this movie; you could tell Toho had little experience with this kind of stuff, as it looks really forced, contrasts the other special effects in the movie, and...hell, there's a part with CG Helicopters exploding (instead of the usual prop style), which looks really animated rather than genuine. Its really no wonder they don't use CG much in the movies after this; I can't blame them for trying something new at the time, but it still looked awful.
-
"Fuck you Roland Emmerich."
This can never be said enough.
Also watched Sherlock Holmes last night. Seconding the Meeple, it was fun, etc. Holmes's inferences are generally drawn from his having a mental map of the city he lived in, which is nice and also an extension of one of the things I liked best about the movie: it has a distinct sense of place and effectively captures a grimy, gritty, lived-in London. Looks great even when it's ugly. I enjoyed the music too, thrums along nicely without ever quite being generic Hollywood Tension Music. ...Ah, Hans Zimmer. That would do it.
-
Up: Pretty weak for a Pixar movie. The tear-jerkerness is crammed down your throat too much.
Iron Man 2: Enjoyable, only really suffers from not being groundbreaking like the first one. Boss fight is better than the last movie, but once again ends too abruptly. Black Widow + Happy Hogan movie nao.
Babies: Hard to review a movie that doesn't have a plot. Suffice it to say that Namibians are hardcore, and Mongolians have the best pacifiers1 and the worst baths2.
1A piece of meat that you suck on (with a match speared through it so you don't swallow it)
2Your mom squirts her breast milk on your face and then wipes your face with it.
-
Varan the Unbelievable: Why am I watching obscure as fuck Kaiju, let alone the American complete realtering of this movie?
...
...anyway, I wasted about 68 minutes of my life watching this and I want it back! I don't know if the Japanese version is better or not, but gah was this boring. Its like watching the original Gamera again or something.
-
and then you wrote about it.
-
The Book of Eli: Saw the first hour of this. It bored me. Wow, so post-apocalyptic means you spend a lot of time alone walking on roads with no dialogue. Bored now.
It IS a pretty glaring flaw of the entire genre pretty much except for the Road Warrior, where they replaced their road scenes with car fights, and Fallout, where they replaced the weeks of walking with a map.
Shit works a lot better in print. Read The Road by McCarthy now.
-
I'd rather not do that again. It was a very unpleasant experience.
-
You just don't like good things.
-
I can only take so much depressing adventure about eating people. Sorry.
-
Oh man I have to read this now.
-
Robin Hood - Not too bad.
The good: Cate Blanchett is awesome. In general, having older heroes instead of boring plucky young folks is nice (perhaps RPGs could learn from this?!?!). I like Russell Crowe well enough, but he was kinda low key. King John was played quite nicely; they captured the essence of an arrogant, slightly incompetent prettyboy nicely. The main villain is thoroughly detestable. I also liked a lot of the dialogue and the buildup on the politician intrigue. The battle stuff at the beginning of the movie was very neat, and I think the encounter with the king sets up the plot quite nicely. Also, very interesting take on King Richard. I think that the casting is quite well done in general.
The bad: Kind of hokey at times (very cliched blathering about liberty and law in one particular scene), the army battle was outright awful and although it needed to exist, it didn't need to make me dizzy or be as absurdly hokey as it was when it ended. I also think the movie needed more focus; I felt like there were parts that just didn't need to exist, like anything related to the orphans. I think the movie also changes PoV too much; sometimes, they should just stick to an important part and run with it. For example, they introduce Maid Marion before she's really important just for the sake of it; I feel like they should have just introduced that section right before Robin actually goes to meet her.
Things I don't care about that people like to bitch about in these types of movies: Historical accuracy. I think that it is reasonably historically accurate compared to some of the other Robin Hood tales, but I'm really no expert. I had a friend with me at the theatre who seemed to be unhappy about it but I'm not really sure.
-
In general, having older heroes instead of boring plucky young folks is nice (perhaps RPGs could learn from this?!?!).
You're just not playing the right ones.
-
John, Godfrey, and the Sheriff of Nottingham were all love, yes. The northern Barons less so because their plot brings Robin to the whole give me liberty or give me death stuff.
Also noticed a couple of actors from the Sharpe series, which was nice. Seems that one guy is making his way in the movie industry being that old English Army fiddler/singer guy. Kinda there in army sequences, but is usually singing a catchy tune in the background when it's quiet.
Anyways, generally seconding Ciato here. First half is pretty dang neat, second half is saved only by John, because Godfrey gets boring here, and Robin goes all Gary Stu. Whereas John just delightfully chews the scenery in a completely douchy fashion. The parts I especially disliked were the random villagers in the army seqeunce, God Mode Hood, and... oh yes, more Gary Stuing of the Hood, and the randomness of certain other people showing up in the final battle. I didn't mind the camera angles, but my suspension of disbelief was basically shot from Robin's backstory to the end of the movie outside of the Nottingham fight and anything involving John or the Sheriff.
As for historical accuracy, I think you're confusing people with that one particular friend. He has some... odd thoughts at times, and I suspect this was one of them. I mean, really. Who goes to a freakin' Robin Hood movie for historical accuracy? Fortunately, you missed the discourse on the Magna Carta and how it totally wasn't signed that early. >_>
-
(spoilers)
And to be fair it isn't signed in the movie either. (Now, you can say it's proposed too early of course, but eh, now we're getting into the reaaally minor as far as historical inaccuracies in movies go.)
-
You say that like it's supposed to keep those types of things from being brought up.
-
Fantastic Four 2 Rocky 5 Return of the Jedi Part Revolutions Part 3: Finally saw this. Its decent enough, though unlike Spiderman 2 which was better than the first in almost every way, I got more of a "generic sequel" vibes from this. Fun, but nothing special.
-
Iron Man 2 - After everything I had been hearing I had been kind of debating whether or not this movie was worth seeing. It was. Shifts gears a bit in the middle, but mostly from a general Robert Downey Jr. fucks the world and tells them to enjoy it, because he sure as hell is, to a more standard Super Hero movie.
This makes it superior to Robin Hood, which while generally superior in its good half, is abysmal in its bad half. And this was pretty damn enjoyable the whole way through.
-
Watchmen- Watched. I enjoyed the hell out of it as a movie, though I'm not familiar with the source material. What did the fans here think of it?
-
Quite good, obviously went to a lot of effort to be faithful outside some very specific changes/omissions that are clear cases of "original works in a comic but not so much a movie" or "dammit, we don't have the space/time to cover this fully". Even did a good job of inserting background shots that covered some of the post-chapter supplemental stuff.
-
Loved it as a fan of the original, wasn't sure how it would work for somebody who's never read the book. Wasn't wild about the way they handled Ozymandias, but that's about it.
Up: Great movie. Didn't feel they needed the villain to be quite as villainy has he was, but it turned out very fun so I can't really complSQUIRREL!
-
I had to explain Watchmen and the plot to like all my (comicbook) friends. Great movie.
-
Yeah watched the Watchmen with super, style rocked, music rocked and I really enjoyed some of the characters. In particular Rorschach (whom my bad hearing designated as Crooshanks - super had to correct me >.>) and Doctor Manhattan~
Reading up on Wikepedia about it now =-)
-
Did you watch the Director's Cut? Night Owl I's death scene is pretty awesome, but it sticks out pretty awkwardly so it's understandable why they cut it.
-
Awww, I missed that. That always did hit me as one of the more emotional scenes in the comic.
-
I don't remember Nite Owl and Silk Spectre killing that many people, though.
-
I didn't really dig the Watchmen movie, but this has so much to do with director's style. Enough with the fucking slow motion already, Hollywood, jesus christ. The movie does take a lot of effort to be faithful to the source material, which I appreciate, and it's pretty much the only Alan Moore adaptation that doesn't suck. I just don't have any reason to watch it again because I've got the book and that has way more dialogue. Why do I need an abridged version?
Agree that Ozy's "Hey, listen, he's GAY!" lisp was kinda eyeroll-worthy. Least effective member of the cast, which does hurt the finale a bit.
-
Fan of the book, but I only read it immediately before watching the movie. Made the movie less good because it was TOO faithful to the source material so I got kinda bored. Movie's slightly more ridiculous and slightly less poignant than the book, but the movie's still pretty good, my specific circumstances aside.
-
Dreamcatcher- Fairly entertaining horror story. Even though it ran two hours, a hell of a lot of the plot from the book was missing, it felt like. They made Mr Grey more evil and the military figures more sympathetic. The finale was cool enough as well.
-
Hot Fuzz- Watched this today. Funnier on a rewatch, movie still drags in the first half. Roger Daltry is having way, way too much fun in this film.
-
The first half is establishing all the things they'll make callbacks to in the second half. I don't think it drags, but it definitely is funnier as it goes on.
-
The first half is establishing all the things they'll make callbacks to in the second half. I don't think it drags, but it definitely is funnier as it goes on.
Seconding this. The setup is crucial. Otherwise the end wouldn't be as sweet as it was.
-
I also just recently watched the Watchmen movie. I had read the book when the movie first came out in America (eager to watch it with knowledge of the original), but it took so long to come to Japan that I only just got around to renting it.
Really enjoyed the adaptation, though having read the original, I wonder if I mentally filled in any plotholes. It felt like the movie was telling its story at breakneck speed, so I felt sure that there must have been a ton of things that would have confused someone who had never read the original.
I liked the style of the directing as a whole, especially with how accurately he captured the scenes and angles of the original graphic novel panels, and I can't remember being annoyed by the slow motion, so it must not have been that prevalent.
The minor change in the ending was probably a better way to use Ozy than the original, in my opinion.
Apart from that, my general impression is: Amazing source material breeds a really good movie.
Also, I watched Terminator 4, which was better than Terminator 3 and that's the nicest thing I'll say about it.
-
Hancock: Fun. Would have been more fun with a supervillain instead of OHNOES HUMAN FRAGILITY, but oh well.
-
Hancock: Fun. Would have been more fun with a supervillain instead of OHNOES HUMAN FRAGILITY, but oh well.
To be fair... at times he IS the supervillain
-
Well, yeah, but even he didn't get drunk enough to punch himself in the face at Mach 3. They did well enough portraying his powers that I was disappointed not to see him use them in a a knock-down, drag-out fight.
-
Gran Toreno- Because being in Europe means it's clearly movie time!
Anyway, completely awesome. It has Clint Eastwood telling punk kids to get off his lawn, what more could you want?
-
How about a movie from a guy that is 80 that isn't yet another movie about how totally awesome old people are in spite of them being gigantic douchebags?
Edit - He is a great director, but his body of work is incredibly focussed.
-
Beast of 20,000 Fathoms: Being a fan of Kaiju, I figured I should at least give some American Giant Monster movie classics ago...well, at least ONE...that wasn't King Kong...so why not go with the one that basically started the Atomic Radiation Monster Movie bang of the 50s, actually predating the original Godzilla by a year!?
Special effects were pretty damn good for the time; Stop Motion effects have really aged a lot better than you'd think. I figured the fact that the movie is significantly before Clash of the Titans (also Ray Harryhausen), it'd be notably inferior and clunkier, but...no, the monster was very smooth and looked almost real at times.
Otherwise...well...first off, the Romance stuff needed to die. It was pointless and added like an extra 5 minutes to the movie! Yes, I know; Hollywood = ROMANCE IS A MUST, doesn't mean I can't rag on it, especially when it feels forced! Damn B-movies *shakes fist*
I guess it deserves props for an original idea...FOR THE TIME. And the way the monster was geared as a threat in a way more than "its a Monster" was a nice touch too ("ok, we can wound the thing but its blood causes DISEASES? Crap, we die either way!") which led to Radioactive Isotope Grenade Gun! Yeah, I dunno where I'm going with this.
Lastly, being the 50s, I naturally expected lots of Cold War undertones, with the Monster being Russia/Communism and what not. I didn't quite pick up on how it was suppose to be that barring one line here and there like "This is war against a modern enemy!"
...then I actually looked at the name of the monster's fictional race (couldn't quite get a good hearing of it in the movie; they say it all of like 3 times).
"Rhedosaurus"
...yeah, any doubts about it not being a personification of COMMUNIST RUSSIA kind of went out the window at that point <.<
So yeah, guess its good for what it was; not amazing, but passable enough. The fact that it was basically the first of its era certainly gives it points, since it didn't really have anything to feed off of.
I will note, however, that despite the idea between the two movies being the same, Godzilla King of the Monsters is very much NOT like this. The visuals, the underlying theme, the way the destruction is presented, what have you...they're all so different. Anyone who claims that Godzilla is a rip off of Beast of 20,000 Fathoms needs to shove it, cause the two are different enough, and really just run off the same basic idea of "Nuclear Bomb -> Giant Lizard Monster."
-
Man, random movie watching day...
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Me: "Well, not awful. Some major plot holes and dumb things, but nothing..."
Silverfox: "They gave me a shot of hydrochlorothiazide...it lowers the heart rate so low it appears you flat-lined..."
Me:
"..."
"..."
"..."
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
BULLSHIT! WHAT THE FUCK?! NO!!!!!!! MY GOD, JUST LOOK IT UP ON GOOGLE YOU FUCKTWATS!!! CHRIST ALMIGHTY, THAT IS THE DUMBEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE!!! WIKIPEDIA, GOOGLE...10 SECONDS AND YOU'D KNOW THAT ISN'T THE FUCKING CASE!!! JESUS CHRIST! MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TAKE THE FUCKING DRUG EVERY DAY AND IT DOESN'T DO THAT!!! CHRIST ALMIGHTY!!!
That's it, this movie has officially replaced The Princess Bride as my least favourite movie. God damnit, it wasn't horrid, but that just...ugh. I'll probably rescind that ranking, but damn.
7 Pounds
Uh...well. I am conflicted on this movie. On the one hand, I like the symbolism and over-arching premise. On the other hand, the execution is a bit off, and it is not easy to pick up the whole story until the end. It also...isn't very logical at all with some of the points, and has a bit of reaching going on. Still, not awful. Good performances overall, just...parts of it were a large stretch for me to take seriously, though I liked the thought of it a lot.
Night at the Museum 2
Bleh. The first one was great - it took itself very lightly, and was hilarious in all regards. Also, Dick van Dyke as a villain is awesome. This one...it's like they didn't make use of the characters at all. The villain in this was...a joke, and fit in so badly with the style. They used so few of the original's characters that adding new ones felt pointless (since they got less exposure than the ones in the original). Long running gags that aren't funny also abound (the argument scenes...ugh...). So many plot holes too...ugh. Granted, as always, Amy Adams is amazing ("ONE DAY YOU WILL BE MINE!"), Jebediah and Octavius owned, and the Darth Vader + Oscar the Grouch cameo was hilarious and should have been used more than it was. Not bad overall, but a disappointment compared to the first. Seriously...Battle at the Smithsonian is an AWFULLY MISLEADING TITLE!!! I was expecting a battle, damnit ;_;
-
Prince of Persia: Good stunts, but the fight scenes are bleh, mostly due to the camera being too damn close to the action. Story pretends it's not going to be cliched, but then goes right back into the cliche anyway.
-
First off, I wanna say that Night at the Museum 2 was somewhat better than the first to me. Rewatched the first recently, and its like the single most formula Hollywood movie of all time; my sister was actually predicting every single moment, more or less. Night at the Museum 2 was generally more creative I felt.
That said...
Up: For a movie that got a lot of hype...really kind of failed to live up to it. I dunno what it was, but normally Pixar movies keep me entertained; this did not. The humor could be summed up as "Dogs, lul" which funny at first, got old and predictable. Everything else...I dunno, just didn't do anything for me.
-
Prince of Persia: Good stunts, but the fight scenes are bleh, mostly due to the camera being too damn close to the action. Story pretends it's not going to be cliched, but then goes right back into the cliche anyway.
So just like Sands of Time? But a bit less intelligent about it I guess. Hey imagine that. Now here hoping there is a sequel that is like 2 hours long UFC as a movie.
-
First off, I wanna say that Night at the Museum 2 was somewhat better than the first to me. Rewatched the first recently, and its like the single most formula Hollywood movie of all time; my sister was actually predicting every single moment, more or less. Night at the Museum 2 was generally more creative I felt.
That's the reason I feel 1 was better - it was formulaic, but the cast played it like that. The chemistry of the cast felt far stronger, and, even though the twists were obvious...the actors knew it, the script itself knew it, and the movie just played it entirely for laughs. 2 tried to be a little more original, but it wasn't really that original all things considered - it played some jokes too long, and tried to be epic, which didn't fit well. The actors were generally under-used, and they put in way too many people that...didn't end up being used. Not that 2 is bad, but it felt more generic than 1, even if 1 was more formulaic.
-
The curious case of Benjamin Button- Love story with a good cast and a fantastic setting. Probably my favorite movie of this trip so far, since it kept my attention from start to end.
-
MegaMan- Made this year, but I think it must have been a college kids project or something. The acting is GOD AWFUL, the plot is TERRIBLE, the dialogue is beyond ridiculous, and the "special effects" are worse than the videos my friends and I made in college. This is the 3rd movie I've ever seen that I couldn't finish, it was that bad. I skipped ahead looking for something cool, but it all blew. Megaman deserves a REAL high budget movie!
Dragonball Evolution- Sucked, but since I watched it after Megaman it at least kept me entertained. The movie had absolutely no flow to it at all. SPOILERS! In two weeks Goku goes from not being able to control his Chi at all to blasting Piccolo with attack after attack. There were minor plot things to help allow for this, but they pretty much failed. I could rant about all the gaps in the plot, but this movie isn't worth more than 3 lines.
-
Did he at least have a training montage to justify it?
-
Dragonball Evolution- Sucked, but since I watched it after Megaman it at least kept me entertained. The movie had absolutely no flow to it at all. SPOILERS! In two weeks Goku goes from not being able to control his Chi at all to blasting Piccolo with attack after attack. There were minor plot things to help allow for this, but they pretty much failed. I could rant about all the gaps in the plot, but this movie isn't worth more than 3 lines.
I actually saw this in the theater. The entire place understood it was a terrible movie and just turned into a MST call-out session. Some really good stuff. Between that and the movie's naturally bad nature, a hilariously good time was had.
-
That's... pretty much what happened when I saw that, yeah. Me and a few friends were making stupid jokes throughout, and nobody in the cinema was taking it seriously, so most were just laughing at what we were saying and complaining about the film.
-
The curious case of Benjamin Button- Love story with a good cast and a fantastic setting. Probably my favorite movie of this trip so far, since it kept my attention from start to end.
I felt all the allusions with the clocks and the flow of water and the storm and all that were a little ham-handed. I prefer them to be subtle, not the center of a frame.
-
Once Upon a Time in China-thon this past week. Waiting for 3 on Tuesday now.
Once Upon a Time in China - 4/5. Needed more fight scenes.
Once Upon a Time in China 2 - 5/5. Had Donnie Yen and ended its slapstick comedy earlier than the first.
Once Upon a Time in China 3 - waitin'.
Stargate - watched this at Jenna's on BLU RAY. First Blu ray movie. Saw it on a 60 something inch TV? Poor Charles only has a 40 something I think. Either wayyyyy, I can definitely see the quality change with Blu Ray. It's like you're holding the camera. Does not work well with older movies though because all the effects and acting seem shitty and poorly done. IE, the buttons and shiny stuff in the research center looked plastic-y versus the quality on the original DVD. Poor acting heightened by the whole feels-like-you're-holding-the-camera effect from Blu Ray. Cute movie, especially since I just returned from Egypt. 3/5.
Shinobi: Heart Under the Blade - 2/5. Ugh. Expected more. Wonder who was rating this stuff so high, what fighting scenes this movie had sucked.
Pandorum: 4/5. Good thriller. Too bad it seems like a mix between the Descent and that.. horror video game I can't name currently.
-
Karate Kid: Sister wanted to see this, so I took her, for all that I had no real desire to see it. I'll admit it was better than I expected, though I have to question why they called it "The Karate Kid"; ok, yeah, same general premise as the original (from what little I remember; I haven't seen that movie in years), but the movie was clearly using KUNG FU. They state Kung Fu multiple times, but I don't think "Karate" is ever said, WHAT IS THIS!?!??
...ahem. Honestly, the first like 40 minutes of the movie is kind of bland. Just about the kid hating his life. When Jackie Chan does his little Big Damn Hero moment, which was a pretty funny scene actually, movie picks up significantly, and becomes somewhat more tolerable.
Is it a good movie? No, not really, but it wasn't painful, so I guess I can't really complain, and it made my sister happy so...
EDIT: Oh, yeah, and because they named it "The Karate Kid" they obviously had to put in some teaser factors to the original, and yes, they do more or less re-inact the championship match in the same vain, just some slight alterations so they keep it "Kung Fu" instead of "Karate" cause its in China and all that.
-
Rob: *Nods* I just thought the movie did a wonderful job setting the tone with the early 1900's setting, and letting the backround carry things.
It- Tim Curry makes one scary as fuck clown. It is a standard SK movie adaption otherwise. It's a lot of fun, but nothing worth going out of your way to see.
Avatar- Mixed bag. You stop taking the plot seriously as soon as they utter the words unobtainum, but it's still fun enough. It dragged a bunch in the middle, which is my biggest complaint.
Lesbian vampire killers- It's complete cheese. Ciddy you need to see this movie.
Smokin aces- First really bad movie I've seen over here. Plot is largely a mess and the main twists are pretty easy to see coming. It is a waste of a strong cast.
-
It- Tim Curry makes one scary as fuck clown. It is a standard SK movie adaption otherwise. It's a lot of fun, but nothing worth going out of your way to see.
It's one of the better adaptations, honestly. The cast made it what it was, with Jonathan Brandis and Seth Green as kids and... a lot of good adult stars. I remember watching it when it originally aired on TV as a mini-series. First horror movie I ever watched all the way through! Was like, six.
Also for Idun: Usually it's the refresh rate that hurts those movies more than the picture quality. 120hz and 240hz look horribly artificial and amplify the problems.
-
It is almost as if it were filmed at a different rate and then remastered using computer software!
The refresh rate takes betting used to, but after a while (watching films actually filmed at that quality...) you get used to it. Edit - That is there is nothing inherently unnatural or anything about higher refresh rate compared to 60 hz, it just takes adapting to. We have been watching stuff at 60 Hz most of our lives unless you are a real man and grew up on PC games, then you have been pissed off and getting headaches from things at 60 Hz for years. 75 is nice, 85 is better! 120/240 is extravagant but I still look forward to it.
Outside of probably a few really uh extravagant films I highly doubt we are going to see to much actual cinema done on film anymore that you can buy on Blu Ray (and have it look any good). So outside of crazy people and indie stuff, the advent of popularised LCD/LED televisions (3D capable or not) has pretty much been what I see as the final nail in the coffin for Film. Digital recordings from here on out. Which is a shame, because I do love the texture you get from film, but such is life.
-
Smokin aces- First really bad movie I've seen over here. Plot is largely a mess and the main twists are pretty easy to see coming. It is a waste of a strong cast.
If you are watching Smokin' Aces for plot you're doing it wrong. Smokin' Aces should be watched with the same kind of expectations as Idun's martial arts movies. There's explosions and everyone's batshit insane... what more do you want!?
Seriously, Smokin' Aces felt like a live-action adaptation of everything good about anime.
-
I was bored to tears by the movie's attempt at plot, and te actual action was a letdown considering th buildup the movie had.
LA Confidental: The best movie I've seen over here, I think. It has a really strong cast, and the setting (Early 50's hollywood) is top notch.
-
LA Confidential is my favorite movie. Just awesome in every respect, and a huge improvement from Elroy's book.
-
There's a Smokin' Aces prequel out now. You may want to check that out. Directed by Pesce. A little bit better in plot, but Smokin' Aces really is one of those just gory slap-action movies. Doesn't make it good though! Once Upon a Time in China actually has some plot, though I feel like 2 pieced together plot more than the 1st.
So, this Expendables trailer which isn't really a trailer at all . . . . . "Stallone, Schwarzenneger, Willis, Statham*, Li, Rourke, Lundgren, Austin, Couture, Crews. . . " are all supposed to be in some awesomeness.
* The trailer prefaces this for action LEGENDS. Is Statham an action LEGEND already? That just seems funky - dude is still making tons of action movies compared to other people on that list. I mean, I GUESS I can see it but I never thought stuff like Crank and The Transporter were *that* popular.
I can't get excited about this movie. For example, I was excited for War with just Statham and Jet Li in it, bu~ut they barely had any one-on-one action time which sort of defeated the purpose. Jet Li has always given me an insta-boner, but still.
-
Transporter is a cult classic for action dudes and Crank is a cult classic for... well people that like awesome things. Transporter has been around for about a decade? Yeah he works well enough to list him.
-
LA Confidental: The best movie I've seen over here, I think. It has a really strong cast, and the setting (Early 50's hollywood) is top notch.
Yes. Now you should continue this trend of watching awesome period movies by seeing The Prestige.
-
Hit me up if we meet for Busch Gardens with it. I'd love to watch something else in the vein of LA Confidential.
The Usual suspects- Forgot if I commented on this. I knew the big plot twist coming in, but that didn't mar my enjoyment of the film at all. Pretty damn fun and knew how to wrap up the story at the right time.
-
LA Confidental: The best movie I've seen over here, I think. It has a really strong cast, and the setting (Early 50's hollywood) is top notch.
Yes. Now you should continue this trend of watching awesome period movies by seeing The Prestige.
So very this. Pick up The Illusionist which came out at the same time and both are fantastic.
-
I <i>guess</i>. I was thinking of "legend" spanning more than action cult fanatics. But when I look at that list, Stallone, Rourke and Li are really the ones that stand out as reaching a larger audience. Oh well.
-
I dunno, is over a decade fairly dedicated to a genre and having actually made good movies enough to get you that label? Kurt Cobain was certainly a rock ledged just as much as Dave Grohl is even though Grohl was has been doing it for much longer now than Cobain did just for an example. Jeff Buckley is a legend and he released a whopping 2 albums and is only really still a music legend for music types, but still a total legend.
-
Bullitt: Because it was a-renegade-cop-who-plays-by-his-own-rules movie before it was cool to be a renegade cop who plays by his own rules. This one was pretty neat. Has that low-key, procedural feeling you get with the good seventies dramas (1968, close enough), which I like a lot. No melodrama, nothing amped up with flashy camerawork or music just for the sake of generating tension. Car chase has a lot of the fine detail and charm that CGI lacks sometimes, smoke pouring off of wheels in random patterns, hubcaps flying off at odd moments, random stuff you often don't get when someone has to plan out every pixel of an action sequence. Good times.
Forbidden Zone: Wow, what, I don't even--*headsplosion*. If ever there was a movie to test one's tolerance for cult weirdness, this is it. This is basically what you'd get if you locked David Lynch, Mel Blanc, and Meeple in a room, gave them the budget of a high school play, and told them they couldn't come out until they'd made a movie. I really don't think I can say I liked it just because my tolerance for "weird for the sake of weird" is fairly low these days, and I have zero interest in seeing it again, but I really can't hate any movie whose credits include stuff like "and Danny Elfman as Satan." Mostly I just sat there in slackjawed amazement that something this insane could actually exist. (In other words it is something Grefter should watch like right now.) Also, the theme song will not leave my head. (It can be found here, in the intro sequence--which I should note involves mild nudity, blackface, and copious amounts of raw insanity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOhncfDJum8)
Dagon: Despite the name, this is basically The Shadow Over Innsmouth (except set in Spain for some reason, probably because that's obviously where the director's funding came from. The actual name of the town in the movie is Imboca, which seems like some mangled Spanish translation of Innsmouth). Random guy on vacation gets stuck in creepy, sheltered port town, flees unpleasantly fishlike locals. It starts out looking like a run-of-the-mill horror movie, but some sequences are pretty much lifted wholesale from the story (fleeing a hotel by shifting a door lock around, then barricading an escape route room by room). It's very low budget, but they make good use of what they have; a minimum of digital effects, most of the effort going into makeup and prosthetics. The Innsmouth Look is captured with admirable detail. It's a B movie, but put together with some reverence for the source material (it's directed by the guy who did Reanimator and From Beyond back in the eighties). Fun enough for what it is, outside of the obligatory gruesome sequence (poor Ezekiel. That really was extremely painful to watch). Main character's kind of a wiener, but eh, not really out of place for a normal guy getting stuck in a horrible situation. Earned massive points for the final stand even if it didn't work out as intended, at least. ("No options." *torch*)
9: Eh. It was okay. I can't quite put my finger on what was missing, but something definitely was. There were some nice bits--escape from the cathedral was probably the highlight as far as the action sequences go, follow-through on the "Sometimes, one must be sacrificed" line was pretty much what it should've been (although, I'd really, really like to see Christopher Plummer play someone who's not a complete asshole sometime before he dies). Basically a decent effort for a first-time director who might be more interesting with some experience behind him.
-
A-Team: Good action movie - I just wish they hadn't associated it with the A-Team name. Most of you are too young to remember the tv show, and this really doesn't do it justice. Loved the CIA guy Lynch; we need more wacky villains like this.
-
A-Team: Good action movie - I just wish they hadn't associated it with the A-Team name. Most of you are too young to remember the tv show, and this really doesn't do it justice. Loved the CIA guy Lynch; we need more wacky villains like this.
I thought they pulled the characters themselves off pretty well. They always seem really smug, like they're enjoying this.
-
Once Upon a Time in China 3 - beautiful beast fights. I think it was the movement that made it awesome . . . because, in order to fight (generally) you have to move, eh? 4/5.
Iron Man - 4/5. Saw this a prereq as Charles wants to see Iron Man 2, and I can't possibly watch the second before the first.
Modify - next movies: Where the Wild Things Are (was never exposed to this as a child, so, eh) and Alice in Wonderland at the behest of Charles. Apparently my Netflix DVD queue is too "old" for him.
-
Karate Kid: They state Kung Fu multiple times, but I don't think "Karate" is ever said, WHAT IS THIS!?!??
For this reason alone, when the commercials were running pretty heavily 2 weeks ago, they were pissing me off pretty badly. Shit, the Kung Fu Kid doesn't really have all that much different a ring to it.
-
Jackie Chan mentioned in an interview a while ago that the movie would be called The Kung Fu Kid, saying it was a point of Chinese pride. Guess the studio got the better of the People's Republic this time.
-
Black Dynamite - Why the fuck did I wait 2 years to get my hands on this? This was so awesome. It might have to make me reevaluate best movies of 2008 sometime.
-
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - Somehow I'd never seen this before. I only saw part of it, but wooow, it was really, really bad. The female lead was laughably pathetic, and the rest of the movie was immensely goofy, and not in an especially amusing way. Oh well, seeing Harrison Ford in it prompted us to stop watching it and start watching Star Wars instead, so something good did come of it!
-
Was that the one where the bad guys ate strawberry jello on monkey cups?
-
Unrelated noblepersons who exposited about who the bad guys were, but yes.
-
Iron Man 2 - good stuff. Now, I'm fairly confused about some plot things, but that's because this is the first time I was exposed to Iron Man outside of a video game.
-
Iron Man 2 - good stuff. Now, I'm fairly confused about some plot things, but that's because this is the first time I was exposed to Iron Man outside of a video game.
What kinda plot things?
-
Iron Man has a plot? :o
-
Iron Man has a plot? :o
Yes. Blow shit up, crack jokes, show off hot people, and make Captain America references.
That said... it makes for a good movie!
-
The whole new element thing. What's it's NAME? But other things I'd have to think of later.
Paper Heart 5/5. Really. This movie surprised me.
-
War of the Gargantuas: Another obscure Kaiju movie by Toho, finally saw it!
Random things I noticed:
-The two Gargantuas are smaller than most Toho Kaiju. Based on their size relative to buildings, trees, etc., I'd say they were on a 50 foot scale. Toho Kaiju are usually more like a 150 Foot scale (Godzilla's original official japanese height was 167 Feet or some such, or 50 Meters IF YOU PREFER TO BE METRIC, for example.) Though I can understand why; the Gargantuas needed to actually interact with humans (bad one eats humans, one by one, for example), so they needed to be large enough to be threatening, but small enough such that humans could actually be seen by them as something larger than ants (so instead, humans are like mice!)
-Random usage of music from Ghidorah, the Three Headed monster, near the end. Most notably, the "Rodan's Theme" section was used the most, but the entire song was there, if broken up (as in, the "Ghidorah's theme" part and the "Godzilla's Theme" part were both there!)
-The Brown Gargantua (the good one) was definitely the stronger and larger of the two. Didn't expect that, cause most cases, the bad guy is the stronger and its usually the UNDER DOG TRIUMPHS, or the two are evenly matched. I guess the logic here is that the Green one is just a lot more aggressive and savage, where as the Brown one is less prone to fighting, so that would offset things? Except the Brown one had the whole Berserk Button thing where when humans were hurt, he'd start pounding on the green one anyway...and to add insult to injury? The Brown one had in his favor...
-COMPETENT MILITARY! IN A KAIJU! What is this I don't even...
Other than that, movie isn't really anything special.
-
The whole new element thing. What's it's NAME? But other things I'd have to think of later.
Obviously Tony Stark's dad invented an element, but didn't have the technology to create it. So, he left some absurdly hidden clues for Tony to find to create the element when the technology was available. Naturally Daddy Stark knew that Tony would have access to some super cool 3D computers and some pretty badass lasers. He no doubt assumed that this element would someday be needed to save Tony's life and/or make a more awesome version of whatever invention's Tony had made while trapped in a prison.
-
I'd like to know it's name!
How to Train Your Dragon - 5/5. Golden. Good voice acting, beautiful textile animation, etc. etc. Onto next movie.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununoctium
Wikipedia, its useless AND educational.
-
Emphasis on useless in the case of ununoctium. If the chemist doesn't even care about you...
-
You Chemists only interested in your real testable elements. If only you had true vision like Theoretical Physicists!
But yeah this is one part of the plot of Iron Man 2 that they do crib from the real theory of Ununoctium a fair bit.
No compounds of ununoctium have been synthesized yet, but calculations on theoretical compounds have been performed since 1964.
Being the most relevant sentence in the whole damned article. No compounds synthesized and no real work done on it since the mid 60s. BAM that is going straight into the movie.
-
That said, for non-chemist people, Ununoctium is not a real name. It's a placeholder (Latin. Un un octium or one one eight, ie 118 on the periodic table) name for a theoretical element that has never actually been observed, whether in nature or in experiments. Once it's be found/created enough to actually play with it and work out what it's like, then it'll get a real name, presumably based on some famous chemist.
Wikipedia notes in... I believe the page on Vibranium (one of Marvel's fictitious super-elements, it's used in stuff like Captain America's shield and is one of the metals in Adamantium) that the Iron Man 2 novelization gives said name to the element Tony creates in the movie.
-
If Vibranium is unstable enough to be used as a powersupply or conductive enough to be used IN such a minute scale powersource that can provide so much power then Captain America is going to be pretty fucked when his movie comes out.
-
Goodbye Solo - 5/5.
12 - 3/5.
Where the Wild Things Are - 3/5. It was beautiful, but it was just missing something . . .
-
Alice in Wonderland - 3/5. See WTWA.
Bloody bighead was awesome though.
-
Up in the air- Has anyone else here seen it? Just saw it and gathering my thoughts.
-
I hear not so pretty things about the Last Airbender.
-
I hear not so pretty things about the Last Airbender.
I saw it and it's as bad as everyone is saying. The effects are good, but the script is absolutely dreadful. The series is much, much better.
-
*checks* Average rating of 4.5/10 on IMDB. And IMDB voters typically overrate things, especially on opening weekend. Wow.
-
Still managed 40 million somehow
-
DAMN YOU SHUMANILALNIWHATSIT!!!!!
-
Up in the air- Saw this, as I briefly mentioned above. The movie's premise is pretty simple in it's fucked up way (Guy is a subcontractor who fires people for a living, lives an empty life mostly in airports and hotels), and delivers on style in a big way. Plot twists were easy to see coming, sadly.
-
Last Airbender: Was actually pretty decent, although I never watched the TV series so I don't know how closely they followed it. Special effects and scenery are beautiful. Acting is subpar though. Aang and Kitara were decent but the villains were dreadfully hokey. As for the script, I believe this was the quote that came out of my mouth at the end: "What the fuck? That was the end of the movie?"
Obviously they expect it to be successful enough to warrant multiple sequels, but that's a dangerous gamble (see Golden Compass).
-
Last Airbender: Was actually pretty decent, although I never watched the TV series so I don't know how closely they followed it. Special effects and scenery are beautiful. Acting is subpar though. Aang and Kitara were decent but the villains were dreadfully hokey. As for the script, I believe this was the quote that came out of my mouth at the end: "What the fuck? That was the end of the movie?"
Obviously they expect it to be successful enough to warrant multiple sequels, but that's a dangerous gamble (see Golden Compass).
If you get the chance, try to watch some of the episodes. It's an excellent series and is probably the best thing Nickelodeon has produced in years. They really did cut out a lot in the movie, but they also added in some stuff that I thought was odd. Sokka and Katara's characters really suffer from a lack of screentime and as a result are almost nothing like what they are in the series. If they do have a sequel I hope they do Azula justice because she is really a superb villain in the show.
-
Where does the movie end it? from the previews I assumed they covered the whole Siege of the North Pole plotline (ie, the end of Season 1), where basically it's "we won this big battle, but we've still barely dented the Fire Nation".
-
Yeah, it ends at the end of season 1. The fire nation has retreated and we get a glimpse of Azula right before the end.
-
Totally awesome place to end a movie.
-
Still managed 40 million somehow
Had a lot of good media coverage/hype, which is odd since M. Night isn't particularly known for a consistently good/acceptable filmography. What I want to see - is Toy Story 3. Hell yeah, that movie is getting good shit all around. I love animation movies too, so . . . it only follows logically.
-
I think the big problem with the movie is the time they chose to release it. You're not beating a Twilight movie on opening weekend, and Toy Story 3 is still new. Even with a built-in fanbase, not as many people are going to see the movie as should - which hurts the chance of a sequel greatly.
-
Predators - keep those expectations low and you'll be pleasantly surprised. pretty fun cast of characters, with well-conceived action that brings the most out of them. But really? You watch this movie for the swearing. If there were a yearly award for best use of the word "Fuck" in a movie, Predators would win, place, and show.
-
Predators disappointed me. The cast simply wasn't packing on mass.
-
You wanted more fat people?
-
Toy Story 3: Saw this today, and generally speaking, lives up to its hype. Very good movie and what you expect from Pixar, etc. Not much to say. Well, guess the movie is predictable in the whole "Deus Ex Machina in 5, 4..." sense, but the movie kind of knows that's the case, doesn't pretend to not be, and just runs with it, so its all good. In the end, found myself entertained, and even got a bit teary eyed in the last real scene (as in, the After Scenes during the Ending Credits that exist purely for gags don't count) of the movie, which...is impressive, since despite being animated and considering the nature of the movie, you really don't expect it to pull something like that. That, and I guess the scene is something people can relate too.
-
Eclipse: Was pretty blah. Unlike New Moon which improved on the book, this one left out too much of what made the 3rd book fun. Jasper now talks in Hollywood Texas accent that he didn't have before. Not enough of the big fight, and the vampires breaking like statues was just a weird effect that didn't seem appropriate at all. On the bright side, they did Rosalie's backstory right. "I was a bit theatrical back then..." :)
The Karate Kid: Obvious name problem aside, was a very enjoyable movie. One of those films where you know what the destination is, but you still enjoy the ride getting there. Great chemistry from the whole cast.
-
Toy Story 3: Saw this today, and generally speaking, lives up to its hype. Very good movie and what you expect from Pixar, etc. Not much to say. Well, guess the movie is predictable in the whole "Deus Ex Machina in 5, 4..." sense, but the movie kind of knows that's the case, doesn't pretend to not be, and just runs with it, so its all good. In the end, found myself entertained, and even got a bit teary eyed in the last real scene (as in, the After Scenes during the Ending Credits that exist purely for gags don't count) of the movie, which...is impressive, since despite being animated and considering the nature of the movie, you really don't expect it to pull something like that. That, and I guess the scene is something people can relate too.
Pixar tends to be good at tugging at your heartstrings just in the right way, yes. I loved Toy Story 3 mostly because of how it handled the whole matter of growing up. Well, and having the typical Pixar qualities.
-
Inception:
I haven't seen a movie in MONTHS. Found it very intriguing and like most of Nolan's films, the execution was brilliant. There are some general wtf moments (like the motives of everyone who does decide to get into the scheme) as well as some loose ends that aren't perfectly tied in (nothing even briefly showing what happens to the other characters), but the most part? It was pretty awesome. The concept itself isn't particularly new I would say, but still relatively refreshing, and definitely a somewhat different take on common ideas used in the film. Emotional side of theme for the main character was pretty solid too. I will most likely buy the DVD whenever it comes out.
-
I was waiting for someone to mention Inception. I hear people raving. I would like to see it despite the movie's trailer lackluster.
-
It's Christopher Nolan. I haven't seen him make a bad movie yet, so.
-
It's Christopher Nolan. I haven't seen him make a bad movie yet, so.
Take away Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart from Dark Knight and you've got a pretty meh or even bad movie.
-
This has Leonardo DiCrapio who has been doing absolutely amazing work under good directors for years now. I am cynical and skeptical, but have good hopes for the film.
-
Inception:
What the matrix sequels should have been.
Also: I like architects ^_^
-
Inception. If you don't see it you are fucking retarded.
-
The Borrower Arietty: New Miyazaki film! Was sufficiently gorgeous, but doesn't really hold up to Spirited Away or Howl's Moving Castle. The original story it was based on was pretty simple, and the movie follows suit. There's hardly any plot to speak of, and the characters don't get very much development.
It -does- have a freakin' awesome Dad-character though.
Ending was presented as uplifting, but the whole thing came off as really depressing.
Also, the evil housekeeper lady reminds me too much of someone I work with.
-
Hellraiser 3: Hell on Earth - 2/5.
Hellraiser 4: Bloodline - 3/5.
Hellraiser 5: (WILL WATCH TODAY/MOVIE LOST IN MAIL, effin' losers)
Hellraiser 6: Hellseeker - 2/5.
Hellraiser 7: Deader - 2/5.
After tonight, I will have seen all the Hellraisers. "What's your pleasure?"
Anyway. Battle Royale in tonight.
Brief Interviews with Hideous Men - 1/5.
A Scanner Darkly - 2/5. 4/5 for animation though.
Miracle at St. Anna - 5/5. GJ Spike Lee. GJ.
-
Oh yeah, if I didn't mention it:
12 - 3/5.
-
Despicable Me: Yet again, dragged to theater by little sister! Anyway, fun little movie, about what you'd expect. Cute/Silly idea, with adequate enough execution to remain enjoyable.
-
Robin and Marian: The sister clubbed me with this one. It's written by the guy who did The Lion in Winter, which is all kinds of awesome and should be watched by anyone with any interest in history or just good movies. This isn't as good as that, but you can tell the guy has a real love for the time period and subject matter. Story doesn't recap the familiar stories--we jump ahead twenty years to when everyone's trying to figure out how to go back to living a normal life (and mostly failing at it). It's about heroes and lovers getting old, not being able to go back to the way things used to be, etc. Which is kind of nice since it's ground Hollywood doesn't often like to cover (old people don't sell). It's one of those stories you know is going to end badly for everyone involved, but you like them too much to stop watching (goddamn sheriff of Nottingham is even fairly likable). Still not 100% sure what I think of the actual ending. I guess she figured something of the sort was going to happen at some point and she may as well make sure she's there when it does (and also there's an army outside). I also have to note that I greatly appreciated seeing King Richard presented as a warmongering douchebag for once. Since, y'know, that's pretty much what he was.
1776: Rented this for July 4th, and because I hadn't seen it in at least fifteen years. Still a lot of fun. I don't normally go for musicals, but c'mon, singing John Adams. Had also forgotten how witty the script was (or more likely I didn't notice it in the first place, given how old I was the last time I saw it). Should totally be required viewing in U.S. history classes.
Young Sherlock Holmes: Obviously the newer movie reminded me that this existed. One of those things you wouldn't even consider watching unless you grew up in the eighties, really. I went, "Eh, I haven't seen it since like 1990 and I think there were Egyptian cultists or something in it. Could be okay." Kinda isn't. Even allowing that it was probably meant to be a kids' movie since the main characters are teenagers and for Hollywood the latter often implies the former (though it's actually rated PG-13), it's very bland, predictable, and suffers from occasional bouts of unbearable tweeness. Dumb Watson is also present. Should've expected as much, really--Chris Columbus script, the man is the king of mediocrity (dammit, Spielberg, why did you have to inflict this mook on the world? You really couldn't have found a better protege?) I figured, Barry Levinson directed it, he's competent at worst. I should've remembered, at worst he made Toys. Only remotely noteworthy thing about the movie is it having one of the first CGI sequences in film (if not the first). Still looks decent enough considering they kept it short and it was meant to be surreal in the first place (credits attribute the segment to Pixar, incidentally. Didn't think they were operating that early--1985).
Inception: Saw this last weekend. Lives up to the hype, excellent on pretty much every front. I can think of nothing bad to say about this movie; it has pretty much everything you would want to see in one. Neat sci-fi ideas are expressed efficiently (visually whenever possible) and without talking down to the audience; supporting cast is charming enough even when their roles in the story are fairly basic; there are dudes beating each other up in variable gravity; stuff explodes; there is a tragic love aspect that plays out in fairly non-cliche fashion tied in with a backstory about the dangers of obsession and the risks of exploration. There is often a lot occurring but it's never difficult to tell what's happening. This is no mean feat when you're crosscutting constantly between three or four disparate (but related) scenarios at the end of the movie. Basically if there is anything you appreciate about the act of being alive, you should watch this.
Toy Story 3: This was fun. Not a whole lot more to say than what's generally true about most Pixar work--they excel at making movies ostensibly for kids that anyone can enjoy. Ending was really nice. Evokes growing up and moving on without being depressing or cynical. This is how to finish a series. The Darth Vader moment was much appreciated--maybe I'm too much of a geek to see it otherwise, but I can't imagine them not having Return of the Jedi in mind there. Also, bonus points for Totoro cameo.
-
Forgot to say I saw Inception on Thursday before I flew out on Friday. What El Cid said.
-
Sorcerer's Apprentice: good special effects, ho-hum story. Bonus points for tying magic to physics, negative points for the main failing to yell "Hadoken!" at the end.
-
But what point variation does naming the main antagonist "whorebath" (okay, not technically, but I spent half an hour thinking that was his name) give?
-
Scott Pilgrim: is awesome. You're welcome.
Memes aside, I don't think I stopped smiling throughout the movie. Great ensemble casting, everyone does a fantastic job. Kieran Culkin does steal the show as gay roommate Wallace though.
-
Scott Pilgrim was pretty awesome.
-
What they said. Seconding Wallace hype in particular. Otherwise, a very fun genre-mashup and while its humour didn't work 100% of the time, it worked often enough that I had a lot of fun.
-
Scott Pilgrim: 0/10. What bullshit. When Scott Patel was defeated he was supposed to drop $2.10 and Ramona offered to lend 15 cents. In the movie, it was 2.30 and 45 cents. This change was inexcusable and represented a complete rape of the source material.
-
Scott Pilgrim: is awesome. You're welcome.
Memes aside, I don't think I stopped smiling throughout the movie. Great ensemble casting, everyone does a fantastic job. Kieran Culkin does steal the show as gay roommate Wallace though.
Seriously the best comedy I've seen in ages. Very consistent state of humorousness (even when doing other genres), unlike damn near everything which is focused on one or two key sequences.
-
Scott Pilgrim: 0/10. What bullshit. When Scott Patel was defeated he was supposed to drop $2.10 and Ramona offered to lend 15 cents. In the movie, it was 2.30 and 45 cents. This change was inexcusable and represented a complete rape of the source material.
It's Matthew Patel you douche. Your typos are ruining my internet.
-
SUICIDE. MY ONLY OPTION.
-
Scott Pilgrim: Yeah, what basically others said. Went in expecting to be mildly entertained, ended up finding the whole thing hilarious.
-
The movie isn't perfect - in particular, I thought it did a notably poor job of getting me to actually sympathise with Scott himself. From what I read of the comic (which admittedly wasn't much), it didn't really have this problem, which makes me inclined to blame Michael Cera. If serious plot were the point of the movie, this could actually be a major flaw. As is, SCOTT PILGRIM SERIOUS PLOT.
-
Scott Pilgrim. Awesome movie. Although, I do agree with:
The movie isn't perfect - in particular [...] Michael Cera.
-
The Expendables- The only way I can think of to improve this movie is to have Dolph Lundgren wear a mesh tanktop and smell crime. But then I guess you didn't make The Expendables, you made Crime Stinks: The Smell of Penetration: He Nose the Truth.
-
So, I am planning on watching some Bond on my trip. Any suggestions for a good 'old' Bond and a good 'new' Bond?
-
Moonraker and The World is Not Enough, because you need camp cheese Bond.
-
*eyes Grefter* These sound like NITORI suggestions
-
New Bond: Casino Royale or Goldeneye. License to Kill if you've seen both.
Old Bond: From Russia With Love. Connery's best.
-
Those are very, very Nitori suggestions, yes. The World is Not Enough is the dullest Bond movie I've seen (despite getting one of the best theme songs). Moonraker is late seventies cheese trying to capitalize on the success of Star Wars. Actual recommendations:
New? Casino Royale, yeah. Excellent reboot, threw out most of what I disliked about the Brosnan movies. Best one in the series that I've seen. Quantum of Solace is not as good but solid and worth watching if you like Casino Royale.
I have seen only an uneven smattering of older Bond movies. Enough to know that Connery movies > Moore movies, at least. Goldfinger was alright and is pretty iconic as these things go. I should probably watch the rest of the early Connery ones one of these days.
-
I admit I am naturally biased toward Connery and Bros due to hotness. I may try Casino Royale after Goldeneye anyway (I think the person who is watching the movies with me has already seen it.)
The only Bond movie I've seen is Tomorrow Never Dies, which fucking sucked.
-
Brosnan really looks the part, just didn't get a great selection of movies in my opinion (I only saw Goldeneye once when it was new and don't remember it well, but consensus seems to be that it's the best of the lot). I didn't think Tomorrow Never Dies was terrible but may have been too busy staring at Michelle Yeoh to notice the stupid.
-
Tomorrow Never Dies is the only Brosnan film I particularly disliked. The villain and his plan are laughably bad (which is a shame, since something better could probably have been done with the core ideas there) and the movie had nothing done notably well to recommend it. TWINE... I can see how someone would rate it the worst, but I think it does one thing very well (Sophie Marceau's character) and that's enough for me, even if the rest is a bit of a mess (Denise Richards' nukular physicist deserves a special facepalm).
Shale's recommendations are pretty swell. I'd mention Goldfinger in the same breath as From Russia but otherwise everything he said goes for my opinions too.
Also, good theme songs tend to have rather little correlation with good movies, in the case of the Bond series. Live and Let Die is easily my least favourite movie in the series, yet that song rocks.
-
It is a great song. Personal preference is You Know My Name (from Casino Royale) for best Bond theme, though.
-
Pffft, fools not understanding there being two sides to the Bond coin. There is super serious and then there is the absurd, TWINE and Moonraker are both the epitomy of absurdity, especially Moonraker. Sure it was a cash grab, but it was a BOND cash grab. It climaxes with a confrontation with Jaws the man with metal teeth on a space station, Bond convincing him to switch sides, dumping the villain out of an air locker, both Bond and Jaws getting hot chicks to have sweet making fuck with and then Bond shags a chick during reentry. Moonraker is a fucking masterpiece it is the epitome of 1970s holywood cinema, it is nonsensical in the ways that all the best 70s cinema is and chock full of excess in ways that only Holywood can do. It is probably Roger Moore's best film.
If you want a good time you could go with A View To A Kill, that movie pretty much sucks and is a crappy Moore movie then you have CHRISTOPHER WALKEN SCENE and then you go back to sleep, it bounces around between WALKEN WALKEN WALKEN and majour snooze.
If you want to be a big baby and watch serious Bond movies then you will want Casino Royale and I would honestly go with You Only Live Twice. With that you have Connery with 5 other Bond roles under his belt, you get Blofeld who is fucking awesome and to top it all off the screenplay was written by Roald Dahl of all people.
Alternately if you are going for the sexy well then you want Thunderball for incredibly obvious reasons.
(http://www.ultimate.com/omc-boats/gallery/babineau/thunderballXboat.jpg)
Fuck. Yes.
Aaaaaalllllternately, if you are going to be binging on a LOT of Bond, make sure you ignore all the complaints about On Her Majesty's Secret Service and watch it for yourself. For all the issues there is to the movie, George Lazenby was not it and it is really a shame he only had that one honestly pretty shitty script to get to do his work as Bond. A lot of the darker serious Bond stuff you will find later after the much more camp Roger Moore years stems from Lazenby's take on Bond. OHMSS may be a bad Bond movie because it has Bond getting married, on the other hand it also is really freaking brutal and ends with her being gunned down in front of him. If you think the ending of Casino Royale is harsh and brutal it has NOTHING on OHMSS which has credits rolling as Bond clutches his newly wed wife's still warm corpse.
-
Live and Let Die is my favorite Bond movie. It's that cheesy 70s stuff but not so cheesy as to be campy. Plus Jane Seymour is fucking gorgeous in that movie.
Also seconding On Her Majesty's Secret Service hype, very underrated part of the franchise.
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
-
It is a great song. Personal preference is You Know My Name (from Casino Royale) for best Bond theme, though.
Yes. That song is awesome.
Anyway, I only watched 'New' Bond. Goldeneye and Casino Royale are indeed both good and worth a watch if you want to watch more Bond. If you want ridiculous stupid you could also watch Die Another Day if only because the cloaking car chase scene was just *psyduck*.
Soctt Pilgrim:
And movies, right. I went and watched Scott Pilgrim today with a friend. There really is nothing much else to add. I loved it. I didn't read the comics, but the movie on its standalone is pretty awesome still. Has some of the problems NEB mentioned, but what I like I about it is just that its fun. The action keeps on rolling, the jokes are pretty witty and it doesn't tend to slow down all that much. Which is nice for this type of movie. The aesthetics are also godlike.
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
If you made a poll of this (at least on the DL), I'd imagine 75% would say the say choice was in the other direction!
-
I am personally boggling at the aiel's decision here and I don't even really like action movies much. There are just few things more barf-inducing than Julia Roberts romcom.
-
Erm, yeah. The Expendables sounds like a fine way to kill a few hours if you can turn your brain off.
On that note, saw Scott Pilgrim, went in with pretty high expectations and it was pretty flawless from start to finish. One or two minor weaknesses as things went along, but nothing major. And every now and then one of the small touches would stand out and it would be brilliant.
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
If you made a poll of this (at least on the DL), I'd imagine 75% would say the say choice was in the other direction!
Likely, but the Expendables looked like the kind of terrible I haven't seen since the Super Mario Bros Movie. I was enterained by EPL, at least.
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
If you made a poll of this (at least on the DL), I'd imagine 75% would say the say choice was in the other direction!
Likely, but the Expendables looked like the kind of terrible I haven't seen since the Super Mario Bros Movie. I was enterained by EPL, at least.
So just to confirm Super hates fun and good things and really would rather catch a chick flick and have a good cry.
Kay.
Does it hurt that much to hate fun?
-
Scott Pilgrim was awesome. I dug the Pee meter.
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
If you made a poll of this (at least on the DL), I'd imagine 75% would say the say choice was in the other direction!
Likely, but the Expendables looked like the kind of terrible I haven't seen since the Super Mario Bros Movie. I was enterained by EPL, at least.
So just to confirm Super hates fun and good things and really would rather catch a chick flick and have a good cry.
Kay.
Does it hurt that much to hate fun?
Does emasculating mean cool?
-
Eat pray love- It was either that or the expendables. Soooooo yeah, not a hard choice.
I dug it, even if the overarching plot was pretty spotty. Bonus points to the movie for randomly throwing in a badass Texan in the middle of India of all places.
If you made a poll of this (at least on the DL), I'd imagine 75% would say the say choice was in the other direction!
Likely, but the Expendables looked like the kind of terrible I haven't seen since the Super Mario Bros Movie. I was enterained by EPL, at least.
So just to confirm Super hates fun and good things and really would rather catch a chick flick and have a good cry.
Kay.
Does it hurt that much to hate fun?
Does emasculating mean cool?
In Superese it does.
-
The AV club breaks EPL down pretty well- it is the story of the worst woman ever. And she wrote it about herself for fucks sake.
-
If you go into a movie called "Eat Pray Love," based on an autobiography, starring Julia Roberts, and expect anything BUT this movie, you're only fooling yourself.
That said, GREAT food porn and travel porn. Hooray for pasta, iconic architecture and beautiful beaches.
-
Scott Pilgrim: Yeah, see what everybody else said. Lots and lots of fun. Haven't read the books, but could still tell when it went off adaptation, and I thought Gideon's "relationship" with Ramona was a cop-out, but other than that it was great. Loved every minute of the fight scenes, was cracking up most of the way.
Twilight: Watched this with RiffTrax and it was still damn near intolerable. Good God. Even Mike and the bots can only do so much. And it's still better than what I've heard about the books, because at least it wasn't narrated.
-
Scott Pilgrim: 0/10. What bullshit. When Scott Patel was defeated he was supposed to drop $2.10 and Ramona offered to lend 15 cents. In the movie, it was 2.30 and 45 cents. This change was inexcusable and represented a complete rape of the source material.
I agree wholeheartedly with Andrew here. Seriously horribly overhyped and awful movie that deserves none of the praise it receives. But, for a deeper evaluation...
The whole premise of the movie is retarded and makes no sense. We're supposed to believe this takes place in Canadia? So where are polar bears? The mounties? The moose? The movie fails miserably at atmosphere - the only part of the movie that makes it feel like it takes place in Canadia is the fact that there's snow on the ground. Way to fail on immersion, movie.
More to the point, there is no logic to this world! The real world? Bullshit. Words appearing instead of sounds? Fucking ridiculous. References to save points and other crazy things? Preposterous! This movie is impossible to take seriously and understand! Where the fuck does this subspace thing come from? How does Ramona carry a gigantic hammer in her purse? This movie makes no explanation or reference to normalcy, making it a failure as a live action movie.
It's also horribly racially insensitive! The first evil boyfriend we meet is Indian. And uses magic. And summons demons. This is horribly insensitive - it perpetuates the stereotype that Indians are evil, godless, magic-using heathens.
And it's insensitive to people with different preferences in other areas! Vegans? Vegans are depicted as also using evil psychic powers, being elitist, and being lying cheats! This is not right! We needed a better, more peaceful and integrative association of Vegans with society, and this movie is simply insulting.
Finally, it also perpetuates some idiotic social interaction - yes, charge into the fray and get slashed, you can come back with an extra life! This movie has so many problems - if only it could have taken cues from the Twilight series, which does a much better job of fashioning fantasy and real life in a believable, and masterful literary and cinematic work.
-
People Magazine review on the Expendables: 0/10
RPGDL Reviews on Scott Pilgrim: 10/10
Sorry People, you can't bash on a movie like this for being unrealistic and be serious about it. This movie was not intended to be the least bit realistic. I suppose Star Wars and Rambo also blow because the bad guys have unrealistically bad aim.
Yes RPGDL, you CAN bash on a movie for being unrealistic when this bashing is completely awesome and sarcastic.
-
I doubt People Magazine has a reader base the Expendables much care about.
-
Having read a few more reviews by dudes that are into mindless action movies, I am hearing that Expendables tries to not be mindless at some points which is kind of a massive let down.
Seriously they should have had a 4 way fight between Sly, Jet Lee, Jason Statham and Dolph Lundgren, this should have taken place on the moon and clearly been filmed on a sound stage. Also heard that it is like the exact same script as Rambo, so yeah maybe a bit to serious?
Oh well, Super still has a vagina anyway.
-
Clash of the Titans - 2/5. (old one) . . . if the gods helped me with everything, maybe I'd be badass too.
The Sandlot - 5/5.
Adventureland - 3/5.
Frost/Nixon - 3/5.
Truman Show - 4/5.
Battle Royale 2 - 2/5.
Haven't been watching many movies. I am in a funk ):
-
Having read a few more reviews by dudes that are into mindless action movies, I am hearing that Expendables tries to not be mindless at some points which is kind of a massive let down.
Seriously they should have had a 4 way fight between Sly, Jet Lee, Jason Statham and Dolph Lundgren, this should have taken place on the moon and clearly been filmed on a sound stage. Also heard that it is like the exact same script as Rambo, so yeah maybe a bit to serious?
Oh well, Super still has a vagina anyway.
It's not the exact same script as Rambo. It's the exact same script as FIVE RAMBOS TEAMING UP.
-
And five Rambos teaming up in the script for the latest Rambo movie is wayyyyy to serious. It might have worked for First Blood though.
-
Grease Sing-a-long: Fun. Dusted off my letterman jacket and took the wife and stepdaughter to see it. Weren't a whole lot of people in the theater, but everyone had a good time. The added graphics were pretty amusing, especially during "Greased Lightning". Also, hot dogs and buns, icwutudidthere.
-
Watched The Big Lebowski. It's... sometimes good, sometimes obnoxious, but overall a fine movie.
-
People Magazine review on the Expendables: 0/10
RPGDL Reviews on Scott Pilgrim: 10/10
Sorry People, you can't bash on a movie like this for being unrealistic and be serious about it. This movie was not intended to be the least bit realistic. I suppose Star Wars and Rambo also blow because the bad guys have unrealistically bad aim.
Yes RPGDL, you CAN bash on a movie for being unrealistic when this bashing is completely awesome and sarcastic.
This post confuses me so badly. Are you implying...that the posts generally here on either of these movies that generally aren't sarcastic? This somehow bends back around back to confusing internet sarcasm right?
-
I believe he was saying Fuck People Magazine and it's review of Expendables and that we are awesome and we do funny things with reviews of Scott Pilgrim.
-
Just wanna say that I had the same interpretation of that post as Grefter did, so yeah, pretty sure that's what he was saying (or something similar to that effect.)
-
Saw Predators at the dollar theatre.
Suffice it to say, I enjoy most movies like this at a cheaper price.
-
Saw Predators at the dollar theatre.
Suffice it to say, I enjoy most movies like this at a cheaper price.
It's the perfect movie for it. As I mentioned when I saw it, it should win an academy award for 'best use of the word 'Fuck.'
-
Burn After Reading:
3/5.
Will do. Loved the characters, hated the plot, hated the outcome of the ending for some characters/wish others were offed.
-
Burn After Reading:
3/5.
Will do. Loved the characters, hated the plot, hated the outcome of the ending for some characters/wish others were offed.
Awwww no waaaaaaaaaay!
Brad Pitt stole that movie.
-
3/5 is still a good rating. Brad Pitt's character was awesome. I favor Malkovich's character because he has a bit more fleshed out transitioning in the movie - well-to-do instantly fucked over to walking scruffily from a boat in nightwear with an axe? Matter-a-fact, one of my favorite scenes are when Pitt and Malkovich are in the car and both of their characters collide.
-
You know, I don't think I said this in the topic yet so...
Shrek 4: Saw this on the plane. Better than Shrek 3, worse than the first two. It was decent enough, though still had that "Can we stop making these movies?" feeling. I mean, yes, the 2nd movie was a good sequel, but that doesn't mean you have to make another sequel! And then making a 4th one after the 3rd wasn't even that good was weird, even if they learned from their mistakes.
...whatever, it wasn't bad or anything, as I said.
Clash of the Titans (remake): Also saw this and...kind of crappy. "Hey look, remember that 1980s classic with cool stop motion that was about the story of Perseus, if screwed up a bit for the sake of Hollywood? Lets add BETTAR SPECIAL EFFECTS and FUCK THE STORY SOME MORE!"
For example, they arbitrarily changed the villain from Thetis and her son Calibus to Hades for no good reason. Honestly, I can't stand when they just go "yo, Hades is god of the dead, HE MUST BE THE VILLAIN!" I mean...ok, it worked for Disney since Disney fucks everything up anyway, and Hades was at least made one of their fun Comedic yet Threatening Villains, but here they just made him a Generic Evil Overlord. See, much as I rant about God of War, at least GoW did one thing right and that was "Hades never openly opposed Zeus." Just doing the "Hades is jealous of Zeus, WAR!!!" is honestly not a fun plot if played seriously, cause all it does is depict Hades in your typical angry vengeful villain light.
They also made the story a whole "MORTALS VS. GODS!" and "Hey, Perseus must be a mediator even if he's clearly COMPLETELY PRO HUMAN AND JUSTIFIABLY SO! HE'S A DEMI-GOD!" I know the Perseus in the original Clash of the Titans was just a Gary Stu, but at least the story here was just "Lets save the princess from a jealous Goddess", and the movie didn't pretend to make Perseus anything other than a cliched super hero with the Gods on his side. The humans were more believable in the original, since it...fit with Greek Mythology, with the whole "Ha! My daughter is better than one of the Gods...oh shit, I pissed one of them off, we're screwed!" and Perseus was primarily helping here cause the means of the sacrifice happened to be the girl he just got engaged too.
Remake? HUMANS THINK THEY'RE BETTER THAN GODS CAUSE THEY SAY SO IN A SETTING THAT KNOWS GODS EXISTS! AFTER ONE GOD KICKED THEIR ASS IN A RECENT BATTLE...VERY VERY BADLY AT THAT.
Don't get me started on the "Character added in only so feminists won't whine" Action Girl or the Perseus wangst regarding refusal to use his awesome magical weapons the gods handed to him.
The movie was watchable, but its just so blech compared to the original, which was a cool movie.
-
The movie was watchable, but its just so blech compared to the original, which was a cool movie.
"I don't wanna sound like a queer or nothin', but I think unicorns are kickass."
Funny you should mention Clash of the Titans, I watched Orgasmo again this morning.
-
Expendables: Still boggling over Super choosing Julia Roberts over Dolph Lundgren. Anyway, great movie, although I can see where the complaints about lack of realism come from. I mean, Steve Austin getting jobbed by Randy Couture? Yeah, right.
-
Season 1 of Veronica Mars finished as of earlier this morning. 5/5. STFU, I like it.
-
Saw Resident Evil in 3D. Never seen a movie in 3D. Layering effect made multiple on-screen people stand out, but when there was only one and a background, it was an odd 2D experience. I can tell they put more focus on the explosives/rain/etc. Still a fun movie. Plus I have a queer lesbo obsession with Jovovich, so I gasmed at 5 stars despite the lack of action that was awesome from RE3. En media res ending fucking pissed me off.
-
Amelie was delightful. 5/5. Plus, parce que c'est-il en française, je peut travailler en mon LISTENING SKILLZ.
Re-watched first Child's Play. Meh. Slapstick-orama, but still full of some sort of awesomeness. Debating on whether this awesomeness derives from nostalgia?
Tried to watch Lolita twice, but a- Netflix envelope came EMPTY, second - the replacement disc was unplayable. Queer up until the telephone conversation scene.
Fargo - 3/5. Like usual, love Coen brother's characters, but don't really like the execution of plot.
The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard - Charles rated this 5/5. I thought it was 3/5.
The Warlords - 3/5. Still not used to Jet Li being evil. Technically, he wasn't. . . "evil," but still.
-
He's Just Not That Into You - 4/5.
A good enough movie to initiate dialogue between the sexes. Plus, I love Drew Barrymore.
-
The Book of Eli: Pretty slow, but overall entertaining. The very end, with the old guy putting the Bible on the shelf, was unintentionally hilarious, though. We got that reverent scene of Washington dictating the first chapter of Genesis, the old british guy transcribes every word like it's...well, the word of God, they finally print it and bind it....and then they set it next to the book that has the exact same stuff in it. You'd think somebody would have said "Uh....we've already got this. Would you mind skipping ahead to Jesus?" sometime while he was putting the entire compound to sleep with Numbers.
-
Shutter Island -
5/5.
My brain is trying to restructure itself at the moment.
-
Shutter Island is awesome. Leonardo Dicaprio's last couple movies (Inception, Shutter Island) have been awesome.
-
Have you seen The Departed yet OK? He is amazing in that as well (as are most of the performances).
-
I'm amazed at his versatility of accents, as his performance (at a younger age of course) in Man in the Iron Mask was questionable.
I doth believe Inception is available at the dollar theatres, so I must hussle to see it. [checking] Oh wait, it's not. Officially down to two show times at regular theatres. The Last Airbender for .75 cents? I just may. . .
-
It's a trap! (or so I'm told)
Instead watch the excellent series.
-
It's a trap! (or so I'm told)
Instead watch the excellent series.
Quoting for veracity.
-
Yes. The series is AWESOME.
*waves his Azula flags*
We'll have to see about the sequel series, but it should be good too.
-
I need to see the series in proper chronological order, and if no one is willing to commission this procedure, I'm just going to stick with the .75c movie.
-
You'd be better off spending the 75 cents on a candy bar, or a wishing well, or in a last-ditch effort, just eating three quarters. It's not that the TV show is better than the movie, it's that the movie is really really bad and should not be watched, and the TV series also happens to be good, so hey, you should watch it sometime.
-
Come on up here sometime, girlfriend, and I'll show it all to ya'!
-
For reference, http://thecinemasnob.com/2010/07/03/the-last-airbender-review.aspx Here is a good reviewer ranting about how bad it is for like 20 freaking minutes.
-
Come on up here sometime, girlfriend, and I'll show it all to ya'!
Your willingness to show me yours is baffling.
-
You show me yours and I'll show you mine
-
That didn't seem part of your aforementioned agreement, so no.
-
Let Me In:
Loved it. The only problem is, its not really a horror, which it is somewhat classified as. Yours personally considers it as more of a drama/thriller - I'm guessing they just slapped Horror on it because there is gore. So what is there to say? The acting's great, the story retains true to the novel (which I should pick up sometime...) and it's a good plot to start off with. Very touching towards the end and how the story concludes. Would definitely recommend it unless you seriously cannot stand gore of any kind.
-
Buried - Hard movie to really get a take on. I have decided that I enjoyed it even if yeah the criticism is spot on that it feels longer than it is. Setting the entire movie in a box is just straight up a rough movie. It is really good, but I have trouble reccomending it. If watching Ryan Reynolds in a box for 90 minutes sounds difficult then give it is skip. If you are looking for a relatively experimental movie done on a Holywood budget (2 million, so not super huge for Holywood, but no 50k indie flick) then give it a shot.
-
Alice In Wonderland: A very pretty movie without a whole lot of there there. The good: The visuals are meticulously designed and very, very Carrollesque, which isn't easy to pull off while still being original but Burton does it. Definitely worth the extra few bucks to watch it on Blu-Ray. The cast, especially the voice cast, capture their characters really well. This film marks the first time the March Hare has ever amused me, and any praise for the Cheshire Cat would be implied in the fact that it's Stephen Fucking Fry doing the voice.
The bad: the story is about as un-Wonderland as it's possible to be, too simplistic and cliched to be engaging on its own terms, and clashes with the good parts over and over and over. Alice as the prophecied hero of Wonderland? The Queen of Hearts/Red Queen as a pure villain, with the White Queen as a Fisher King? Characters saying "Frabjous Day" over and over until I wanted to stab somebody? Honestly, I liked the LOOK AT US WE'RE SO DARK AND SERIOUS retelling/sequel hybrid better when Tin Man did it, and that's not much of a compliment. Also: "Underland". Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh.
Still, very, very pretty.
-
Machete was freaking gold. Go watch it now.
-
AIW was pretty. I was just expected the typical story from the title. It's a pseudo-sequel I've been told?
I've watched a crapload of movies since. Most notable is Milk though. I wished for particular characters during the Movement to gain a bit more background, but the movie was about collectivism for equal rights with Milk at the helm. Great soundtrack, too.
*Edit: I've been ruminating on the voyeuristic element it presents for people unexposed to the personal lives of homosexual men. I'm not too certain the depictions would help solidify discriminating ideas of the anti-homosexual population, but I do applaud the movie as it humanizes them contrary to the creatures blindsided people love to consider them as.
-
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and Inglorious Basterds were both good entertainment. I expected more bloody fun in Basterds, but once you start appreciating the movie for what it is instead of what the trailers said it would be, it's a pretty damn good movie.
-
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang going in cold is an awesome watch. You highly underrate Inglorious Basterds.
-
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang going in cold is an awesome watch.
-
Iron Man 2: Meh. Downey's cool as always (better in KKBB though), and Iron Man wrecking Mandroids is never not going to be fun, but aside from Rhodey putting on the suit the whole thing felt pretty pointless. Iron Man's going to be in the Avengers? What a shocking development. And they'd have been better off just cutting every scene that had to do with palladium poisoning. Tony survives the movie? Really? AMAZING!
Still, I liked how Hammer used Vanko the exact same way the Ten Rings terrorists used Stark, and whoever casts these movies continues to be very, very good at his or her job. Rourke + Rockwell = good times. And yeah, Iron Man wrecking Mandroids.
-
I think the point of the Palladium Poisoning was to explain why Tony Stark was suddenly acting like a bigger dick and went into this massive "Who cares" state, cause from his perspective, he's going to die soon anyway, why not just do what he WANTS to do and be irrational about everything, rather than show any remote sense of care about himself? When he finds out a way to survive the poisoning, suddenly "Oh, hey, better start caring about life again!"
...I didn't say it was effective at it, mind, but I think that's the logic they were going for. You can argue its still pointless if you want! (I personally thought it wasn't very necessary myself; trying to force out an aspect of Tony that just didn't really work)
-
The thing is, if you want Tony to act like a gigantic jerk, there's a ready-made solution. Booze! Hell, I could have sworn IM2 was going to adapt Demon In A Bottle at some point in its development.
-
Easy A: Entertaining, reminded me a lot of Saved! Also has big tits*.
*That's a reference from the movie, not a chauvinistic remark. Not that I'm above making a chauvinistic remark.
-
Saw the Dead or Alive movie on TV today.
It's... even more horrible than I expected. And for that, it is hilarious.
-
CIA ALERTED
-
Okay, so I've sheen (I'm keeping this typo, haha) a seet load (keeping this solecism too) movies I haven't documented in chat. I suppose I can go in reverse order.
Inception, 5/5. Bad. ASS.
Toy Story 3, 4/5. It's great seeing an older animation stick firmly to its visual aesthetic and develop it without muddying its original perspective. Storyline wasn't as great as I thought it would be - many people said it brought them to tears. I thought it was a bit too maudlin. Spanish Buzz Mode was win though. Evil monkey was when. I forgot Mrs. Potato Head was so fucking annoying.
Metropolis, */5. Need to rewatch this one. Fell asleep multiple times during the movie - beautiful but a bit to anarchist in its story for me.Needed better voice actors.
Bangkok Girl, 4/5. Documentary about Thailand's exploited/exploiting sex industry. Definitely liked the connection he made between the smiles all the Thai women provided for the falang, unfortunate ending . . . I would like to note the lack of any "colored" falang in this movie, including everyone but whites. Why? Just watch the documentary.
Code Monkeys - 3/5. Charles made me watch part of the series. Not a movie, I know. But it's kinda like Tosh.0 - trying a bit too hard.
Raging Phoenix - 3/5. Should be 2/5. Movie confuses the viewer with drunken style compared to the DRUNKEN CAPOEIRA it actually was. Great music, esp. Buddha Bless's Young Wai. Ended up being too long.
Legend of the Tsunami Warrior - 3/5. . . . M m m m m m . . . . . I don't quite remember this one. I think it suffered from excessive length though and a bit too much CG.
Appleseed - 3/5. Yeah. Predictable movie.
Amelie - 5/5. Hey. French films can be great too. Despite that I could actually talk about the movie, but its cinematography and Amelie's quirks are too interesting to get into.
Fargo - 3/5. "Don't ya know?"
Child's Play - 3/5. Saw this again. Ages bad. Humor doesn't.
The Goods - Live Hard, Sell Hard - 5/5. I think I overrated this but am not interested in changing it. Very funny movie.
The Aviator - 4/5. Fucking long as shit. Could tell too, because I started getting all germophobic and OCD like Hughes.
Kick-Ass - 3/5. It's like the scenes paused to wait for me to laugh. Lame.
Date Night - 4/5. "I'm GUNNA COUNT TO THREE . . . . ONE, TWO . . ."
Did not see all the movies I expected to see at the dollar movie that night. Lame.
-
Mang you just gave a Coen Brothers movie the same score as Kick-Ass. You are a scary person miss Idun.
-
The Aviator is absolutely fantastic and one of my fav movies. Glad you liked it. (And I will reveal how many movies I've seen by saying "And I've never seen any of the others.")
-
My experience with the Coen Brothers is that I absolutely love their characters, but don't really prefer their plots or endings. I ran into a similar situation with Burn After Reading. Kick Ass bordered on a 2, but Chloe Moretz's acting brought it up a notch. Matter-a-fact, Hit-Girl was the best thing about the movie.
-
She was the only thing about the movie actually.
-
Nicolas Cage is pretty good as well. Much more disgust at you rating a Coen Brothers the same as it than the fact that you gave it a 3.
-
To be fair, Burn After Reading wasn't their strongest work and kinda deserves a 3/5. Don't know what kind of Mickey Mouse operation they were running on that set. Fargo though... unforgivable.
-
I found Burn After Reading pretty consistently hilarious. If there's one where they dropped the ball, it's Ladykillers (still has its moments and isn't a bad movie per se, just what I'd call the worst they've made if asked. Edit: wait, I completely forgot that Intolerable Cruelty even existed. So I guess that one takes it).
If Idun at least likes their characters, she should watch Barton Fink for sexy John Goodman action. She still won't like the ending, but hey, sexy John Goodman action.
-
Machete - Best Rodriguez movie ever? Yes. Most awesome movie ever? Pretty close. So many good times here. Ticket says movie is 2 hours. I had like 30 minutes of ads (what the fuck, seriously we walked in late and I checked the time as the movie started, I sat through 20 minutes of stuff and turned up at least 5 minutes late), so for a 90ish minute movie the start of the movie and the end of the movie have a lot of stuff happen between them. This movie never stops. Crank: High Voltage is a pretty close analogy I guess, this movie really is just Rodriguez taking his existing body of work and cranking the rule of cool up to a million. There is no room for reality in these movies compared to his last ones (note: Once Upon a Time in Mexico had a blind Johnny Depp shooting dudes up with a silenced SMG and shotgun sniping), just balls out stupid awesome. I love this movie and hope the sequels happen.
So essentially this is 90 minutes of Danny Trejo fucking people up, banging chicks and generally ruining people's day. Also the cast is pretty amazing. Watch this movie.
-
My thoughts exactly, but since Greft says it, now people will flock to it. Go figure. heh
-
Hah, people don't flock to things I say are good. They pick them up 4 years later and ask me if I ever played them.
Also disclaimer of the movie just came out down here and I wasn't as late to the party as it looks. Would have seen it back around when you did if I could have. I had been looking forward to it so very much.
-
Watched Over the Top this weekend.
Stallone wrote AND starred in this movie about a truck driver who competes in the International Arm Wrestling Championship to prove he is a fit caregiver to his son. I think I don't need to say more.
-
It involves him turning his cap backwards to power up and win at arm wrestling.
-
And I quote: "The hat is like a switch, it's like I'm a machine and it's my switch that turns me on, so when I turn my hat on it's like I'm an arm-wrestling machine."
-
That makes too much sense.
-
Harry Potter and the Plot Thingies We Never Mentioned Before Book Seven, Part I: Was pretty good! Most notably, Ron is not a whiny bitch, which is a marked improvement over the book. Also, Harry and Hermione have sex. I am not making that up. o_O
-
I wouldn't call it sex, at least not what happened on camera.
-
Army of Darkness: Lived up to the hype.
-
Harry Potter and the Plot Thingies We Never Mentioned Before Book Seven, Part I: Was pretty good! Most notably, Ron is not a whiny bitch, which is a marked improvement over the book. Also, Harry and Hermione have sex. I am not making that up. o_O
So they pull a Kai Allard-Liao and Dierdre Lear eh?
-
I wish they would have flipped the last two Dobby (sp?) and Lord Voldemort scenes. I prefer rising and then falling for a negative climax.
-
Harry Potter 7 part 1:
Pretty good; I cried at three points in the movie. Several people around the office didn't like it much, though--usually people who hadn't read the books or didn't remember them well. So...avoid this movie if you're not familiar with the books, I guess?
Minor BOOK SPOILERS from here on out
Absences that make me angry:
Harry doesn't call Lupin a coward. Seriously--best scene in the whole damn book, and so much potential given Lupin's actor.
Kreacher. Like...he does the plot-essential, but doesn't get any of his character development, which I actually rather like.
absences that don't bother me at all really:
Dumbledore. Like...they make vague references to it that nobody who hasn't read the book would understand. I'm assuming they're saving this all for part 2, which is why I'm not upset (put it in one movie so that people don't lose track makes sense). If it's not in part 2, they get crucified, of course.
Stealth. Constantly wearing the invisibility cloak would be bad for cinema. (Although the fact that the cloak isn't mentioned at all is...what? It's a Deathly Hallow, and should have been noted for that reason).
Wormtail's death. It was dumb in the books. Felt like "well, guess I said that in book 3, so I'd better tie up that plot thread."
Additions:
More doby. why would you add more Dobby? :(
Hedwig's death...is much improved. :)
Improv dancing in the woods. Actually, I kinda liked these; very ambiguous confused emotions. Probably wouldn't like it if I hadn't read the books as much as I have, and thus was speculating all the mixed feelings going through every character's head at that moment.
-
More doby. why would you add more Dobby? :(
This.
Had some concerns going in account the movie being split into two. Expected bloat and pacing woes, but I think they mostly avoided that. Ron angst wasn't real convincing, but decent enough a movie overall. Probably wouldn't put it up with 3 or 5, but likely better than the rest. Have to say that I was very impressed with the Deathly Hallows storytelling sequence. Very stylish, kudos to whoever did the animation there.
-
Meesa Jar Jar Binks!
-
Personally my favorite change was putting the mention of Hermoine's parents in the intro. It's really just remembering they're making a movie rather than making actors read the book aloud, but some other bits of the franchise fail that so.
I though the Kreecher scenes were after they get away from the Malfoy's? If it was earlier, then yeah, shame they cut it and hope they give it a scene in the second half.
-
Harry Brown - Holy shit this is a rough movie. Michael Cain is brilliant as always and plays an amazingly hard man. Movie has about as much subtlety as Killdozer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer) but all the better for it.
Good movie, you should all check it out. No on will bother though because it is good.
-
Tron: Objectively, not a good movie, but watchable enough. The graphics aren't actually what feels dated; it's more the plotting. Modern movies would never assume audiences are as patient as they have to be for this movie - thirty minutes of it would have ended up on the cutting room floor. The character of Yori also kind of had nothing to do - Ram the actuarial program gets a lot more screentime and lines.
TRON: Legacy was, shockingly, good. Really. Go see it, preferably with IMAX / 3D. It's fun! Art style is unique and cool. And it has a really good Daft Punk soundtrack ( http://www.myspace.com/hollywoodrecords/music/songs/tron-legacy-soundtrack-preview-77189122?ap=1 ) I mean, it's absolutely nitpickable, but it definitely tries harder to be a coherent movie and artfully not talking too much about some of the more ridiculous assumptions that needs be made for the concept to work.
It also took its sequel status more seriously than I expected. I knew they brought back the same actors (wow The Dude and Commander Sheridan are old these days) but they have the Arcade from the original looking exactly like before, even with a sofa in the same place in the office. Some of the transport videos are taken from the evil letter Ms of the original. And obviously the clothing for the programs was inspired by the original (but actually looking decent rather than mental patient-y). The plot feels less like a video game as well (it's not "defeat the guardian of the crazed final boss then use the special artifact to attack past the gaps in his wall") which is probably a good thing. Lots of cute hacker references too that actually vaguely make sense - as in, they're using real Unix commands like kill -9 and grep in the real world rather than usual MovieOS.
If I did have to nitpick, the two parts of the film that I'd most want to redo: Okay the whole Zeus / (Jam? The random hot chick from the weapons room) plotline goes basically nowhere and is an excuse for a fight on a dance floor with Daft Punk DJing it up. The movie also builds Zeus up to be this master manipulator / shadow dealer who is supercool and up to something, then has him dancing like an idiot during the fighting (more shots of fighting please, less of crazed dancing) and then getting punked by Clu uselessly. They needed to either chop like 10 minutes off, make Zeus a side character, and have him just killed near-immediately by Clu to prove he's an effective bastard, or, if they wanted to keep Zeus in the game, figure out some kind of more interesting plot for there to be between him & Clu then "begs for his life for 2 minutes then gets blowed up."
Secondly. They blew Tron himself. First half of the movie was well-done, though I guessed what was up - nearly silent helmeted badass, presence points, formidable opponent, good. Then The Dude suddenly yells "Tron!" for no reason when Cora is captured, which is basically a half-reveal right there. But they wait until the fighter plane battle to finish the reveal, and it's not done very stylishly - "Tron, what have they done to you?!" Then for no apparent reason Tron remembers his original programming! And... does something! Not shoot them down, I guess. And no dropping away of the mask to show Commander Sheridan! Come on. Masked characters must have a dramatic reveal of their face, just like Clu got earlier. They needed to do the Tron showdown in mano-a-mano laser frisbee combat where you can see faces and make the fight very clear. Plus they even could have used the "reprogramming" excuse like Flynn pulled on the guard as for why Tron would be back, rather then him just shifting for no reason. It'd also give pro-User Tron some time to do something epic, even if it was just to quickly heroically sacrifice himself - as it stands non-brainwashed Tron doesn't really get to do anything at all.
Also. So I lied, three things, I'll mention this one just because fixing it would have been so easy. Why does Clu spare Cora when she's captured? Didn't he want to eliminate the isos? They just kinda totally skim this. Give Clu one creepy line about how "Good news! I've decided to hold you for... analysis, so that your bugs don't infest the rest of the system ever again. We will be taking you apart piece by piece." and problem solved.
But overall, thumbs up. Even if you hate the plot it's a visual treat, so good times.
-
The Trotsky
17-year-old kid is convinced that he's the reincarnation of Leon Trotsky. Hillarity ensues.
Very well-done movie. Required viewing for Grefters, of course, but it may be hard to get as it's a Canadian independent film.
-
Solution, mail him a copy (or hold onto one until DL Con for him)
Sounds completely awesome in any case.
-
I would be very interested, did it just come out in cinema or is this on DVD Met?
-
9: Eh, it was okay. Very pretty, and the quest story was entertaining enough. Ridiculously short though. Glad I waited to Netflix it.
-
I would be very interested, did it just come out in cinema or is this on DVD Met?
DVD (saw it on a rental from my local video store in Vancouver--they actually had a couple copies because it's a Canadina film that won several film festival awards).
-
Tangled: Fairly good if predictable Disney fare. Songs weren't very good though.
-
Outsourced: So...this guy's department gets outsourced and he has to go to India to train his replacement. Very well-made commedy--it's rare that I stand up and notice cinematography, particularly my first time through a movie, but it was quite well-done.
-
Harry Potter and the Plot Thingies We Never Mentioned Before Book Seven, Part I: Was pretty good! Most notably, Ron is not a whiny bitch, which is a marked improvement over the book. Also, Harry and Hermione have sex. I am not making that up. o_O
So they pull a Kai Allard-Liao and Dierdre Lear eh?
Have you reread that lately? It's the worst dialogue Stackpole maybe EVER did.
-
The Kids Are All Right: A well-told story, but not one I was especially interested in. Good acting.
National Treasure 2: Extremely silly. Which was not exactly a shock, so I enjoyed it.
-
Exit Through the Gift Shop
Interesting. It's a fabulous bucket of meta-analysis on street art and its culture and place in society. It's one of those uncomfortable documentaries where you're sure they're laughing at you - all the way to the bank. Except then you see what happens in the movie and you double back around again to wondering what the hell they're doing, and what is this 'art' thing anyway.
Worth a watch if you can stomach counterculture and all that goes with it.
-
Tron: Objectively, not a good movie, but watchable enough. The graphics aren't actually what feels dated; it's more the plotting. Modern movies would never assume audiences are as patient as they have to be for this movie - thirty minutes of it would have ended up on the cutting room floor. The character of Yori also kind of had nothing to do - Ram the actuarial program gets a lot more screentime and lines.
TRON: Legacy was, shockingly, good. Really. Go see it, preferably with IMAX / 3D. It's fun! Art style is unique and cool. And it has a really good Daft Punk soundtrack ( http://www.myspace.com/hollywoodrecords/music/songs/tron-legacy-soundtrack-preview-77189122?ap=1 ) I mean, it's absolutely nitpickable, but it definitely tries harder to be a coherent movie and artfully not talking too much about some of the more ridiculous assumptions that needs be made for the concept to work.
It also took its sequel status more seriously than I expected. I knew they brought back the same actors (wow The Dude and Commander Sheridan are old these days) but they have the Arcade from the original looking exactly like before, even with a sofa in the same place in the office. Some of the transport videos are taken from the evil letter Ms of the original. And obviously the clothing for the programs was inspired by the original (but actually looking decent rather than mental patient-y). The plot feels less like a video game as well (it's not "defeat the guardian of the crazed final boss then use the special artifact to attack past the gaps in his wall") which is probably a good thing. Lots of cute hacker references too that actually vaguely make sense - as in, they're using real Unix commands like kill -9 and grep in the real world rather than usual MovieOS.
If I did have to nitpick, the two parts of the film that I'd most want to redo: Okay the whole Zeus / (Jam? The random hot chick from the weapons room) plotline goes basically nowhere and is an excuse for a fight on a dance floor with Daft Punk DJing it up. The movie also builds Zeus up to be this master manipulator / shadow dealer who is supercool and up to something, then has him dancing like an idiot during the fighting (more shots of fighting please, less of crazed dancing) and then getting punked by Clu uselessly. They needed to either chop like 10 minutes off, make Zeus a side character, and have him just killed near-immediately by Clu to prove he's an effective bastard, or, if they wanted to keep Zeus in the game, figure out some kind of more interesting plot for there to be between him & Clu then "begs for his life for 2 minutes then gets blowed up."
Secondly. They blew Tron himself. First half of the movie was well-done, though I guessed what was up - nearly silent helmeted badass, presence points, formidable opponent, good. Then The Dude suddenly yells "Tron!" for no reason when Cora is captured, which is basically a half-reveal right there. But they wait until the fighter plane battle to finish the reveal, and it's not done very stylishly - "Tron, what have they done to you?!" Then for no apparent reason Tron remembers his original programming! And... does something! Not shoot them down, I guess. And no dropping away of the mask to show Commander Sheridan! Come on. Masked characters must have a dramatic reveal of their face, just like Clu got earlier. They needed to do the Tron showdown in mano-a-mano laser frisbee combat where you can see faces and make the fight very clear. Plus they even could have used the "reprogramming" excuse like Flynn pulled on the guard as for why Tron would be back, rather then him just shifting for no reason. It'd also give pro-User Tron some time to do something epic, even if it was just to quickly heroically sacrifice himself - as it stands non-brainwashed Tron doesn't really get to do anything at all.
Also. So I lied, three things, I'll mention this one just because fixing it would have been so easy. Why does Clu spare Cora when she's captured? Didn't he want to eliminate the isos? They just kinda totally skim this. Give Clu one creepy line about how "Good news! I've decided to hold you for... analysis, so that your bugs don't infest the rest of the system ever again. We will be taking you apart piece by piece." and problem solved.
But overall, thumbs up. Even if you hate the plot it's a visual treat, so good times.
Give me your nerd card so I can tear it up. Sheridan was a Captain; Sinclair and Ivanova were Commanders.
-
Commander Sinclair was more awesome than Mr. Sheridan anyway. Yeah, put that in your pipe and smoke it.
-
Sinclair? Pah. Anyone can win a war if they're from the future and already know what will happen.
Sheridan kicked the old ones out of our galaxy. Valen let them push him around!
-
The Expendables - 3/5. This movie was made for boys.
Blassreiter, Part 1 - 4/5.
Xenosaga - 4/5. I picked up on two terms rarely used throughout all three episodes that I plan to examine more through my summer re-playthrough.
The Land Before Time - 5/5. Re-watch. 'Tis expected.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - 4/5.
The Hangover - 3/5.
Twilight - 3/5. Not as bad as I expected. The intensive love addiction is actually a turn-on.
Ju Dou - 3/5.
The Forbidden Kingdom - 3/5.
Horton Hears a Who! - 4/5.
Catch Me if You Can - 4/5.
Wanted - 3/5.
The Aviator - 4/5. I don't know if I mentioned a few of these already. *shrug*
Next on my list:
The Twilight Saga - Eclipse, Grown Ups, The Twilight Saga - New Moon, Coco Before Chanel, Restrepo.
-
Gulliver's Travels: is terrible. The book is also terrible, due to being extremely boring. But this is a whole new level of terrible. Let me sum it up this way: Gulliver convinces the Lilliputians and their enemies to stop fighting by leading them in a dance number.
-
Gulliver's Travels: is Jack Black. The book is also Jack Black, due to being extremely boring. But this is a whole new level of Jack Black. Let me sum it up this way: Gulliver convinces the Lilliputians and their enemies to stop fighting by leading them in a Jack Black.
What were you expecting?
-
Next on my list:
The Twilight Saga - Eclipse, Grown Ups, The Twilight Saga - New Moon, Coco Before Chanel, Restrepo.
Presumably not in that order? (New Moon is the second in the series; Eclipse is the third in the series; may as well watch them in order and all that).
-
What were you expecting?
I was expecting it to be better than the book, which I despise. And Jack Black occasionally produces quality work - just not this time.
-
Haven't posted here in ages due to....uh...being forced in to watching most movies for a while against my will >_>
But hey, why not...pretty short, but I feel like it...
The Top 10 Movies OK Saw This Year
Not necessarily movies released this past year, but movies I saw this year. In no particular order....
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World - Pretty obvious one here, I think. Honestly think it's better than the graphic novels. I liked all the actors' performances and the changes they made to it compared to the novels. It's an excellent movie, high energy, great fun. Not too much to say that probably hasn't been said by most.
Shutter Island - Excellent psychological thriller. I guessed the twist, but even so, it was still pretty awesome. Great acting, great emotion, great immersion.
Toy Story 3 - 10 years later, it still has the same charm the originals did. I'm really impressed - it stands up so well, and is entertaining for both adults and kids.
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm - Of all comic book characters, Batman is my favourite. I don't read comics typically, but I did watch Batman the Animated Series as well as Batman Beyond. This movie was released ages ago in 1993, part of the animated series tie-in, and....wow. This is the same year as Schindler's List, Jurassic Park, Sleepless in Seattle, Philadelphia...and honestly, I think the animated film is the best of the bunch. It's very adult, and very Batman-y. Filled with the usual intrigue of Batman, it's a great movie to watch.
Inception - Honestly don't know how much I need to say about this. Great acting, great psychological intrigue...excellent movie. See it if you haven't.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - I was a huge Transformers fan when I was younger. While the movies don't follow storylines I'm familiar with, they DO satisfy my desire for apocalyptic action. It's entertaining! And, while some stuff was idiotic (lol Transformer gods resurrecting humans), it was fun and exciting, despite not being exceptionally original.
Zombieland - If you like zombie movies, watch this. If you like a great post-apocalyptic movie, watch this. Small cast (4 + a great surprise guest), sticks to its premise, great acting...damn fun movie. It's a zombie movie - what else would you want outside of blowing zombie brains out?
Forest Gump - I'm surprised I never saw this earlier in my life. It got a lot of hype, and it's very deserving of it - every bit of praise it gets is well-deserved. Tom Hanks is amazing, and the way they work old footage in to the movie to make it look real is excellent. Great, touching movie. Go see it if you haven't.
Batman: Under the Red Hood - See Mask of the Phantasm above, except with a different storyline. It is once again well-done, great acting, only missing Mark Hamil's voice. The Batman Animated series was awesome, and the animated movie adaptations of additional Batman storylines are just as awesome.
Hot Tub Time Machine - I was expecting to find this movie stupid. And...well, it kind of is. But...honestly, was pretty hilarious as well. Actually very enjoyable, even despite the absurdity (or perhaps because of the absurdity) of the situation. Maybe I was just in need of watching a movie like this at the time (god, I've seen so many movies this year, and only about 6 I really wanted to see ;_;), but I was entertained.
Movies I wanted to see but didn't get a chance to: a lot. Up, Kick-Ass...way too many to name. I really need to change that next year.
-
Bro, you NEED to see Up. Immediately, or die.
-
Bro, you NEED to see Up. Immediately, or die.
So damn good.
Anyway, saw "9" with my family. Nice movie. More...traditional than I'd expected. Great atmosphere. Glowing red mechanical eyes and jagged metal made for some scary-lookin' bad guys.
-
Bro, you NEED to see Up. Immediately, or die.
So damn good.
-
Monsters, Inc.: Friggin' adorable.
-
Monsters, Inc.: Friggin' adorable.
The sky is blue most of the time, people breathe air, Jesus was a dinosaur tamer, etc.
-
Huh. Am I the only one who's seen True Grit thus far? It is extremely excellent.
-
Superman/Batman: Apocalypse. Big dumb action movie. Pretty much what I expected given (a) that's what Public Enemies was, and this is a direct sequel; and (b) it's based on something Jeph Loeb wrote. Script varies from nonsensical to insultingly bad, bu the fights are good and the voice cast features Kevin Conroy, Tim Daly and, in his glorious return as Granny Goodness, Ed Asner. So there's that.
-
Educating Rita - A classic Michael Caine movie from 1983. I want to write so much about it but it has gone and made me self conscious. It makes me want to go back to university.
Stuff. I will see True Grit sometime. I think it only opened here on boxing day.
-
Harry Potter 7: Holy shit was this good. I'm having trouble thinking of a better adaption of a book into a movie ever in the sense that it capitalizes on all that is good with the books (which is a lot) and makes it work as a movie. The scenes and lines that were added and changed for the mot part made the movie better than a faithful adaption would have been (and I'm forgiving the movie for some omissions of some of the book's plot because it was a long movie to begin with, and there really wasn't room for it all). The scene with Hermione near the beginning had me stifling tears all of, what, 2 minutes into the film? It may be even more of a tug on the heartstrings than the intro to Up, and that's saying a lot. Harry's extra line in the Ministry of Magic when he confronts Umbrage made me smile. For that matter, the three adult actors who play transmogrified Harry and co. did a great job. When they first transform, they all look so uncomfortable in their own skin it's just great.
-
The King's Speech: Excellent
Not sure what else to say; it's about King Gerge VI (WW2 king) getting speech therapy to eliminate his stutter. It's very well-executed.
-
Fantastic Mr. Fox
I didn't know before I watched it that it was a Wes Anderson movie. Now that I do, it explains why I didn't particularly care for it.
-
Hudson Hawk
I have no idea what the hell I just watched but it was GLORIOUS trainwreck.
-
It's why Bruce Willis lost his hair.
-
a win win!
-
Next on my list:
The Twilight Saga - Eclipse, Grown Ups, The Twilight Saga - New Moon, Coco Before Chanel, Restrepo.
Presumably not in that order? (New Moon is the second in the series; Eclipse is the third in the series; may as well watch them in order and all that).
Just saw this. Too late! I didn't remember to re-arrange my Netflix queue, so I got Eclipse recently. Didn't watch it, mailed it back and now I have New Moon.
I'm also leaning towards seeing the Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole at the dollar theatre. Life As We Know It is definitely a good dollar theatre movie. Will see that soon.
Must do this on a margarita night at La Parilla. . . . MC, you don't drink do you? We could totally share a jumbo . . .
-
True Grit- Was a Western by the Coen Brothers.
Fucking. Awesome.
-
Must do this on a margarita night at La Parilla. . . . MC, you don't drink do you? We could totally share a jumbo . . .
Wait, how does me not drinking lead to us sharing a jumbo margarita? Aren't margarita's typically alcoholic?
-
That sentence was more of a:
Must do this on a margarita night at La Parilla . . . MC, you don't drink do you (pleasesayyoudrinkpleasesayyoudrinkbecauuuse.....) ? We could TOTALLY share a jumbo . . . . .
Ah well. To work.
-
True Grit was pretty awesome.
My friend lured me into the film by sayng it was going to be action packed.
Which it wasn't, but hey it was fun nonetheless.
Also, it's a John Wayne remake? Go figure.
-
Dr Strangelove - Watched it for the first time in a damned long time. I had forgot just how much fun it is and how great the last half hour or so is. Best ending line to a movie ever? Quite possibly.
-
Peter Sellers' phone call to the Russian premiere is the greatest monologue in film.
The Keep: My mom rented this last time I was there because she vaguely recalled it being neat back when she saw it in the eighties. I...would have to disagree. (I'd also seen it before but had only vague memories of it). So these Nazis set up shop in a Romanian castle where some dude imprisoned the ultimate evil or something and being Nazis they can't leave well enough alone and they let it out and it starts killing dudes one by one. This could be cool if it was done right, but done right is something that it is not. This is early Michael Mann, he was purely about visuals, and plot, well, maybe it would happen eventually if he felt like it, maybe it wouldn't. What is there is rambling and incoherent, the ostensible hero sits on his hands for most of the movie with breaks only to: bang the main chick after exchanging about five words with her; get shot up by Nazis and fall off a cliff; miraculously save the day at the last minute despite not doing much or displaying much in the way of character. To be fair, some of the color contrasts and lighting are striking, but anything Mann does right aesthetically is undermined by the fact that someone really, really needed to take away his fog machine privileges. Jesus you don't need to use that in every scene. What a mess.
The Departed: I would've hated the ending if not for Mark Wahlberg. Wow, I never thought I'd say that. Anyway, it's Scorcese, he might make a movie I don't care for once in a while (organized crime is a subject that rarely interests me), but he's consistently good at drama and was in top form here.
The A-Team: Big dumb action movie that operates on the premise that if you keep throwing shit at the audience they'll never get bored, what is this thing you call pacing? Nonstop action is not necessarily good action. Bleh. I can't wait 'til Hollywood's eighties nostalgia fixation stops being profitable for it. [Note: the brother put this one on, was not a Cid pick. In case anyone was prepping "what were you expecting?" comments.]
Terribly Happy: Random foreign movie rental. I don't remember why Netflix recommended this one to me, but I can't help but feel someone was having a laugh at my expense. It's about this cop who gets posted in a small town where the locals deal justice in their own way and don't like outsiders interfering. So basically it's Hot Fuzz with every ounce of humor drained out of it. And it's Danish. (I suspect this latter statement is redundant.) And the protagonist is mildly psychotic and accidentally smothers a woman to death and gets blackmailed into joining the creepy inbred yokels. God, what a depressing trainwreck of a movie.
Voyage of the Dawn Treader: Usually see the Narnia movies with my parents because it's basically nostalgia mode for my mom. I read 'em once, but so long ago that I retain only vague impressions and details. Dawn Treader I remember being the most fun because it was all about exploring the unknown and seeing weird places. If there was a plot in there somewhere I must've blinked and missed it (man, they barely even pretend that there's actually anything opposing the heroes to motivate the journey), but this isn't a big deal since the appeal was adventure for the sake of adventure. Sometimes it's alright to look at, sometimes it's just a jumble, but at least it's better than the last one, about which I mainly just remember Caspian screwing up a lot and there was a big battle at the end for some reason. And we get more of Simon Pegg as a swashbuckling mouse this time, so there's that. One of those largely inoffensive movies that mostly evaporates from your consciousness once you're out of the theater. I can't help but feel the directors take a very by-the-numbers approach, and wonder what the movies would've looked like done by someone with real vision.
-
The Keep sounds like a faithful translation from the book then!
-
True Grit: Didn't really work for me. Good story, great acting by Bridges and Damon (who disappeared into the role, pretty much), but the script got in the way. A flowery, almost Shakespearean Western could work, but not when your lead actress is 14 years old and just not up to making that kind of prose sound natural. Shame, everything else was there.
-
True Grit: Didn't really work for me. Good story, great acting by Bridges and Damon (who disappeared into the role, pretty much), but the script got in the way. A flowery, almost Shakespearean Western could work, but not when your lead actress is 14 years old and just not up to making that kind of prose sound natural. Shame, everything else was there.
Huh. I thought she was pretty good in the role.
-
A lot of her delivery , especially in the opening scenes, just struck me as a few steps above cold readings. It really threw me out of the flow of the movie.
-
A lot of her delivery , especially in the opening scenes, just struck me as a few steps above cold readings. It really threw me out of the flow of the movie.
Eh. I attributed that to the character rather than her. No telling how much was her and how much was the character, honestly. No matter what it's a child trying to use adult language.
-
It's one thing if it's just the kid, but the conceit of the movie is that everybody talks like that - teenage girls, drunken bounty hunters and dying outlaws alike. Once it starts to sound unnatural, it breaks the mood regardless of whether it's happening in-character or out of it.
-
True Grit- Seems like they mostly wanted to sell a mood. The entire thing is very frank, in a kinda 'the world is what it is' way, and every shot shouts desolation from the hilltops. Very effective in those regards.
-
I want to see Black Swan.
-
I want to see Kick-Ass.
Also, for some reason, it seems that there are no Japanese DVDs of the Scott Pilgrim movie. Is that out in the US/Australia/Europe yet?
-
I want to see Kick-Ass.
Also, for some reason, it seems that there are no Japanese DVDs of the Scott Pilgrim movie. Is that out in the US/Australia/Europe yet?
Yes. It's been out for a few months
-
Got it for Christmas, so yeah you could import it or something if you wanted.
-
The Green Hornet- I'm utterly shocked. Not only did it exceed the low expectations I had for it, but it was... really good. I really enjoyed it. I'm confused and think that I might be partially crazy for thinking so but... it was just good. Go see it.
-
Grown Ups . . . .
. . . very . . . meh.
-
That's as good as a movie with Paul Blart in it will get, yeah.
-
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist: I wasn't really enjoying this movie. It was pretty sub-mediocre in all respects. And then I got to the vomit scene. I said fuck this and turned it off. Pretty rare that I won't watch a movie all the way through, but yeah, this is garbage.
-
I would also like to say, that I doth like Rob's avatar.
-
Bourne Identity- Pretty awesome. It's pretty, moves fast, and the plot doesn't insult your IQ too much. Are the sequels worth watching?
-
Yes.
-
Yes.
-
Yes.
Personally find the third a notch below the others, but it's still good.
~
True Grit: Mostly what CK said. Enjoyed this, didn't have a problem with the kid. I pretty quickly got the impression of someone trying to act older than her years to compensate for an unreliable parent and the movie eventually said as much.
-
Surprisingly I enjoyed the Green Hornet too. The fight scenes were pretty awesome. I did enjoy Seth Rogen attempting to be bad ass, especially at the end.
-
Black Swan
Fantastic
Also a horror film. Did not realize it was a horror film. (I didn't sleep, and had a 7:30 appointment this morning).
-
It's not truly a Darren Aronofsky movie if it doesn't make you feel bad about being alive.
-
Black Swan
Fantastic
Also a horror film. Did not realize it was a horror film. (I didn't sleep, and had a 7:30 appointment this morning).
Oh no, you didn't sleep because of the movie?! *I* had to resist getting a drink later on, because apparently someone sitting in front or to the right of me had been drinking a bunch of tequila. I wanted to lean over and ask if you smelled that whenever someone opened their mouths.
The casting for the two main characters was on point. I'm not much of a fan of Natalie Portman. For example, I feel the best role she's played up 'til Nina in Black Swan was in The Professional (which is an awesome movie in every respect). But being able to play a meek, sexually repressed overachiever with hallucinations worked out great. I'm also amazed at how much weight she's lost for the movie! I checked to see if there were any stand-ins, because ballet is some physically demanding stuff, and yep. Though apparently Kunis's stand-in was used much more, and Portman's was used after over-exhaustion in wide scenes?
I still want a solid answer for the ending, dammit. Considering what happened to the Old Swan Queen, Portman should have been okay? I want her to be okay, rather . . seeing all the crap she went through. But I suppose you can't be "perfect," every time.
-
Wait, Black Swan is a horror film? Wow are they ever marketing that incorrectly.
-
Tron Legacy: So this was good mindless fun. It looks super cool and the music is hypnotic (I obviously need to listen to more Daft Punk). Visual effects don't impress me much these days, but style does; I still love the aesthetics of the original, dorky as it was, and it's very nice to see it lovingly reimagined with the best Hollywood can afford. I don't normally put much stock in nostalgia, but I have to admit to sitting there with a big dumb smile when we first got to the grid. It's beautifully gloomy. It helps that, unlike every other 80's nostalgia cash-in to roll out in the last couple years, it does something other than just produce flashier explosions, and tries to actually add to the original material. It doesn't always make sense, but it doesn't spend more time beating you with exposition than it really needs to, so that's kind of okay.
Not without some bumps along the way, mind. I went back and read Snowfire's spoiler text, and yeah, all of those are valid criticisms. Last battle would've been more satisfying to see play out mano a mano than as a shmup. Still pretty entertaining, just a little sad that dramatic impact could've been maximized there and wasn't.
Also, Jeff Bridges was seriously channeling The Dude here. There were so many times his inflection (and sometimes the actual dialogue) sounded right from an older, world-weary, messianic Lebowski. Was also surprised and pleased that they didn't play the girl as the stereotypical badass/femme fatale the design led me to expect. Actually fairly endearing.
Had to laugh at the eighties music playing on the jukebox at Flynn's when he turned the power on. I don't know why, really, just Separate Ways isn't something I expect to hear in a movie in 2011. (Totally a guilty pleasure song.)
-
Season of the Witch: Not too bad, better than I was expecting. Nicolas Cage is OVERLY DRAMATIC MAN, but Ron Fucking Perlman makes up for him.
I'm really getting tired of the "possessed people crawl on walls like spiders" special effect. Seems like it pops up way too often in movies.
-
Toy Story 3- Don't often watch Pixar, but still this struck me as uncommonly good as standardized Pixar goes. Though still no Incredibles (shock, CK is biased towards unabashed super hero sendup)
-
- Harry and the Henderson's - 3/5. My boyfriend's favorite childhood movie. I was under-impressed. I didn't like Harry one bit.
- Race to Witch Mountain - 2/5. Boring.
- Explicit Ills - 2/5. For a connective narrative, the execution was very ineffective for the fall out in the end.
- Coco Before Chanel - 3/5. Nothing to really say about the movie . . best wardrobe, perhaps? I am, indeed, a fan of Audrey Tautou.
Next up, A Woman, a Gun and a Noodle Shop, starting season 2 of Spartacus, Fish Tank, L'Auberge Espangnole . . and maybe something on my instant queue.
-
Most favored childhood movies don't stand up too well twenty years later. Well, plenty of 'em from the eighties don't, at least.
Anyway, I watched Ed Wood recently for the first time in a while (best movie either Tim Burton or Johnny Depp ever made, by the way), which naturally led to me watching Plan 9 for the first time in a while (I own both of these, had just been a few years). You know, as bad as the effects were even for the fifties, it's the dialogue in this movie that always gets me. There's a special kind of badness here that I don't think any other filmmaker's ever truly reproduced.
"We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember, my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future."
!
"That's the most fantastic story I've ever heard." "And every word of it is true." "That's what makes it so fantastic!"
!!
"One thing's for sure: Inspector Clay's dead. Murdered. ...And someone's responsible."
!!!
So inevitably I decided I needed to watch more Ed Wood after that (the only other one I'd seen was The Sinister Urge, and that on MST3K), and rented Bride of the Monster. There's no narration in this one, which is sad because Ed Wood narration is really special, but Lugosi looks like he was having a lot of fun at least. I totally need to avatar him in hypno mode. Also monster finds its conscience through the power of ANGORA, which is such a ridiculously obvious case of author fetish as plot device that I laugh just thinking about it.
Best line: "This swamp is a monument to death. Snakes, alligators, quicksand, all bent on one thing: destruction."
Glen or Glenda next.
-
Despicable Me: Lots of fun, even if it wasn't as supervillainy as I'd hoped (which is kind of surprising seeing as the movie centers on a plot to steal the moon, but it's true).
-
Red: Hilarious. Ugly Old Men (and woman) are awesome.
-
Decided to skip the Super Bowl and spend the day at the movies instead.
The Green Hornet: Completely awesome. Note to self: make sure all future cars are front-wheel drive.
The Rite: A disturbing lack of Anthony Hopkins crawling on the wall like a spider.
-
I finally saw Capitalism, a Love Story - and then I watched Restrepo.
Much better than his last infamous film - better music, better editing, better interview dialogue, better similes and allusions . . .
I'm obviously biased because I would describe myself as a Democratic Socialist. I loathe Capitalism - I believe the theoretical free market economy does not mingle at all with a Democratic society. America is a great example where it shows that those who have money have power, and despite our vote, it's been proved to be overridden in favor for corporate America. I don't want to get into it much, or debate . . but I fucking hate "our" Capitalism. 5/5
Restrepo. Another documentary. If you want to know what it looks like, what the atmosphere is like for our troops in Afghanistan, this is the movie. 5/5.
-
I've been watching movies lately.
The Corporation: Recommended to Idunie, based on her watching Capitalism, a Love Story. It's another damning anti-capitalism piece. Well, a damning anti-corporate capitalism piece. I'd argue that true capitalism is the thriving of a multitude of SMALL businesses, but I digress.
Something about Jack Abramoff I can't remember: Turned this off because it made me SO FREAKING UNCOMFORTABLE.
Jesus Camp: Was really hoping that this would follow SEVERAL of the camps and show things, but it only focused on one, specific Jesus Camp, which is, I mean, you can't make too much of a documentary about that. EVERYONE knows that there are crazy radicals of EVERY religion. The premise of this one was that there were tons of kids being indoctrinated into, not necessarily Christian beliefs so much as Conservative Republican beliefs, shamelessly using their religion as an intermediary. Unfortunately, since it only focuses on one Camp, it really strains that message. I mean, yeah! OK. One place CLEARLY does it. But if you want to make people care about something or feel moral outrage or whatever you're trying to do, you have to prove that it's a larger trend, and the film didn't do that. So without additional proof, I'll call this one propaganda.
Cabiria: Silent film, watched for a class I just dropped. Pretty weird movie. Never seen a silent film, but I was pretty impressed by some of the stuff that this was able to pull off during the time period, because there's some damn good special effects in this film. I was also kind of amazed to see a scene where they were sacrificing children in a giant incinerator. You'll never see that today, even with the disturbing rise in torture porn flicks. This is a pretty decent film, for a silent film, but silent films can be a real drain to watch, because the music score is repetitive, and the narration cards stay on the screen for an insultingly long time. The whole process is an ordeal and to be honest, I took a nap in the middle of it.
Good Will Hunting: One of my shrinks told me to watch this movie, I dunno which one, there's a not insignificant chance they BOTH did. Great film. I love me some Damon and Affleck goodness. And Minnie Driver is always welcome. Robin Williams does an excellent job at NOT being Robin Williams, and showing off a little range, and the whole movie hit very close to home, since like Will, I've been waffling around on a lot of potential, not really doing anything with it, and living miserably, when I could be out being practically anything I want to be. It really made me sit up and take notice, and started getting me to re-evaluate some decisions I've made. If I drop out of college, it very well might be Ben Affleck's fault. That mother fucker. :P
Conversations With Other Women: Really interesting movie for the art-fag in me that remembers being a film major. Aaron Eckhart is one of my favorite actors, so I knew going in that I was probably going to like this, but I was really intrigued by it. To be honest, the split screen didn't do much for me, but the story is still really OK. At the end of the film, it struck me that several characters were named, but neither of the main characters were. Yet those were the ones I cared about. That was a slick touch. Overall, this is an excellent movie that any art-fag like me would probably like.
Solitary Man: Dunno why I watched this. Indy kick, I guess. Good enough movie. Nothing really good or bad about it. It wasn't boring. Michael Douglas did a pretty nice job. Basically, a guy learns he has some kind of heart condition and might need some tests, and he says "Fuck it", never gets his tests, and spends the next six and a half years drinking, fucking much younger women, and becoming totally corrupt in what used to be a very successful business built on honesty. Naturally, this destroys his life.
The Education of Charlie Banks: Jesse Eisenberg kick, apparently, since he was in Solitary Man, too. This was.... wow. This was a really fucking amazing movie. Basically from start to finish I felt this one deep in the pit of my gut. Just extremely emotional and understated. Amazingly, this gem was directed by Fred fucking Durst, of all people. I really couldn't believe it. Anyhow, this may be the best movie I've ever seen, up there with Hero.
-
Cabiria: Silent film, watched for a class I just dropped. Pretty weird movie. Never seen a silent film, but I was pretty impressed by some of the stuff that this was able to pull off during the time period, because there's some damn good special effects in this film. I was also kind of amazed to see a scene where they were sacrificing children in a giant incinerator. You'll never see that today, even with the disturbing rise in torture porn flicks. This is a pretty decent film, for a silent film, but silent films can be a real drain to watch, because the music score is repetitive, and the narration cards stay on the screen for an insultingly long time. The whole process is an ordeal and to be honest, I took a nap in the middle of it.
If you get it into your head to watch another silent movie, make sure it's Metropolis. Everyone should see Metropolis.
-
So I picked up the Book of Eli and the Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus from the bargain buy shelf. Which should I watch first?
-
Zombieland
-
How to Train Your Dragon- fairly average, standard movie. Probably one that wasa lot better in theaters, what with the extended flight sequences. Still, cute parts, I liked the montage of him basically doing naturalist stuff on the dragons.
-
If you don't want to be supremely let down when you watch the second movie, watch Book of Eli first, because Imaginarium of Dr Parnasus is awesome.
-
The Brothers Bloom: Awesome movie, plus you get a shot of Rachel Weisz's ass! How can you go wrong?
-
The Social Network: Good stuff. Well-written, acted, the whole bit. No particular moment or element really wowed me, but it adds up to a solid whole. Reading up on the real people, I was amused that one of the things Zuckerberg took public issue with is that the movie supposedly says he started Facebook "to get girls" when it does the exact opposite. He comes off as a clueless sociopath, not a skirt-chaser.
-
Bourne Supremacy - Good enough. It was highly entertaining and had decent pacing, though it did suffer some problems with poor lighting at points.
-
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: Probably the best HP movie I've seen thus far (so, not including HBP and DH Part 1). Streamlines the plot well, good casting, friggin' awesome visual effects and setpiece scenes. The fight in the department of mysteries deserves the hype it got, and compressing the timeline a bit did wonders for its setup to boot.
Unbreakable: More good than bad. It's the first M. Night Shyamalan movie I've seen, so I wasn't prepared for his methodical (to be kind about it) pacing, and the payoff for the movie is in the freaking end credits, which is stupid. Still, it was a pretty unique take on the genre and they obviously had fun setting up the last twist.
-
True Grit - Finally watched it this week, been mulling it over this week. I enjoyed it and it is a good movie. The ending is pretty bad though. The prologue 30 years later stuff is alright, but the climax and general ending of the story is really really meh. All the way up to it though? Great.
Regarding the stuff about the lead actress? Personally I found the way she spoke quite fine. It is all very formal, but she is a clearly intelligent young girl who is well read and most importantly that I think most people seem to be missing, associates with adults far more than she does other teenagers. She is pretty spot on for a kid like that. Expanded vocab that they flex far more than is really appropriate and prevents actual effecient communication is a pretty tell tale sign of it.
-
Bourne Ultimatum- Thought it was better than the second. Julia Stiles was pretty awful, but they kept her dialog to an absolute minimum. Chase scenes were better than the second, and the payoff was better as well.
-
Unbreakable: More good than bad. It's the first M. Night Shyamalan movie I've seen, so I wasn't prepared for his methodical (to be kind about it) pacing, and the payoff for the movie is in the freaking end credits, which is stupid. Still, it was a pretty unique take on the genre and they obviously had fun setting up the last twist.
Personally didn't mind the ending bit. The payoff for me was "Now that we know who you are, I know who I am." Although there was surely a more elegant way to end it than with captions, I really don't think there needed to be much of anything after that meeting.
~
Glen or Glenda: Wow. WOW. I've seen plenty of bad movies before. I've seen Ed Wood movies before. But I remain impressed almost beyond words at the overwhelming incompetence displayed in this production. It's an inspiring jumble from start to finish, a miracle of bad plotting and awkward presentation no other human being could've possibly produced. An impassioned, documentary-style plea for tolerance of crossdressing shoehorned into a grade-Z exploitation flick, starring the writer/director...in drag. And that would be recipe enough for self-indulgent trainwrecking, but it's also just so mindbogglingly incoherent in the way it's put together that I just sat there slackjawed the whole time, amazed that this movie even existed.
Bela Lugosi's some kind of magician or something who can make people disappear and utters the most baffling narration in cinematic history, it's like a quarter of the way into this hour-long movie before our title character even makes an appearance, and oh during a post-suicide scene here's a shot of a radiator for no god-damned reason at all, also here's some stock footage of stampeding buffalo, why was the devil the best man at the wedding I don't understand--and eventually we get to the part where the producer said, "There are supposed to be tits in this movie. Where are the tits," so then we get five minutes of Wood and Lugosi watching various striptease and S&M acts, and PULL THE STRING, PULL THE STRING.
Five stars, this was pretty special. "Only the infinity of the depths of the human mind can tell the whole story." You said it, Eddie.
-
Magnolia - 4/5. Unfortunate people.
Machete - 4/5. Hahaha, this movie is hilarious. A Rodriguez movie I finally enjoy. There's many scenes that lack continuity - and characters (only Jessica Alba really) who I find no real purpose for in terms of her investigating the Network, but whatever.
Nowhere Boy - 5/5. Not a fan of the Beatles. Love this movie about the younger John Lennon.
L'Auberge Espagnole - 3/5. Watched this French series backwards. Sort of glad I did - L'Auberge Espagnole was full of scenes that required more development.
A Woman, a Gun and a Noodle Shop - 3/5. Interesting cinematography, forgettabble cast.
Explicit Ills - 2/5. A movie where the idea behind it is greater than the actual film. Still instills a bit of activism in me by putting an anonymous face on certain health situations, but it could have been much better. Similar to Magnolia in that in links multiple characters together into an overarching domino theme, but is really bad at it.
X-Files Season 7 - less quirky X-Files. Still liked it. 5/5. Should have been better in preparation for No Moulder though.
-
Be warned that if you continue with the X-Files, you do so at your own peril.
-
The dude that replaced Moulder is pretty good, but yeah he really didn't have much at all to work with.
Also you don't like the Beatles? How much have you done? Have you listened to Sgt. Peppers in its entirety? Because they are pretty amazing. Having a bit of context helps though.
Unknown - Watched this last weekend, it was alright, not a waste of time to watch. There was a few parts that raised my hackles a bit, like the part where the foreigner that hasn't been in the country before demands the keys from the chick that has been earning money in the city as a taxi driver for ages as they escape and stuff. I know there is plot stuff for it, but it is a bit of a stretch. If you want to watch Liam Neeson action star though you are better off watching Taken though.
-
The dude that replaced Moulder is pretty good, but yeah he really didn't have much at all to work with.
Robert Patrick, yeah. I kinda feel sorry for the guy since it's not really his fault the stories went to shit as soon as he arrived. He could've been fine if they ever figured out what they wanted to do with him. Duchovny brought a desperately needed lighter touch to the show that no one seems to have bothered even thinking about continuing.
The Scully stand-in in season 9 was just flat-out awful, though.
-
I've seen a ton of movies at the theater last year, and pretty much stopped buying DVDs. The theater is a much better experience for about the same price or less if you go with someone, and a lot less expensive if you're alone. You can't watch it again, but from what I've seen most people don't rewatch movies aside from their top 10 or whatever.
Ghost Writer, Inception and Black Swan were the most impressive, I'd say. All top notch; The Prestige's excellent too, I really regret not having seen it at the theater back then. I bought that crazy poster, it was worth it: http://images.fan-de-cinema.com/affiches/thriller/the_prestige,7.jpg
-
No Moulder X-Files?! That's madness.
-
I find it amusing that we are all collectively misspelling the name of one of the show's main characters, obviously confusing him with a random FE8 scrub because we are the DL and find those more memorable. Good show, us.
Or it could have something to do with Mulder's name being spoken and not spelled, but who's letting logic get in the way of a good snark?
-
That is a pretty sweet poster, ran a different one down here in Aus, was way more generic than that.
Have you checked out the Illusionist as well Fenrir? It is pretty good from the same time and always has to be mentioned if Prestige is. It is different, but both are stage magicians from the early 1900s whoamg mystary movies.
-
Yeah, I've seen it, I can't say it grabbed me as much though. I nearly don't remember anything about it.
Isn't The imaginarium of dr Parnassius similar too?
-
I still need to sit down and watch that actually. Picked it up at release on DVD and never got around to it.
-
The similarities don't go very deep, but two movies about mysterious turn-of-the-century magicians with acts that are impossible to figure out that were released at the same time are naturally going to end up being seen as a matched set.
-
That and you know, they were both really damned good as well.
-
Momento- Pretty fantastic film. Q though:
I thought I saw a a very brief scene of Leonard with his tattoos and his wife together at the very end. What's up with that?
[/quote]
-
Inception: Pretty awesome. Nowhere near as mindscrewy as I was led to believe (the ending is ambiguous without being actually confusing. Lady And The Tiger, not Evangelion.) but a very very good movie in all respects. I'd love to see more stories set in that world.
-
On the off chance that you missed it, he had memory problems before she died. She was not killed by John G. She was damaged, but he was hit over the head and got his memory problems then. She was killed when she overdosed on insulin like he thought Sammy Jenkis was. There never was a Sammy. That sequence shows how they had started to deal with if it is in there. I honestly forget how well all of the above is explained in the movie directly though. Can't even recall if the thing you saw exists, but that would be the explanation. He always needed coping mechanisms.
-
Super:
"The picture of Leonard that Leonard finds in the envelope under his motel door shows him pointing at a bare spot on his chest. He tells Natalie that this spot is reserved for when he finds John G. Later, when Leonard is driving to the tattoo parlor, he thinks about his wife, and a flashback his shown in which he is lying in bed with his wife. The bare spot in this shot now contains: "I've done it."" Seen on IMDB
Glad you liked this anyhow.
Nolan has said he wanted to create a videogame based on Inception. No idea how this will turn out.
-
Assassin's Creed meets Radiant Historia at The Matrix's House?
Watched Open Season 2. Pales in comparison to its former. I don't remember the rating I gave it.
The Art of the Steal. Documentary about Albert Barnes's Post-Impressionist/Modern Collection's unethical and shady acquisition to the Philadelphia elite. In many cases similar to Art History modes, there is a significant biographical focus. This is necessary, as he was essentially the philistine's antichrist to museum collections, but the docu goes through depths to explain the issues in a coherent way. Love the passion of the interviewees. I believe.. I gave it a 5/5, to hopefully skew some fragment of its ratings on Netflix to influence people in watching it.
-
I went to the video store and rented some Fine Art and some Mindless Sci-Fi Trash. By which I mean Japanese Gay Porn and Battlestar Galactica. You decide which label applies where.
-
Just so no one makes a mistake I am not actually saying Battlestar Galactica is a piece of fine art, but you rented Sci-Fi themed Japanese porno?
-
Nobody's fool- Rewatched this for the first time in 15+ years. It's an extremely well done movie, which is unsurprising when you have Jessica Tandy, Paul Newman, and Bruce Willis in it. It was great as a serious piece from start to end, but it was also fucking hilarious, which I missed the first time I watched it. Was probably too young to appreciate the dialog.
Edit: Command performance: Dolph Lundgren stops an execution with the power of a guitar riff. Seriously. It is as camp as it gets. A: His 'love interest' is young enough to be his daughter. His young daughter. B: The dialog and acting is terrible from top to bottom. C: The dude from a biker gang outfits several members of the russian special forces. D: They shoot the journalist at the end for the hell of it.
It's pretty fucking entertaining.
-
"Rango" is pretty sweet. Watch it.
Re "The Illusionist": There's one problem I always had with that movie.
The main characters are NOT the cheery good guys with a happy get away ending! Or shouldn't be, despite the fact the narrative thinks they are. The putative bad guy is a jerkwad and a cad, yes. But just that. He never actually does anything criminal or evil. For the crime of being a jerk, he gets *framed for murder*?! And probably imprisoned for the rest of his life? Dude, this is a seriously evil act our two lovebirds committed. I'm fine with them getting away but then our sympathies need to be on the poor prince who pursued the wrong woman rather than the guy who perverted the law to win the girl.
-
Battle Los Angeles: I liked it. Pretty intense stuff. Don't like herky-jerky camera movements, but they're trendy nowadays so every movie has to use them.
-
Snowfire: If I recall correctly, jerkwad villain (who was way too obviously one, in my opinion) was plotting to overthrow his father, so he does have that against him. I am pretty sure he also kills himself at the end or something? Don't remember with total clarity, only saw it once and honestly wasn't all that impressed.
-
So let me get this right, the movie about stage magicians and complete and total showmanship was misleading and defied expectations?
How dreadful.
-
Hey what is this I saw movies recently...SPOILERS!!!!
Black Swan - Very well-done psychological thriller. Also great porn. Mmm...Natalie Portman masturbating...
Despicable Me - I...don't know. The movie felt pretty standard. It had some parts I really laughed at, and some I didn't. Way too plain - which is a shame. I really expected it to be...well, more over-the-top. They didn't play the supervillain part up enough, I think. Overall was good, but the conflict just wasn't there the way I was expecting, and it was very, very obvious how things would work out (although cute).
Adjustment Bureau - Man. Did not use its potential. Good movie, but it really did not explore what it could. It took the concept...and then just skimmed the surface. It also didn't help that we got so little background on the antagonists - Thompson "The Hammer" is so very not hammery (lol he talks to you wow...), the first white-haired guy basically vanishes after the first act, and Harry is...still not detailed much. And the water thing really, really needed some explanation - I feel like the directors were too afraid to go deep into the concept here, and it hurt. Soooooo much potential. The acting was great, there were hilarious parts of it (when Harry and Whitey are trying to stop David right before Thompson is called in, it's hilarious - moreso than Despicable Me was at its funniest), and it was overall good, but sooooo much potential that they didn't access.
-
Black Swan - Very well-done psychological thriller. Also great porn. Mmm...Natalie Portman masturbating...
Wait, Black Swan is a porn film? Wow are they ever marketing that incorrectly.
-
Inception: I'll let Cid speak for me here.
Inception: Saw this last weekend. Lives up to the hype, excellent on pretty much every front. I can think of nothing bad to say about this movie; it has pretty much everything you would want to see in one. Neat sci-fi ideas are expressed efficiently (visually whenever possible) and without talking down to the audience; supporting cast is charming enough even when their roles in the story are fairly basic; there are dudes beating each other up in variable gravity; stuff explodes; there is a tragic love aspect that plays out in fairly non-cliche fashion tied in with a backstory about the dangers of obsession and the risks of exploration. There is often a lot occurring but it's never difficult to tell what's happening. This is no mean feat when you're crosscutting constantly between three or four disparate (but related) scenarios at the end of the movie. Basically if there is anything you appreciate about the act of being alive, you should watch this.
Addition to this: Fantastic ending (And I thought a very clear one) and just an amazing watch. I need to watch more Nolan, the movies I've seen from him are top notch.
-
Nolan's pretty great, yeah. I think you've seen most of the noteworthy ones by this point? Memento I think I remember you mentioning recently. Cannot recall if you saw The Prestige, which you should definitely do if you have not already. Pretty sure that's my favorite of the lot. Batman movies of course are excellent, second has some pacing issues that show up more every time I watch it but there's still a ton of excellent material there. Insomnia's the least notable of the bunch. Not bad, just scattershot. I haven't seen his first movie so can't comment on that.
-
Speaking of!
The Prestige- Very good movie about obsession. As engrossing as the main feud was, I found the rest of the plot to be eh. Movie was a treat to watch (it bears repeating, every Nolan movie is visually appealling) and had a very good cast. It didn't hook me as deeply as momento or inception, but that may have had more to do with the subject matter.
-
Sucker Punch: Great art direction and the use of music is outstanding. Unfortunately the script and acting leave a lot to be desired. Vanessa Hudgens is so not ready to leave television yet. The main problem is that there's no real suspense to the movie. You know what the movie within a movie within a movie (not a typo) represents, so the mystery of it is gone. Go see it if you're an art fag or enjoy the juxtaposition of steampunk Nazi zombies with Hello Kitty mecha; skip it otherwise.
-
Yeah Super, it looks like you've seen Nolan's bests. (If you've seen Dark Knight too) Insomnia was indeed less impressive than the others (I think Nolan didn't write it), and Batman begins didn't really transcend the superhero genre, unlike its sequel.
-
I've seen both Batman movies. The second does have some pacing problems but man, Ledger and Eckhart make it worth it.
Inception is the best of the lot, but they were all very good films.
-
Wow. So Super is the only one who sees what's wrong with Dark Knight other than me? Goddamnit, world.
Anyway...
Funny People- I liked this movie more than I thought I would. More drama than comedy than I thought even knowing it was more drama going into it. Still good times.
The Hangover- Finally saw this. And... really people? Funniest movie in years? I loved the movie, but... it was basically a grown-up version of Dude, Where's My Car? and I daresay that Dude was better. Though I love the silly and absurd. Hangover seems like a Big Lebowski type deal though in that it gets better on multiple viewings.
-
To be fair, Dude came out in 2000, so people aren't necessarily wrong when they say funniest movie in years. Blame the lack of funny movies.
-
Despicable Me - Good Gawd! Pharrell does the soundtrack? Why did no one tell me this BEFORE! I would have seen it in the theaters had I known that.
Other then that slapping me in the face when I popped in the DVD, the movie was pretty good. I've been seeing a lot more kiddy movies as of late.
Megamind - Decent. I liked DM a lot more...
Tangled - Blame the GF who likes these types of movies. Liked this one more then the double M, but less then DM. No Pharrell meant this movie had way too many songs for my taste.
Hall Pass - The missus did not like this one, but I found it to be pretty damn funny. Go figure.
-
Just 2 recent ones:
The Last Airbender - ........what the fuck. Shymalan, you are a master. Seriously, I don't know how you could fuck this up - the damn thing was basically already designed! Seriously, awful.
THAT IS NOT GENERAL IROH!!!
Christ, are the Earthbenders doing the fucking Nutcracker just to throw a stone at someone?
Ugh...
The Human Centipede - Bwhahahahaha! Hilarious. Probably one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. Seriously, the concept is so damn awful and ridiculous that I laughed the entire way through the "horror" of it all. Seriously, sewing people's mouths to asses is your dream as a master surgeon? Man, that's...ridiculously funny. Awesome movie on the sheer inanity of the concept.
-
Daybreakers: Surprisingly awesome. It's a movie about vampires running the world and it's... very good? It's well acted, has a decent enough plot, and is shot very well. Great ending as well. Go see this.
-
Limitless: Movie of the year. At least for me. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
Arthur: A remake or something. Brand plays an immature rich drunk very berry very very very well.
-
Goodfellas: I've seen parts before, but just that. Anyway, good movie, though definitely choppy at points.
Shutter Island: Lived up to the hype, which is unshocking considering the actor/director combo.
Edit: List of movies I've seen so far this year:
Bourne Identity
Bourne Supremacy
Bourne Ultimatum
Momento
Inception
Nobody's fool
The Prestige
Daybreakers
Leaving Las Vegas
Goodfellas
Shutter Island
Will have to hit up the library for some more.
Watch Nobody's fool, slackers!
-
Thor: wasn't expecting much due to the preview. And as it started I was getting that "They ruined everything! RAGE" feeling. But then the movie turns out to be a lot of fun! Very Shakespearian story, with emotion in the right places.
Best thing: making Loki so sympathetic
Worst thing: that is NOT Hogunn the Grim. Casting fail.
Also the Captain America trailer was hella hype.
-
The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly: Saw this for the first time in a long, long while. Good movie, but too long. I would have liked Leone to cut out about 15 minutes or so, but for the life of me I can't really find a good spot to do so. Can't be the first Tuco vs. MWNN spot in the hotel because it sets up the ending. Can't be the ghost town gunfight because it's really the only fight in the movie that isn't solved by one shot. Maybe cutting back a bit on the POW camp and the bridge area, but you can't cut too much there. Best part is (of course) the soundtrack.
-
Thor was good. I enjoyed the part after the credits too.
Spoiler? I really don't see a spoiler button so avoid this part if you hate things spoiledzzz.
I was really expecting Nick Fury to show up in Asgard. And when Thor or whoever got around to asking him how he got there, this is what I wanted to see Fury say, "BECAUSE I'M MOTHER FUCKING SAM JACKSON!"
-
Thor:
Really, really great adaptation. I got a little emotional when they showed Asgard the first time. I wish Jack were alive.
Also, Sif. OH GOD SIF. I can't rave enough about how awesome Sif is, and how happy I am that they made her straight-up awesome like she's damn well supposed to be.
-
Thor: Chiming in, I liked it, but it was at its most fun when it was Thor being an awkward human. Otherwise it was just too goofy on the whole. The Shakespearian drama parts were decent, obvious influence of Branaugh there. But... can't quite put my fiinger on it. I think it was the most out of all so far that have been "OBVIOUS COMIC BOOK MOVIE"
-
Time Cop: 90's cheese with a surprisingly solid cast. What can I say, I like Mia Sara.
-
Saw Thor. Enjoyable save for the void of nonacting that is Natalie Portman (I cannot possibly buy her being a physicist. This is a comic book movie, yet everything else is more believable). She's as wooden as ever and drags down every scene she's in. Enjoyable movie other than that, everybody else did a good job, I'm a sucker for colossal architecture so I had a lot of fun just eyeing the scenery, etc.
EDIT: Oh, was that cube in the stinger supposed to be anything in particular? My comic reading wasn't comprehensive enough to place it, if so.
-
TV Tropes seems to think it's some cosmic device linked with Thanatos. I can't remember the name of it though.
I thought she worked when she was supposed to be a giggling schoolgirl because Thor is dreamy (and I can't fault her on that), but certainly doesn't work as a theoretical physicist that's going to be making cross-dimensional gateways in the near future.
-
It's the Cosmic Cube. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Cube)
-
Thor: functional, but I feel like it was weaker than average for a comic book adaptation recently. Not necessarily because of Natalie Portman (whom I could buy as a theoretical physicist; I've known theoretical physicists who behave similarly). But more just...the overall. A lot of the stuff around Loki I found hard to believe (his motivations, and people interacting with him). Fight scenes seemed inconsistent--sometimes like they're just barely above humans, and sometimes completely ridiculous.
-
Hangover Part II: Even better than the first.
-
Boondock Saints- I'm not sure if this is a good or bad movie. It's so over the top that it's almost a parody, except that the director takes himself pretty seriously. It was reasonably entertaining though.
Boondock Saints 2- This was just bad. The female detective wasn't a match for her counterpart in the first film, and some of the humor mixed in was pretty juvenile. I still enjoyed it well enough though.
The Hangover- OK is so Stu. So very Stu. It's more or less a documentary of what would happen if Elfboy, VSM, myself, and OK went to Vegas for a weekend.
-
Kung Fu Panda 2: It was basically about killing, except they couldn't say killing because it's a kids movie. So there's just a lot of awkward open-mouthed stares where you would normally say "killed". I liked the peacock though.
-
Boondock Saints- I'm not sure if this is a good or bad movie.
Personally thought it was the latter. The director is so goddamn serious about his "lolcops r dumb VIGILANTE JUSTICE IS THE ONLY WAY" message (he claims the movie was inspired by a neighbor being killed by drug dealers and the police letting the killer go or something) that I could only flush the damn thing by the end.
-
The Hangover- OK is so Stu. So very Stu. It's more or less a documentary of what would happen if Elfboy, VSM, myself, and OK went to Vegas for a weekend.
OK is very Stu. ESPECIALLY considering the second movie. However, the rest of the cast is kinda off. Say what you will about yourself, Super, you're far, far from being Alan. VSM is not Bradley Cooper either. Elf is the closest there at Doug, but... still.
-
Hangover II: Funny movie. Seems like it benefits from not having seen the first one, given how much the reviews say it copies wholesale. Alan is way too close to a childhood friend of mine, down to the scene where he yells lunch orders at his mother.
-
I said it before, nothing in The Hangover is that shocking if you've seen Dude, Where's My Car? Same basic premise, just Dude is silly and corny while Hangover is more adult fare.
All these kinds of movies have the same basic plot. Granted, yeah, Hangover II is almost carbon-copied from the first, but it's so much more over the top that I actually ended up enjoying it more.
-
Pirates 4 - Well, this was certainly a thing. Not quite a movie, more like a serial or a really expensive and long TV episode. Not quite a movie. Entertaining, but... not quite up to par with the first two. Roughly on par with the third, for different reasons.
Knight and Day - Shame the rest of the movie was such shit, since there was some pretty witty dialogue in here.
Cop Out - Sadly not as good as you'd think a buddy-cop movie by Kevin Smith would be. Michael Keaton is great in it though.
Midnight in Paris - Woody Allen's new movie (written/directed). Saw a trailer for it at Pirates 4, ended up being really good! Anyone who is a lit buff should go see it. As it stood, sooooo glad I took a 20th Century Humanities class recently. Other than two lame potshot type jokes at Republicans the movie was incredibly solid comedically and otherwise.
-
X-Men: First Class- Good fun. However! Warning: Marvel muggles may have hit a new low here. Remember to preemptively roll eyes after the villain's last scene.
-
The Expendables: Somehow less impressive than I was expecting. It should have either skipped all the pointless dialog and gone full on action movie, or attempted to actually build a story.
Resident Evil 4: Always awful, always entertaining. Wesker had perfect casting, I will say that much.
-
X-Men: First Class- Good fun. However! Warning: Marvel muggles may have hit a new low here. Remember to preemptively roll eyes after the villain's last scene.
(http://www.be-something.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/civil-war-fl-11.jpg)
-
That's more realistic.
-
And yet still lower than whatever you just saw in the movie.
-
The proper answer to the NASCAR question is "Never, because I'm not an idiot" and to the Simpsons, "about ten years ago, because I'm not an idiot."
-
What's a myspace?
-
X-Men: First Class- Good fun.
This.
I approve of the sixties Bond villain thing the enemies have going on here, incidentally.
-
X-Men First Class: Yeah, baby! Revisionist history has never been so much fun. Austin Powers Xavier is a very groovy cat. His mojo is getting into other people's mojo; that's heavy, baby.
Anyway, the movie worked for what it intended to do: give a backstory to the previous X-Men movies that doesn't require you to read 50 years of comics. My wife was like "Oh, so that's how that happened!" throughout the movie and I just smiled and nodded at her.
Kevin Bacon was excellent as Shaw, and it's ever so much fun to watch Magneto moving things around with magnetism. They always make it look so much cooler than telekinesis for some reason.
-
X-Men, First Class
I thought it was pretty fantastic. With the caveat that there were really only three characters in the movie (Raven, Charles, and Eric) and everyone else served as a foil of one of those three.
(SPOILERS I guess)
Charles actually comes across as...not so much a villain, as a bit of a douchebag. He's the guy who feels it's better for gays mutants to be semi-closeted; not flaunt their pride in who they are. He does perform well in the teacher role, but isn't good at treating his friends like equals. It's hard not to identify with Raven; she does feel like the main character of the movie in a lot of ways, and gets the most character development. From shy girl who's kind-of living in Charles' shadow and a bit ashamed of who she is, to proud woman. Her leaving with Eric at the end makes sense, not so much because she necessarily agrees with him, but because Charles is a douchebag. Eric is kind-of a broken man--you can always see where he's coming from, given his origins; like "identification; that's how it starts."
(ENDSPOILERS)
I think it's strong as a movie when you don't try too hard to tie it to the x-men cannon, other than the fact that a lot of extraneous stuff was injected just because it was x-men. Like...they could have done with half the cast. They definitely needed Hank in that movie, as an excellent foil to Raven, and Shaw as a foil to Eric. But past that? Most of the other mutants could have been cut.
-
This movie shows in full force what's only sorta hinted at in the older ones; Charles Xavier might mean well, but growing up being able to read people's minds has left him, putting it nicely, morally challenged. He thinks nothing of using his powers to his advantage and much like Erik he'll do whatever he thinks is necessary to achieve his vision. He just has a vision a little more compatible with standard morality and less influenced by being horribly broken as a child.
Edit: the other characters mostly exist because it's an adaptation of a team book, so you need a few more people/different sets of powers to make the action elements work like fans expect. Or exist to die/turn evil to underscore the seriousness of teh situation >.>
-
Yep, Charles was indeed a total dick as a kid. He tortured Cain Marko constantly with his mental powers when they were growing up.
-
I always identified with Magneto the most, personally.
-
Well, said I would do writing on my holiday, so first day of it will be movies, because I watched some movies.
The Mechanic - This movie is a mess. It is a bit of fun, but it meanders all over the place. I watched it because it had Jason Statham in it and that gave me what I wanted. The premise is that he kills his mentor because the mentor sold out his assassin company. Then he trains up the mentor's kid in assassination missions because he is directionless and is a loose cannon. Then there is like 20 minutes of training montage or some shit. There is just way to much of that. By 3/4 of the way through the movie Statham has killed like 2 people. Then after training montage the kid goes on 2 missions. Straight up fucks up the first one, turning what could have looked like an overdose on something into a violent break and enter murder while planting the drugs on the body sending a pretty crazy hard message to the company the target worked for. Then they are asked to kill another guy. Careful plan goes to shit and turns into a fire fight. Statham is not really called out for either of these. The second one isn't the kid's fault really, but he certainly helped escalate the situation into a big full blown gun fight.
Then the last quarter of the movie is a straight revenge flick when Statham has talked about how it isn't about revenge. He certainly went on a big killing spree after fucking up 2 important missions for no monetary gain. Then the kid kills Statham with Statham accepting it all. The kid says revenge was always the mission blah blah. Goes back to Statham's house and takes the old car he had been working on. Oh snap Statham trapped it and blew the kid up, then we find out Statham got out of the trap the kid setup.
Like the last part is a big dumb action movie with LOL TWIST at the end, which is fine. I just have no fucking idea how this guy is ever meant to find work again. It is a real slow burner after a fun opening then ends with a bang. It isn't an explosive bang though, it is a bang of the plot being dropped on the floor and shattered to a thousand pieces. Fun movie, but not good. Watch Snatch instead for good Statham action.
THIS IS SPOILERS FOR A GOOD MOVIE, I AM SKIPPING OVER THINGS THAT REALLY TIE THE MOVIE TOGETHER. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK. I AM SPOILING TO TRY AND INTRIGUE ON THE LARGER PARTS OF THE MOVIE.
The Adjustment Bureau - Now this. This was really damned good. I am glad I caught that it is based on a Phillip K Dick piece because that makes the whole thing make sense and is the only reason I watched it. The description of it is how Matt Damon and the heroines love is so great that they won't be kept apart because of a big conspiracy.
That is total bullshit and the story is fucking nothing like that. What it is about is Free Will, like straight up Cartesian shit right here. The bureaucracy are Angels the enforce God's plan by modifying minor events and directing decision making of people. So you have a divine bureaucracy that is run by angels that wear 3 piece suits, hats (important plot point) and go everywhere at a fairly leisurely stroll. These Angels follow their maps for how things should be going along completely blindly and have no idea what the divine plan is and why they are doing the things they do. This is pure Phillip K Dick stuff here and it is pretty fantastic.
There is a case worker specifically assigned to Matt Damon. He is chock full of regret. More on this later. He screws up one day and Matt Damon meets Emily Blunt after he was never supposed to see her again and rocks up to work on day while the Bureau is recalibrating his best friend's opinion (on investing deeply into Solar Panels, so he will do that). So Matt Damon finds out about the Angel dudes that he shouldn't. They can't wipe his memory so they make him swear to never expose them to anyone or be lobotomised.
So the plot of his undying love in the face of a conspiracy? Matt Damon loves Emily Blunt because the divine plan changed years ago and he was no longer supposed to marry her and be happy for life. He keeps fighting in his way to be with her without revealing the presence of the Bureau. This takes place over a period of about 4 years, it is pretty awesome. Just huge time jumps where he was entirely unable to do anything about it (had no idea who Emily Blunt even was...). So anyway, they ultimately end up together and the divine plan changes to let them stay together. Which is kind of hilarious in that this was originally the divine plan anyway. You still have a triumphant story about free will though on the human side anyway. The Chairman sees how far Matt Damon will go and just goes yep sounds good (omnscient and omnipotent being that you never see is the Chairman). So a bit of a smart arse move there. It could be because of sloppy writing in the screenplay that this is what happens, but I love it anyway for the shades of Voltaire in it.
The real strong part of Free Will though I think comes from the Angel that is filled with regret because of the ways that he had to shape Matt Damon's life. He had to do things that he didn't like doing to people that he thought didn't deserve it. He is questioning the divine plan even though he is a being born entirely to uphold it. He sees the course taken as extremely wasteful and regretful. Ultimately he chooses to help Matt Damon. With a few small exercises of breaking protocol I think he has made a far more grand statement about Free Will than the four year long story of Matt Damon trying to find his lost love (bonus points for it taking place over 2 generations off camera, just nicely handled). It is a small act on his part that has huge ramifications resulting in the ultimate changes to the divine plan. All from an Angel who is in a Bureaucratic system that represses his personal choices because they are defined for him. So we are racking up shades of Descartes, Voltaire and rage against corporate workplaces. No wonder I loved this movie.
Another point where the marketting fails, it gets referred to as an action movie. There is action sequences of people running around. Like away from Angels that walk at a brisk stroll. It is a far smarter movie than it is marketted as.
A few quick finishing things, I love the costuming again. Another movie that knows how good a three piece or four piece suit is. Pretty much every Agent is dressed immaculately and looks great. The main few look great. The higher up on the food chain they get the more oppulent the costuming is. The special agent man they bring in to ultimately try and break up the relationship steps it up with a very fine long coat and scarf. My favourite part is when you see some of the really high up guys and they are dressed like 80s stockbroker stereotypes. Bracers, slick backed hair, bold solid coloured shirts even from memory. Just great fun there. Also the Regret Angel guy, dresses nicely and rocks his trilby at a rakish angle. Looks fucking great. Just to show, he is played by Anthony Mackie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Mackie).
Just a ton of fun for a gigantic nerd like me.
-
Good lord. If the advertisements had given THAT impression I'd have gone tos ee that movie.
-
Yeah really. NOt that anyone else would have gone and seen it.
-
I'd like to think that the ads that did come out were too ham-handed to draw in the sorta people who enjoy "fated love fighting the system". I mean, I'm all about that (Xenogears fanboy and all) and I thought they were retarded!
-
I liked the Adjustment Bureau. I had a pretty good idea what the movie was about and I took my GF to watch it. It was a good date movie.
I also liked green Lantern. Granted, it changes some of the origins around a little bit, but it was not too bad. it could have been better, but aside from Superman and Batman...the Dc characters just do not get that much attention. I always hear people decribe the Green Lantern and then call him (Green) Arrow or Hornet as if they were the same hero. they do lead up to a sequel which I hope gets green lit. I think a second movie will remove a lot of the restraints of the first and allow the Jordan to really let his powers loose. Although, judging by the poor reviews the movie garnished...who knows.
Either way I'd much rather see a Flash movie personally.
and...
Why do people like these Harry Potter movies? Granted I have not read any of the books, but I just caught up all the way to the DH1 and I am supremely unimpressed. My gf had to slap me a couple of times to keep me up during the Deathly Hallows and The Half Blood Prince was just horrible. Oh well I've gone this far, might as well see it all the way through. At least these movies aren't as bad as those Twilight movies. Ugh.
Here's hoping this Captain America movie is good. I was never a huge fan of him, but the trailers look dope.
-
Harry Potter is pretty much just for fans of the books who want to see scenes from the books in action. I don't see how they make a damn bit of sense if you don't already know the story backward and forward.
-
Green Lantern: pretty good. A lot nerdier than the average superhero movie; lore heavy at some points, and fairly philosophical at other points. On the other hand, the muggle interactions were...weaker than normal for a superhero movie. I can see why it might get weak reviews: if you go in seeking a cookiecutter Hollywood "Avatar" plot it's...there as a crappy subplot. But it's also not really the strength of the movie. I went in knowing nothing about Green Lantern, and came out with a fair bit of respect for the concepts.
-
Harry Potter is pretty much just for fans of the books who want to see scenes from the books in action. I don't see how they make a damn bit of sense if you don't already know the story backward and forward.
I've known people who never read the books and enjoyed the movies and didn't find them hard to follow. Said people claimed the only real difference between these and other movies was that Harry Potter movies expected you to remember stuff between movies (like 6-8 important characters).
-
I went in knowing nothing about Green Lantern, and came out with a fair bit of respect for the concepts.
Concepts, plural? I dunno, I just got back from seeing it tonight knowing nothing about the Green Lantern previously, too. The movie has one 6th grade moral and hit it hard and repeatedly. Luckily for the movie, I actually agree with said Aesop of the day (courage is about conquering your fear, not having none in the first place), so it doesn't succumb to the problem many JRPGs do of "your moral is incomprehensible, ridiculous, hypocritical, or some dread combination thereof." But it isn't scoring actual concept points, either.
Anyway, uh, decent movie... yet also a tad meh. They totally cheat on some of the action scenes by just cutting the scene away and then... poof, we never return to the scene and nobody talks about how it ended. I guess they didn't want to draw attention to their plot holes, which is fine, but I'd rather they not be there in the first place.
Spoilers (ha like that matters, but I'll be cautious anyway):
How the hell do you write a sequel after Hal SINGLE-HANDEDLY slays a giant planet devouring fear entity. I'll grant he does it partially through trickery, which was cool, but he still stands up to him when Sinestro's elites apparently still got their souls sucked, and this is the Greatest Threat to the Core Ever (quote from the film!) and it's implied not even the Guardians of Oa could stop Paralax. Sure, there's the Yellow Ring for sequel villain bait, but that would presumably be a massive step down from "crazy Guardian who merges with fear entity." It'd be like if Luke kills the Emperor and then destroys the Spirit of the Dark Side of the Force in the first movie. If I'd been writing the movie, I'd have made Paralax be a "subversion from behind the scenes" sort of villain who enjoys making planets commit suicide because he thinks that's awesome, rather than OM NOM NOM. That way, there's always tons of schemes to foil and it's understandable if you don't fight him directly in the first movie.
Green Lantern's powers seem totally broken, and they couldn't find much to really use them creatively with. I'll grant that a lower-powed villain should just die to GL's overpoweredness, but against Paralax, it was all TEST OF WILL blooey where the actual form of the creations didn't seem to matter. Meh.
Minor quibble: "the ring is never wrong!" But... the lantern was made by the Guardians, and Hal mouths off to the Guardians about how they're wrong about Paralax. The Guardians made something less fallible then themselves? And with a name like "Sinestro" it's obvious who will be the villain if they do a sequel, so apparently the ring / lantern selection process can go awry. I'll just assume they were totally lying to cheer Hal up. If I was writing the script, I'd have had the conversation be more "do you want to make the ring's decision wrong or right? It's your choice. Either get on your feet, hero, or go cower in bed and admit defeat."
Another nitpick: I cannot complain too much as it was an attempt to make Token Mortal Ferris relevant, but missiles distracted Paralax? Really? The dude flew through space.
I do appreciate that the writers at least took Screenwriters 101, and had Act I prefigure Act V. That's something.
-
Snowfire, could you do me a huge favour and go read up Green Lantern stuff on Wikipedia and come back and post about it again?
That sounds really douchey, but I just kind of want to get your opinion on the larger background of the concepts. Most of your complaints for the movie are straight up stupid things in the comics as well.
Magic wishing ring space cops are pretty notoriously hard to write stories for that aren't full of those kinds of holes.
-
The bits about starting with Parallax while keeping Sinestro's SHOCKING TWEEST for the sequel are just straight-up stupid adaptation though.
-
Sinestro SHOCKING TWEEST is always straight-up stupid though.
-
Which is why they need to just introduce him as a villain with a stupid name and David Niven's mustache, and leave the TWEEST in his backstory where it belongs.
-
Green Lantern: Wasn't expecting much because the reviews have been so bad, but this was surprisingly competent. The story was coherent, and the visual effects didn't look cheesy. Granted, I know very little of the actual comic story since I was a Marvel Zombie, but this seemed to cover the major points well enough.
-
Green Lantern: Was okay, when all was said and done. EXPOSITION at the start was a bad sign, but it leveled out fine. I actually thought Thor had funnier parts, but Reynolds does fine with Hal Jordan. My favorite part for him was just a throwaway scene after he's talking to his nephew and they're leaving the room. He just looks at the car track and can't help but set it off. Subtle character points! Woo!
Tim Robbins was dreadfully underused.
-
X-Men, First Class
I thought it was pretty fantastic. With the caveat that there were really only three characters in the movie (Raven, Charles, and Eric) and everyone else served as a foil of one of those three.
(SPOILERS I guess)
Charles actually comes across as...not so much a villain, as a bit of a douchebag. He's the guy who feels it's better for gays mutants to be semi-closeted; not flaunt their pride in who they are. He does perform well in the teacher role, but isn't good at treating his friends like equals. It's hard not to identify with Raven; she does feel like the main character of the movie in a lot of ways, and gets the most character development. From shy girl who's kind-of living in Charles' shadow and a bit ashamed of who she is, to proud woman. Her leaving with Eric at the end makes sense, not so much because she necessarily agrees with him, but because Charles is a douchebag. Eric is kind-of a broken man--you can always see where he's coming from, given his origins; like "identification; that's how it starts."
(ENDSPOILERS)
I thought that was the point. Xavier was a young man who was handed the entire world- looks, money, brains, etc. He's learning the ropes on how to be a leader as he goes along, and makes some mistakes along the way.
X-Men: Good, solid fun. It really did an excellent job with mystique in particular- I expected Xavier and Magneto to be good, but her being memoriable was out of the blue.
-
X-Men: Good, solid fun. It really did an excellent job with mystique in particular- I expected Xavier and Magneto to be good, but her being memoriable was out of the blue.
Yessss!
*hypes Mystique as the secret main character of that movie*
-
Cars: Watched this as part of a lazy evening at home. It was more fun than I expected, although the sequel still looks shitty. Kind of annoyed I missed out on Jeremy Clarkson's cameo by having the American version of the film (was anything else different between the two?). The John Ratzenberger scene in the credits was gold.
-
X-Men: Good, solid fun. It really did an excellent job with mystique in particular- I expected Xavier and Magneto to be good, but her being memoriable was out of the blue.
Yessss!
*hypes Mystique as the secret main character of that movie*
In some ways, she was. She develops the most by far and has some of the most heartbreaking scenes in the film. So much of the story is about Xavier's failures as a leader of the early X-men and why people chose Magneto's side. Everything that Mystique went through was a reflection of that. I mean, Xavier brutally and offhandly rejected her more than once, and that Beast scene... ouch. Shit, I would have joined with Magneto if I were her as well.
-
X-Men: Good, solid fun. It really did an excellent job with mystique in particular- I expected Xavier and Magneto to be good, but her being memoriable was out of the blue.
You. Bad. No color-based puns!
-
...I didn't notice that one, I swear.
-
Harry Potter 7.5
Really good at some points, shaky at others. Like the whole Gringotts sequence felt pretty rushed. But the Helena Ravenclaw scene was downright fantastic--what was a mildly interesting investigative scene in the book became probably the strongest scene in the movie.
The Snape memories were done decently well, so I was happy about that, although I'm not sure they'll make sense to a casual moviegoer. (Although it's not like they didn't need to cut stuff--they avoided the whole "mudblood" part, which I guess they had to after they failed to put it into book 5, and I don't think they used the "I think we sort too soon" line).
The final battle has...elements of the original. Hat->Sword->fight. Sword->Snake. "Stay away from my daughter". And briefly mentions wand ownership, although most of that is explained after the fight. But things are completely shuffled around, and it's much more of a crazy action lightsaber duel.
There are parts that are obviously problematic just because of the fact that they split the movie. Like...they never really complete the Dumbledore plot. The scenes still exist, but no backstory happens.
-
The last Potter movie kept me entertained enough to where I thought it was the best of the movies.
-
Green Lantern: Decent comic book movie. The action scenes are fantastic and Ryan Reynolds does a good job as Hal Jordan. The movie doesn't try to complicate things much, just presents a single theme and problem and runs with it.
The birthday party scenes did more than anything else to show the actual character of Hal Jordan off and it's conflicts, more than any interactions with the female love interest did. (Or yeah, seconding Soppy)
-
Captain America: Good ol' schmaltzy fun. The best superhero movie of the summer, not that that says much. Still not among the best, but still fun, especially the USO segments. The Avengers preview after the credits seemed promising.
-
The X-Men movie had better acting and plot, but Cap's film is pretty classic comic book movie stuff. Also, the actor who played Steve Rogers knocked it out of the park.
-
Harry Potter and the we're running out of books so just kill Voldemort already: Good, but Mrs. Weasley totally ruined the bitch line. No emotion whatsoever. I was hoping they would change the epilogue and have Ginny die horribly, but eh, can't win them all.
-
Captain America- Not bad. The first half of the movie is quite strong, up through the prison escape. The bits after that felt rushed, in particular the montage sequence which really threw me out of the movie because it looked so much like a "we need clips for the trailer" segment. Probably the weakest of Marvel's offerings this summer, but still worth the time.
-
Saw Captain America as well. yeah, I haven't posted here in a while, but shut up! Good movie, not sure if I can say its better or worse than Thor or X-men First Class, but I tend to rate movies and such, barring a few extremes, in terms of "Good" "Bad" and "Whatever."
-
Rosemary's Baby- Hatbot voted for Candyman for some CT weekend movie fiending but Grefter over ruled this in favour of Rosemary's Baby. Grefter > Hatbot. Yeah RB's baby was indeed quite compelling and I'm still thinking about what is was I actually watched. Yeah interesting I think I might watch it again to get my head fully around it. Not tonight though. Movie was longer than I was expecting and I sort of lost track of it near the end because tiredness. I enjoyed it though. Not sure why the old biddy won an Oscar for her part. I thought Rosemary and Roman were stronger roles, definitely Rosemary. Especially Roman at the end though I was awake enough to appreciate that at least. I haven't read the book for this one but I have read Son of Rosemary though I don't know if that really means much depending. RB does deal with some strong themes such as the eating of raw meat - which was ... she did it so naturally that I didn't even realise what she was doing until she did - and nonconsensual sex inc nonconsensual sex between partners ("it was kind of fun, in a necrophelic sort of way"? ... yeah I would have done more than spat on my husband by the end of the movie although with the way the movie works I'm not really sure how much of that really happened/was real or not) so it is not for folks with weak stomachs/etc.
Candyman or some of the Stand tonight~
-
Captain America! Fuck Yeah!: Yeah, that was pretty much what I wanted out of a Captain America movie. A bit of mishmash on his actual history and villains, but certainly evoked the right feelings of being PROUD TA BE AN MERICAN!
Also, the Arnim Zola introduction scene was colossally funny if you actually know who Arnim Zola is.
EDIT: A few more thoughts while this is fresh in my mind. The montage itself didn't bother me as it compacted a lot of very similar events (destroying one base after another). What did bother me was the motorcycle scene, since it was fairly obviously ripped off from the Endor speederbikes.
Dr. Erskine was portrayed very well. In the comics, Cap always thought of him as a father figure. This came off well in the movie.
I also liked the little touches into Steve's character that they threw in (like his artistic ability). It's nice when a movie can change some events from the comics but still retain the feeling of comic-accuracy.
-
I felt that the prison break was the highlight of the movie, with a good mix of raw action and slower paced, pseudo-spy kinda feel. so I couldn't help but think that just showing one 'blow up the bases' sequence in a little more detail, and leaving the audience to suppose the rest, would have kept a more consistent feel to the film.
I thought the bike chase was much closer to the one from Last Crusade, myself >.>
-
Captain America: Good movie, but not great. Cap himself was note-perfect - Evans was great casting and the script absolutely nailed every character beat (LOVED them showing Cap's cartooning ability, shame they didn't go the whole nine yards and give him a credit on the comic book). The pacing was off, though. CK's right about that montage not cutting it as a transition between USO Show Steve and the final assault on Hydra. Honestly, that whole conflict felt a bit like going through the motions. It probably doesn't help that I had to take a phone call just as the rescue mission heated up (and didn't get back until the scene with Hydra's human guinea pig), so I missed the only sustained action sequence before the climax. Accursed real life.
Also, was it just me or did Schmidt's endgame seem suspiciously similar to the WWII episodes of Justice League?
-
Some time, we should congregate to discuss movies in subject to cereal, dinners or simple yes or no's.
-
Horrible Bosses: This was good, not great. Charlie Day is at his best being Charlie Day, but not wholly utilized well. Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston and especially Colin Farrell play their douchey roles to a T and make it work. Coulda been better but I can't pin down how to arrive at it. Overall much better than I thought it'd be originally, but otherwise just okay.
I would say it is pot roast and mashed potatoes without gravy.
-
God, Lifetime movies are so, so, so awful.
-
Harry Potter Seven and a Half: Good movie. They really used the expanded runtime well, and parts 1 and 2 hold up as the most complete story any of the HP movies has had. Aside from the delivery of the "bitch" line, most of the film's weaknesses come from the book's - the stupid, stupid epilogue and the mechanics of the Elder Wand, mainly.
-
Captain America
You know, it did everything it was supposed to do, Cap was likeable, and believable as this kid from Brooklyn who used to get beat up. And yet I did not really like it.
Part of that, I think, is that I couldn't help thinking about Smurfs (http://www.maxbarry.com/2011/07/08/news.html) the whole movie. There is one female character, and her personality trait is "token female"/"token love interest". Part of that is just not really doing anything to stand out. Sure, it's 40s vintage, but "superhero movies set 50 years ago" are almost a cliche now. X-Men First Class did it; Watchmen is certainly partially set in the past; I'm guessing that the Wolverine movie is too but I've been instructed not to watch it.
(SPIOLERS)
Another part that bugged me is that...it just bothered me that when storming Hydra they didn't take a few Hydra weapons with them from previous raids. They were fighting with inferior weapons for no apparent reason. Oh, and those bombs that were released: I'm scratching my head and thinking "Wait, what?" (Cap stops some of the bombs, but not all of them; did those cities just get destroyed in a bigger-than-nuke way in this continuity?)
-
While that's a valid reason not to like a movie, I'm not sure how you go into Captain America not expecting that to be the case. I was just glad she at least got to shoot some dudes. For spoiler stuff:
Yeah, none of that stuff made any sense. Not even in the fridge logic way, but in the immediate, "Wait, what?" way. What happened to Chicago? He didn't stop that bomb! I'm also not sure why his only choice was to crash the plane since he could apparently control it and it's not like the bombs were automatically guided or anything. Also, seems safe to assume Red Skull got warped to Asgard or something instead of actually dying.
Otherwise, generally fun diversion considering I came in with no real expectations.
-
Noting that I haven't seen it yet or anything.
My understanding is that the finale involves the Cosmic Cube which is a pretty big part of the Red Skull comics plot, so it is probably just the vehicle for bringing him into the future to menace Cap.
I hope it doesn't involve Asgard because I really liked that spin on Loki. I don't want Loki to be sullied with Nazism.
Interesting take on the female lead met. From most of the reviews I have read people praised her as being one of the stronger (have heard strongest!) female leads in a comic book movie purely because given the ending she couldn't just be there to be the romance plot.
Note that most of these reviews are from dudes though. Also note that the competition sets the bare amazingly low at best here.
-
It's a little of both. The Red Skull uses the Cosmic Cube to power his Nazi super-death-rays, and the Cube is supposedly an Asgardian artifact. None of the gods show up in any form, though. Just the cube and a picture of Yggdrasil.
-
I couldn't be bothered to note whether the female lead was strong or not because I was too busy staring at her fantastic breasts. /male chauvinist pig
-
Noting that I haven't seen it yet or anything.
My understanding is that the finale involves the Cosmic Cube which is a pretty big part of the Red Skull comics plot, so it is probably just the vehicle for bringing him into the future to menace Cap.
I hope it doesn't involve Asgard because I really liked that spin on Loki. I don't want Loki to be sullied with Nazism.
Interesting take on the female lead met. From most of the reviews I have read people praised her as being one of the stronger (have heard strongest!) female leads in a comic book movie purely because given the ending she couldn't just be there to be the romance plot.
Note that most of these reviews are from dudes though. Also note that the competition sets the bare amazingly low at best here.
The female lead was oceans better than the one in the green lantern film. She was actually pretty competent at her job and had a defined role.
-
I am would be interested in the opinion of the other lesbian in the audience as well if she gets time.
-
Cowboys and Aliens: gave me all the things I wanted out of this movie.
-
30 Minutes or Less- Saw this today. Pretty good. Everything Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Anzari related is utterly awesome. Everything Danny McBride and Nick Swardson related kills the movie, except for when the two pairs cross paths. It still averages out to pretty damn funny, at least.
-
So I went to see the 3D Lion King. I haven't watched the movie in at least 10 years, probably more.
While the 3D effect is continuous, only two or three shots really make use of it.
The movie itself though... y'know, animated movies have changed a lot over time. Pixar's dominance, and the influence of Dreamworks, changed the landscape a lot from the 90s Disney era. I don't think you could even make Lion King now, not with the care, detail, and fluidity of it. But that's not what stood out to me.
I feel like we really lost something in the past 10 years, a willingness to evoke genuine emotion. I'm comparing Toy Story 3, the closest of the pixar movies to Lion King in tone, and there is more than a little gap. Look at the incinerator scene, then look at the wildebeest stampede? Yeah. Maybe I'm overreading here, but Lion King went balls out selling that scene, musically, in the animation, in the ebb and flow of tragedy and fear and hope. It's like... you have to downplay everything now, that there's something wrong with trying to build up emotions and it's better to throttle them back to a whisper.
'course, my favorite show may well be Gurren Lagann, so perhaps I'm just weird.
-
The Perfect Host:
(SPOILERS. I doubt anyone knows or wants to see this anyhow)
This is the single weirdest film I have ever seen, and keep in mind that 1)I'm a film major and 2)I'm familiar with the works of David Lynch.
That doesn't mean this is a good movie, or even one that makes any goddamn sense. The first plot twist is really good and fun, the smaller plot twists in the middle are fun, but the second really BIG plot twist is just.... over-the-top ridiculous and about where the movie shits itself in a surrealist explosion of bafflement.
David Hyde Peirce plays a guy who inadvertently takes in a bank-robber for dinner. The bank robber eventually reveals himself and starts threatening DHP, who looks scared, but then when the robber sits down, he notices a photo with Peirce putting his hand over.... no one. The robber looks at his wine in shock and passes out.
Cue an hour of Peirce acting fuckin' crazy. He has a dinner party with a bunch of guests that aren't actually there, and then he shows a photo album to the bank robber of his last dinner party guest, who eventually wound up with his throat slit. So does this robber.
Who.... wakes up in an alley, and it was all make-up. DHP didn't kill him at all. But hey, he's fuckin' crazy. Maybe he did it to prove a point. Who knows.
Meanwhile the police are investigating the bank robbery, and find out how the guy committed it. I won't get into too much detail, but this part was actually well done. It's just the next bit where the movie completely jumps off the rails, and turns from "psychological thriller" to "Plot inspired by 14 year olds who got into the weed." Because DAVID HYDE PIERCE IS A POLICE DETECTIVE, and is supposed to investigate the case of the robbed bank, and WHAT THE FUCK, I can't even describe this anymore.
Hack off the movie right after the guy discovers that he's not dead after all, and you have a pretty good film that I would recommend. Afterward.... just.... what the fuck. Why? Why would you do that to a perfectly good plot?
-
Gun Hill Road
A movie about a latino man who gets out of jail only to find that his son is becoming his daughter.
I feel like the director was trying to make 100% of the scenes in this movie mildly uncomfortable to watch. For me, the director succeeded on about 70% of scenes (illegal stuff, some very awkward sex/relationship scenes). I am also clearly not up-to-date when it comes to teenage ghetto slang, so feel like I just didn't understand some scenes. And in the end, the message of the movie is...what? (mild SPOILERS I guess) If you don't like your dad, wait till he winds up back in prison--problem solved? How very deep! </sarcasm>
Granted, it's not like the movie is offensive. It's fine in that respect. But I don't really feel I'd recommend it.
-
The movie itself though... y'know, animated movies have changed a lot over time. Pixar's dominance, and the influence of Dreamworks, changed the landscape a lot from the 90s Disney era. I don't think you could even make Lion King now, not with the care, detail, and fluidity of it. But that's not what stood out to me.
I feel like we really lost something in the past 10 years, a willingness to evoke genuine emotion. I'm comparing Toy Story 3, the closest of the pixar movies to Lion King in tone, and there is more than a little gap. Look at the incinerator scene, then look at the wildebeest stampede? Yeah. Maybe I'm overreading here, but Lion King went balls out selling that scene, musically, in the animation, in the ebb and flow of tragedy and fear and hope. It's like... you have to downplay everything now, that there's something wrong with trying to build up emotions and it's better to throttle them back to a whisper.
To be fair, look at the scenes in the Lion King compared to the scenes in...any other Disney movie at the time. If you want individual scenes that pull at your heartstrings, then Lion King stands head and shoulders above most of its contemporaries. (It's worse in some other ways, but...yeah).
And for the record, when Disney fired all their old animators, Pixar hired them. So...it's not like the know-how is lost.
-
http://www.girlswithslingshots.com/comic/gws-1258/
-
Johnny English Reborn: Hilarious. Haters gonna hate.
I think I've enjoyed it more than every movie I've seen since True Grit >_>
-
Thor: Pretty great. Branagh's chops really show through, and he has a surprisingly good touch for the broader comedy moments as well. Script-wise and acting-wise, they nailed pretty much all the characters, although Hogun looks little to nothing like Charles Bronson. The only complaint I have is with Loki, and that's a matter of personal preference; his trickster side was there, but I love seeing it take center stage, instead of getting back-burnered for outright betrayal pretty much from the get-go. Even so, the fact that Loki's going to be a big deal in Avengers has me more hyped for that movie, so yay.
The visuals were the standout, though, because damn. Asgard looked absolutely amazing. Wish I'd seen it in theaters just for the wide-angle scenes.
-
They were fucking incredible FYI.
-
Ghostbusters: Saw this at the minimeet a couple of weeks back. I seriously remembered next to nothing from this movie, so it was new to me. Amazingly well written (Bill Murray in particular stole the show) and the humor has aged very well. Groundhog day is better, but this is a close second for Murray's best film that I've seen.
-
Excalibur: It would be so easy to see Monty Python and the Holy Grail as a parody of this specific movie if Excalibur didn't postdate it. Fortunately, I wasn't expecting a whole lot from the guy who made Zardoz (Zardoz primer for the uninitiated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOROvO2fxTc). I was in the mood for fantasy schlock and man, that's exactly what I got. Sex in plate mail? That can't be fun for either party. Merlin somewhat questionable for arranging this encounter. John Boorman's prime talent seems to be finding picturesque corners of the isles to shoot in. I will say, though, that Mordred was perfectly cast. Dude just looks wrong.
Immortals: And this one didn't even meet the low expectations I'd set for it. I knew it was going to be dumb, and indeed it is a narrative jumble that gives you no real reason to care about anything, but I figured it would at least look nice given the director's penchant for color and design (both of which were on brilliant display in The Fall--which is pretty much the only reason I bothered watching this and which is a great movie people need to watch. Or at least Grefters need to watch it, they would surely appreciate the meta nature of the narrative). But alas, it was only out in 3D, and 3D's tendency to render everything dark and muddy blunted whatever impact the visuals might have had. In case I haven't said it enough, fuck 3D.
-
Hot Fuzz: So I saw this at Minimeet. Its just sort of decent until the last half hour when it gets absolutely brilliant.
The Muppets: Its Muppets. In an original Movie. If you expect this to be anything less than awesome, there's something wrong with you. (And yes, it was about as good as you'd expect)
-
The thing about Hot Fuzz is that everything in the first part of the movie, while amusing enough in its own right, is also setup for the final act. Nearly every line and joke uttered in the period before the movie goes completely batshit gets a callback in the last half hour. The first time I saw it, my reaction was also, "Yeah, that was alright." On rewatching it I started noticing just how thoroughly they build a field of material to be mined in the endgame. There are so many nice little details you don't think to look for until you've seen it once already.
-
I love that almost every single thing Nick or Danny says from the time it goes bonkers until they get to the supermarket is them quoting their own lines.
Also, if you've seen Shaun of the Dead the fence scene is an early warning of how things are going to go.
-
Jolene:
Interesting enough little indie character-portrait flick. Kind of chaotic. Sort of uncomfortable in some spots, because it doesn't shy away from nudity/sex even when the character is a still a minor, and when her third husband comes along, well, he's just crazy. Otherwise.... man, I dunno. It started to get a bit old with the whole "see the girl" "decide she's perfect" "basically want to move in with/marry the girl." Like she had some kind of mystic power or something. Just weird.
X-Men: First Class:
I was able to get into this once Xavier said something was really groovy, and I decided that it was Mission Impossible with Mutants and not an X-men movie. Normally for a pre-existing franchise, you can say "That was a good movie for it's franchise, but not a very good movie. This was.... a decent movie, but a truly horrendous X-men film. As far as movies go, it was better than the third by far, and maybe better than the first, but as far as having anything to do with the X-men? Dear lord. Not a single character matched up with their actual personality, aside from maybe Riptide. Remember Riptide in the movie? NEITHER DO I.
-
He had a snazzy suit.
-
X-Men: First Class:
I was able to get into this once Xavier said something was really groovy, and I decided that it was Mission Impossible with Mutants and not an X-men movie. Normally for a pre-existing franchise, you can say "That was a good movie for it's franchise, but not a very good movie. This was.... a decent movie, but a truly horrendous X-men film. As far as movies go, it was better than the third by far, and maybe better than the first, but as far as having anything to do with the X-men? Dear lord. Not a single character matched up with their actual personality, aside from maybe Riptide. Remember Riptide in the movie? NEITHER DO I.
You've almost hit the nail on the head with this, but not quite. It's a good movie for the X-Men MOVIE franchise (pretty damn good origins story for the movie continuity) but not a faithful X-Men movie.
-
In fairness, I think their take on Xavier works quite well, and while it doesn't necessarily jive with some of the canonical portrayals of his past fits quite well with his overall character.
Otherwise yeah it's pretty far afield from a faithful adaptation.
-
Eh it isn't like they are doing a remake of it moving the city it takes place to somewhere completely unrelated, changing the race of all the cast and disconnecting it from any of the themes it is famous from discussing. Changing the character's backgrounds from something more dangerous and turning the two main characters into brothers instead of it just being a story of a good friendship.
The Akira movie is going to suuuuck.
-
Not all the cast. The bad guy is still Japanese, which has no unfortunate undertones whatsoever.
-
Yeah. It's pretty unfortunate, since the Japanese would never do that, Shale.
-
I know! If there's one thing you'd never think to accuse an old Japanese guy of, it's not liking white people.
-
Next people will be saying that the Japanese like to villainize Americans in THEIR movies!
-
Being represented by Ken Watanabe isn't being a bad guy. It is becoming the secret main character of the movie because of overwhelming awesomeness.
-
So I watched The Room. The PS3 groaned audibly trying to read the disc. Warning signs. First thing we see is a Wiseau Films banner. Then another Wiseau Films banner. Then "Wiseau Films presents..." So we've seen the guy's name three times before the title of the movie even shows. Hello vanity project. Shots of San Francisco, music plays that sounds like it's from one of those movie parodies you'd get five seconds of in the background of a Seinfeld episode, except it doesn't stop, it just loops again and again. Our star shows up and oh my god Tommy Wiseau is a neanderthal transplanted through time, you can see him puzzling out the mystery of speech as the lines spew forth "I open my mouth and noises emerge this is astonishing." Oh hi Denny no you can't watch while we have sex, hey there soft focus groping and the relieved groan of laxative taking effect on loop to smoove smoove basement R&B oh thank god that's over with wait what no why are you having sex again that can not possibly be comfortable on the stairs "by the way I have breast cancer" STOP HAVING SEX wait this is just reused footage from the first sex scene it wasn't raining just a minute ago! This movie is an endless series of people entering rooms saying two lines to each other and leaving again. Modern communication, drive across town to talk to someone for thirty seconds go home socialization is done for the day Denny how the fuck old are you who are you people and why are you having sex in somebody else's house. Most honest line of the movie, "What are these characters doing here?" People arrive, spew fragments of speech assembled by diseased computer, walk away. "I have something to show you" Is it your boobs, Lisa? It's your boobs, isn't it IT'S ALWAYS YOUR BOOBS No one knows how to make sex look ugly like you do Tommy Wiseau DO ANY OF YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT A GAME OF FOOTBALL LOOKS LIKE "Let's go home" wait what where are you right now, is this roof in another dimension I don't understand time and space "How's your sex life" yeah this is absolutely the kind of thing people toss out in casual conversation "Your point of view is very different from mine" that's because she's a psychotic pitbull. Gentlemen we have identified the face of evil and it is somewhere between Courtney Love and a chipmunk Peter you are the most useless psychologist ever "I feel like I'm sitting on an atomic bomb" WHO ARE YOU? WHO THE FUCKLEDIDDLEDEEDAMMIT ARE YOU AND WHERE DID YOU COME FROM? Johnny who gives a shit that you recorded their conversation everybody knows she's cheating on you they were making out at your birthday party in front of everyone BANG I can't help but feel partly responsible, saw you blink, dead guy! Roll credits, smoove smoove R&B plays, makeout music carries us out after the main character shot himself in the head, awwww yeah.
I never thought I'd say this, but I've seen something worse than Manos. Tommy Wiseau apparently likes to claim the movie was badfic. Tommy Wiseau is a fucking liar.
-
Ah, another satisfied customer of The Room.
-
Melvin Goes to Dinner:
Interesting enough little movie. An understated drama of sorts. Designed clearly to be watched twice, but I dunno if that's something I'll be doing anytime soon. Still, definitely worth watching. In the middle of the movie, there's a random scene with Jack Black where he plays a schizophrenia patient, and I'm pretty sure it's the funniest thing I've seen in about a year.
Highball:
What the Christ?
-
Swingers:
Finally saw this without the power going out or God knows what else keeping it from me. In the end..... eh. It was good. Not great. I hear all the time that this is like, -the- guy movie, or just mandatory watching or whatever but in the end, it's just, you know, another Film (albeit one with good music) in a sea of films very similar to itself. Maybe I just don't get "it".
-
Watch The Graduate sometime VSM. Entirely unrelated but just a thing.
-
Eh it isn't like they are doing a remake of it moving the city it takes place to somewhere completely unrelated, changing the race of all the cast and disconnecting it from any of the themes it is famous from discussing. Changing the character's backgrounds from something more dangerous and turning the two main characters into brothers instead of it just being a story of a good friendship.
The Akira movie is going to suuuuck.
Also Tetsuo is named Travis now.
-
TRRAAAAAAVVVVIIIISSSSSSSS!!! Yeah, that totally works.
-
Eh. It's not worth getting too wrapped up in the differences in the movies. In the end, if it's good, having a dude named Travis in it won't detract,and if it sucks, callin' him Tetsuo ain't gonna make it that much better.
-
Watch The Graduate sometime VSM. Entirely unrelated but just a thing.
True story: I've had the Netflix DVD for this sitting around unwatched since May.
-
The Graduate:
I have to think that a good chunk of this movie is largely symbolic in some way, because the alternative is that life in the sixties was damn near unlivable, and no one I have talked to from around that time has really given me the impression that this is true.
Like, the shiftlessness of the main character, I can relate to that. I -am- that. But around where he meets Elaine, things kind of go off the rails and make no sense. This is a guy that would be arrested (oddly, not for the various things he was threatened with.....) and thrown into a nut house. Why did he love Elaine? WHY IS THE OPPOSITE true? Her personality makes absolutely no sense in any context until, I guess, right at the very end. Is it really that easy to force someone into a marriage? Apparently so.
This movie made no sense. None. Trying to read reviews of it, I find that, apparently, Roger Ebert thought it was a comedy. Did I have to be ALIVE in 1967 to understand this movie? Apparently so. Although, I did crack up pretty hard at the "Don't tell me he did it in a car" line, in response to Elaine's other proposal. That was delightfully dickish.
The other thing is during the seduction, the sort of.... stiff, sudden way he grabs Mrs. Robinson's breast. Is that a thing? Is this a thing guys do on their first contact with boobs? Because it's something I've seen in plenty of films, but it just seems completely untrue. Who -does- that? I wasn't like that. Am I apparently the only young awkward soul who didn't haphazardly palm a tit to get the ball rolling? Apparently so.
Also, Simon and Garfunkle: At times, really enjoyable. At times, "AREEEE YOU GOINGGGG TO SCARBOROUGH FAIIIIIIIR.... PARSLEY SAGE, ROSEMARY AND THYME...... .....Stir for fourrrrrty minutes and simmerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, for extra flavour, add zest of limmeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"
Can't say I really enjoyed this movie. Can't say I know why this movie was made. I'm gonna go on a limb and say context was everything for the film, and I apologize to the no doubt thousands of fellow film students who had to watch this for some reason or another.
-
The other thing is during the seduction, the sort of.... stiff, sudden way he grabs Mrs. Robinson's breast. Is that a thing? Is this a thing guys do on their first contact with boobs? Because it's something I've seen in plenty of films, but it just seems completely untrue. Who -does- that? I wasn't like that. Am I apparently the only young awkward soul who didn't haphazardly palm a tit to get the ball rolling? Apparently so.
If she looks really surprised at suddenly getting groped, that's because she was: it wasn't in the script and Dustin Hoffman evidently decided that yeah, that is the sort of thing guys do on their first contact with boobs (along with subsequently banging their heads on the wall, apparently). May be worth noting, the seduction of a young man by an older woman was a pretty scandalous thing for a movie to do at the time.
And yeah, movie had way too much Scarborough Fair. I mean, I like Simon and Garfunkel a lot, but that didn't need to be in the movie like six times.
-
I liked the other Simon and Garfunkle tracks. I just really, really dislike that one. "Hello Darkness" is one of my favorite songs. Well, top five hundred, somewhere.
That boob grab not being in the script is pretty hilarious. And ballsy. Poor Ms. Bancroft.
It's just.... all context. I remember reading a book by Steven Pinker (I think it was Pinker) about linguistics, and he specifically mentioned the Graduate. He talked about the "Plastics" line. I guess in the 50s, "Plastic" was seen as this amazing thing, and people referred to things as "plastic" if they meant it was malleable, adaptable, and cutting edge. But by the 60s, when the movie was filmed, it had garnered the negative connotation of "fake" and "cheap".
I just..... I get the opinion that the bulk of this movie makes no sense since I didn't live in 1967. Maybe it was brilliant in its day. Flipside, Murphy Brown was one of the more successful sitcoms ever, but why would anyone want to watch it now? Is any of it meaningful anymore?
-
Wait, did you just diss Scarborough Fair? You are dead to me.
=======
When my mom wrote her memoirs, I found it amusing that one of her best childhood memories was getting a little plastic bracelet. We would find that to be a cheap, insignificant thing now. But plastic was so new and uncommon back then that it seemed special.
-
The layered voices are cool. It's just the lyrics are ridiculous. And it plays way, WAY too often in The Graduate.
Also, I just now remembered the song is called the "Sound of Silence" and not "Hello Darkness", and I am SO NEUROTIC that I had to come here and point that out. I was gonna edit my post surreptitiously, if no one had made a new comment.
-
Rest assured you would have been appropriately lacerated in print had you not corrected yourself before I returned to see it.
-
Hahaha man I had been telling you to watch it because it is about young adult ennui and really strange relationships, especially the fact that all that shit isn't necessarily what you really want. Sound familiar?
That and the Mrs Robinson stuff is an iconic piece of pop culture. Sometimes you have to put up with some junk to get to them. You might not. Are for them now but they normally pay off eventually. Like now you know the context for he song Mrs Robinson (which I love). If you want to see the impact of culturally iconic stuff note that same song charted in the 90s by a band of little other note. 30 years on it was still a thing. Lemonheads had a bit more going on than just that, but it is there song that stood the test of time and still gets AirPlay.
-
Twilight Breaking Dawn part 3.14: Sadly, Kristin Stewart does not die. Apparently becoming a vampire comes with free eyeshadow. Bonus!
-
Up- This movie doesn't quite work for me. the opening, up until the storm, sets the stage very well, just... okay. The idea in this film is an adventure Carl needed to take to put Ellie to rest properly, right? All the emotional bits work just fine. When the emotional closure comes, it feels closed, complete. The adventure bits fall really flat. I dunno what it is, but I feel this in a lot of Pixar movies, that the adventure bits just lack something. The humor never really resonates and there's not really a sense of awe or wonder about it. It just never really feels exciting, and for whatever reason the adventure and the heart are segmented, or at least I feel that way watching it. The climax is okay, but by then it's almost redundant because the emotional climax has already taken place and was more or less satisfactory. I mean, not that this means you can just cut off the movie there, but the emotional investment isn't the same I guess.
-
Wall-E - The first time I feel comfortable saying a Pixar movie lived up to its hype. Engaging the whole way through, great characters, great animation, etc etc.
-
Super 8: We turned this on during the Twilight Zone marathon yesterday to get away from that godawful camera episode (seriously, do they have to show that one every year?) I've encountered elsewhere the opinion that J. J. Abrahms is good at building tension but has no idea what to do with it, and I find this wholly accurate. Movie is an entertaining enough diversion that has no solid idea what to do with its second half. Particularly irked by the triumphant music played over the alien's escape. Y'know, he probably deserved to get free, and I can't much hold against him massacring the army guys who'd tormented him for years, buuuut those were a whole lot of civilian bodies hanging from the roof in his hideout, movie. Decent, just yeah, more evidence Abrahms is a technically proficient director without adequate discipline for storytelling. Smart enough to know that the best thing to do in an age when everyone's used to CGI monsters is to keep one in the dark, at least. I will also add: I loved the end credits, over which they play the short film the kids were making throughout the movie, which is hilarious. Here, have a 70's zombie movie homage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwMz9Ydj378
-
Battle for Los Angeles: Oh man. The director hit some of the small things dead on (The scene with the marines drinking) but the plot is literally ripped from V and Independance day, with a dash of generic action film thrown inn. Should have been much better.
-
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
Dunno why this premiered so poorly. I found this to be quite the enjoyable little romp. Very fun movie, highly similar to the first one, so if it didn't float your boat, then this definitely won't, either. Personally, I like Downy's take on Sherlock Holmes, and if it gets anyone upset about not being how they pictured him or not authentic or whatever, they can bugger off because he's public domain. I could write a story about Sherlock Holmes where he's an anthropomorphic dog-robot and there's nothing you can do about it.
Anyhow, I like how the movie -does- show you everything you need to figure out what Holmes is doing, even if it's often so minute that you probably wouldn't bother to. I definitely made a note of Holmes attempting to grab something of Moriarty's in the hotel when he was disguised as a bus-boy, so that plot point coming up later didn't bother
Otherwise..... Fun little nod to the Dark Knight at one point. Too much nude Stephen Fry and not enough nude Noomi Rapace.
-
That's pretty much how I felt about Sherlock Holmes, vsm. In fact, seeing the first one -- and then the BBC mini-series, season 1 -- spurred me to reading the Sherlock Holmes tales just to see what they'd taken from the character. (You can take from this, too, that I like the TV show House, which is supposed to be loosely based on the mannerisms and overarching characterizations in Sherlock Holmes.)
You know what? It's not that far off. Holmes was a crazy motherfucker in the stories, if perhaps less invested in steampunk victoriana and explosions. As far as I'm concerned, these movies are just a Hollywood-ized version. And you know what? That's fine because they also chose to maintain the integrity of the characters as best they could while making all the explosions and things make sense.
So yeah. I liked it too. And hooray for Stephen Fry even if, ugh, nudity, really?
-
Hangover II: This was a pretty notable downgrade from the first one. The first movie had a lot of rough humor but nothing too bad , the second one more tended towards viciousness (Hi, everything that happened towards Stu besides the tattoo). It had a few funny moments, but for the most part felt like a cash in.
Batman: The first year: This should have been called 'Jim Gordon owns and will kick your sorry ass'. Batman was very secondary to Gordon, which suited the story fine. Batman's genesis as a hero is well established lore, so focusing instead on Gordon cleaning up the police was a cool take on it.
-
Hangover II: This was a pretty notable downgrade from the first one. The first movie had a lot of rough humor but nothing too bad , the second one more tended towards viciousness (Hi, everything that happened towards Stu besides the tattoo). It had a few funny moments, but for the most part felt like a cash in.
It all makes sense if you picture Stu as OK.
-
Batman Year One The Jim Gordon Badass Hour Guest Starring Batman: See Super. They cut the Year One story down to its core to fit it into an hour, and the core of the plot is all about Jim Gordon. Suits me fine, since Jim Gordon is a total badass and more stories need to emphasize this. Plus Batman's actor ranged from meh to god-awful, so giving him fewer lines is a good move in general. Other than that, my only complaints are superficial - mainly the fact that Gordon's wife was apparently nine months pregnant for ten months.
-
Bridesmaids: I watched this. I am a hungry bear.
Anyway now that I'm on topic, VSM FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WRITE THE SHERLOCK HOMES ANTHROPOMORPHIC ROBOT DOG NOVEL. Do it now.
-
Rise of the Planet of the Apes: It was a 12 hour plane ride and I had already rewatched Captain America! That said, I think the movie would have benefited more from not being associated with Planet of the Apes (heck, the title feels like its tossed on to make it sound more appealing, because, you know, PLANET OF THE APES.) My main beef is knowing its related to Planet of the Apes makes it hard to cheer for the Apes when the movie wants you to against the oppressive marines, knowing how things will end up in the future. If the movie was just a self contained "Chimps gone smart and go wild!", probably would have enjoyed it more. That said, it wasn't as bad as I was expecting, and kept me entertained for an hour and 40 minutes or whatever.
Walk on Water: I got a glimpse of this on my Israel trip, when we were learning about Israeli Cinema, just as a random night activity, and it seemed interesting, and it was also being offered on the plane for free, so I figured why the hell not? Movie...its not my style. I can't say its bad so much as just pure dramas like that don't really catch my attention unless they're really freaking good (Shawshank Redemption comes to mind.) Amusing though watching a movie shift between 3 different languages (English, Hebrew and German) on a whim, and how the subtitles shift accordingly (when its German, it just has both English and Hebrew)
-
Bridesmaids: I watched this. I am a hungry bear.
Anyway now that I'm on topic, VSM FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WRITE THE SHERLOCK HOMES ANTHROPOMORPHIC ROBOT DOG NOVEL. Do it now.
I'll give it serious consideration after I finish my Kung-Fu Emo story.
-
X-Men First Class - Pretty damn good. Solid superhero action, and Xavier, Magneto and Mystique are really well-realized characters. The writers obviously made it their first priority to show how the three of them fractured into two camps, and they did a great job - in a way that mostly holds true with the first two movies, to boot (and makes me want to punch Brett Ratner that much more for the bit where Magneto leaves Mystique for the wolves in the third). McAvoy and Fassbender nail their roles, and Jennifer Lawrence carries Mystique well. The writing....it rings true with the characters as presented, but the way circumstances play out, Magneto is hard to blame at all for acting like he does while Xavier is on multiple occasions an utter tool. Young Charles Xavier is indeed a jackass, but Erik comes off as entirely justified where you'd expect some level of overreaction. There are also some unfortunate scripting choices re: Black Dude Dies First (and doesn't even get to do anything useful before it! Lame.) and the fact that villains not named Shaw or Frost get a total of maybe one line.
Also, the cameos were great. Well played, Vaughn.
-
Inception: Pretty good, but you could see the Lady and the Tiger ending coming like a freight train barreling down a city street.
-
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (Daniel Craig version): It's very frantic. Probably difficult to follow if you haven't read the book. They curiously omitted the stuff with Cecilia which was a major plot point. And the Harriet resolution is completely different. They also leave out a lot of dialogue between Mikael and Lisbeth, so when they have sex it's just totally random and nothing more than an excuse to show Rooney Mara naked again. Not that I'm complaining, mind you!
Also, the opening credits have got to be one of the weirdest fucking things I have ever seen. Someone who walks into the movie a few minutes late will probably think they've walked into a German BDSM bar. Except that still doesn't adequately describe these credits...
Oh look, I found a video:
http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/pd19/media/694922499001/694922499001_1377661317001_blur-openingcredits12.mp4
-
I saw the Phoenix Wright movie with a couple of other ALTs today. It was in Japanese, but thanks to having played the game it was pretty easily understood (and I feel like I caught about 40% of the subtleties beside that, so, hey, go me). The costumes and casting were great, and aside from one exceptionally trite gimmick (you can guess when you see it) it managed to capture the feel of the game pretty well.
Also, in Japanese, Larry Butz is "Just as I thought" and Phoenix Wright is "I see". (Yahhari and Naruhodo). This is excellent, and I wish I understood the other characters' name puns as well.
So, keep in mind that I saw the movie in entirely Japanese, and delude myself though I may my Japanese still isn't that great. That said,
What it did well: It managed to make the courtroom scenes engaging and captured the feeling of said sequences. If you played the first game and like seeing references to things you've seen before you'll enjoy this movie no doubt, even if it's in a language you don't understand at all.
What it did poorly: This is where my Japanese skill (or lack thereof) plays a part, but I really don't feel like this is a good movie if you HAVEN'T played the game. They do very little character building work for Mayoi (Maya) and the whole DL6 case was changed ever so slightly and details may have actually done well and I just didn't understand, or may have not made any goddamn sense at all. Also, how they portrayed Manfred Von Karma's link between case 4 and the DL6 case didn't make sense to me but I am pretty confident that that was the language barrier there.
What it did ugly-ily: NO WENDY OLDBAG. 0/10 WOULD NOT WATCH AGAIN.
-
What it did ugly-ily: NO WENDY OLDBAG. 0/10 WOULD NOT WATCH AGAIN.
This is... unforgivable!
More seriously, did 1-3 end up being cut entirely for the movie? I remember speculation about this although Dee Vasquez was in the previews so nobody was sure.
-
They're all covered. 2 is the focus of a good portion of the start of the film. Makes sense, as it introduces Maya. 1 is like the intro sequence. 3 is the one that gets glossed over almost entirely, but has a brief scene that references it. Considering it's a 2 and a half hour movie as is this is a decision I'm pretty OK with.
Still. No Wendy Oldbag. Fuckin' film sucks.
-
50/50: Surprisingly good. Well-written, well-acted, well-cast (although Anna Kendrick's teeth are terrifying) - just an all-around good comedy/drama. With Taggart!
-
Watched the first Lord of the Rings movie, EXTENDED EDITION. I've never read or seen anything LotR related so it was fun to associate all of the names that I've heard all of my teenager/adult life with people. Interestingly, my favorite character is like the one name I hadn't heard before the movie, which is Boromir. The movie was good but was rather long. (Apparently 30 min longer than the normal movie!) I had a bit of a headache by the end. <_< Aragorn is a Gary Stu, Gandalf is a surprisingly useless combat unit, Legalos kills more people at melee than the fighters do (let alone at range). Next week is Two Towers I guess.
-
Fellowship of the Ring I think is the movie that benefits least from extended edition treatment. You get a bunch of extra background but eh, that's more something that works in the books than in the movies (usual disclaimer that Cid didn't like much else about the books, mind).
-
And think, Aragorn is probably the biggest area where the movie is way ahead of the books.
-
It does kinda show that he's Jackson's favorite character. Not that I would blame him. If I'd directed Lord of the Rings it would have taken all my willpower to not be "The Eomer of the Rings: The Return of the Eomer."
-
Ah, a character I haven't seen yet. I assume I would have seen him already in your edition. <_<
-
Yeah, Eomer is someone you'll meet in Two Towers. Not much else to say beyond that!
-
Ah, a character I haven't seen yet. I assume I would have seen him already in your edition. <_<
Well, yeah, but my point was that while you can tell Aragorn is Jackson's favorite, he doesn't go fanboy nuts like I would.
-
I am legend: Much better than I was expecting. Will Smith did a fantastic job and the movie was visually appealing.
The third part of the film seems to be the main complaint.
I'm neutral on the ending. The movie did club you over the head with the hemocytes retaining some type of humanity (The spring trap and Fred being moved) but Neville was in such bad shape mentally at that point that it is easy to see why he didn't figure it out. I will agree the alt ending was better.
Film wasn't a masterpiece- I could have done without most of the action and the science stuff was largely bad- but it was fun.
Edit: Today is Will Smith movie day, apparently.
Hancock: It had funny moments first but rapidly fell apart when it attempted anything besides humor. Second half of the movie was bad; not even a strong cast could save it.
-
From Russia With Love - Sean Connery has a lot of chest hair, dang. Otherwise it was James Bond, campy dude entertainment. <_<
-
The amount of movies I've watched in the last couple weeks has increased exponentially.
The Room - Jesus christ.
Captain America - OK film. Action montage was kind of silly but whatever. Lots of Orange and Teal.
Scream 4 - Bland. It's been a while but I don't remember anything about this movie except some people get stabbed and it had an OK intro. Asstons of Orange and Teal.
Liar Game 2 - Colors other than Orange and Teal! Interesting movie from what I understood of it. The characters were kind of bland and the main girl was really dumb and terrible but I was entertained.
Oceans 11 - Holy crap why have I not watched this movie before? Probably the only legitimately good movie on the list of movies I've seen recently.
Also, fun thing to do with Brad Pitt movies: Anytime Brad Pitt is on screen pretend it's actually Edward Norton. Basically the best.
-
Hunger Games: Pretty much what I expected. I enjoyed it though! It's much better seeing it all put to motion. I didn't really think it was as literal an adaptation as people kept saying it was. Woody Harrelson was perfect, and as usual the movie needed more of him. Donald Sutherland is also a perfect cast as President Snow. While the guy playing the announcer was just okay, the cut-ins with them were brilliant for interspersing needed information. I would have honestly like them to do more just to set the tone, since the dichotomy between their commentary and the action on screen was hilarious to see and defines the books and the movie. I liked Lenny Kravitz as Cinna, but his delivery felt a bit wooden. Rue was adorable.
Only two problems I had with the movie, really, one incredibly minor, one very major.
Minor one? The cape of fire was kinda small. I mean, really? It doesn't even go to midback. If ANYTHING I expected Hollywood to embellish a bit, it was that, and instead they undersold it.
The major one? FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF SHAKEYCAM. Godfuckingdamnit what a way to muddle an otherwise good movie. Shakeycam is a fucking bane on moviegoers. Was I watching the Hunger Games or motherfucking Blair Witch Project?! I know part of it was so that the graphic scenes could be toned down for the target audience, but still, waaaaay overused and totally not necessary.
-
http://m.hitfix.com/blogs/motion-captured/posts/film-nerd-2-0-revenge-of-the-sith-devastates-the-kids-as-anakin-falls-from-grace (http://m.hitfix.com/blogs/motion-captured/posts/film-nerd-2-0-revenge-of-the-sith-devastates-the-kids-as-anakin-falls-from-grace)
A dad writes about watching RotS with his two kids who have mostly just watched the cartoon and other such prequel things. One highlight is them talking about "the nice old man who is Anakin's friend," Palpatine.
-
That's a pretty sweet article, in both sense of the word.
-
When I have kids, I hope they're as awesome as those kids.
-
My niece is about that age, come to think of it. But I think she already knows about the Star War and its major players.
-
At some point in time, I watched a few movies:
Last Night: I dunno. There's something wrong with me. I am unhealthily attracted to movies about affairs. It's glurgy and weird and I feel weird. I'm not sure what to take away from this movie, to be honest, which I dunno says something more about the director or about me, but I couldn't really fathom what they were getting at, or trying to say about the nature of the content. So I guess I didn't particularly enjoy it, looking through that lens.
The People I've Slept With: Kind of a poorly acted movie, but nice in that it has a character that is an asian man and also incredibly sexy. In my humble opinion. Anyhow, movie is this: Girl who likes sex has a lot of sex with men and gets knocked up. There are four or five possibilities of who the father is. She collects DNA to find out which one. (There is one that she secretly hopes is the daddy. Hint: It's the sexy Asian man.)
Crazy, Stupid, Love.: As far as I know, that period is in the title and not a typo. Anyhow, this movie was very.... male? I guess in the end I have to say it was a male movie. I dunno, I sort of feel a little weird when a movie showcases a supposed pick-up artist, even one as in good of shape as whatsisnuts' character. Even when they "change" in the end, or when they "learn the error of their ways" or whathaveyou. It just rings really false, particularly to someone who has, at least on some level, dealt with the PUA community. It's hokum and stupid.
Getting over that, Steve Carell is Steve Carell. I almost always find him funny, but oddly enough, not in the Office, which I guess he's most known for lately, which I can't stand. The storyline with the son and his babysitter was creepy and uncomfortable, and the resolution to it was arguably EVEN MORE creepy and uncomfortable. Very, very male. Like "God, if this happened to me when I was thirteen it'd have been the best thing ever." Very wish fulfillmenty and just sort of put me off.
No other movies lately.
-
Green Lantern: Well this was a big pile of mediocrity.
Really, I can't be too surprised at this. The core idea of Green Lantern is such pure silver age silliness to begin with that it's bound to look out of place rubbing shoulders with grittier, more grounded superhero flicks like the Nolan Batman movies, so taking anything seriously here was an uphill battle to begin with. The script doesn't do it any favors, though. Right from the opening narration (itself never a good sign) something's off. There's a lot of talk about WILL and FEAR like these two opposing forces run the universe. It doesn't seem like anyone stopped to wonder if this conceit made any goddamn sense at all, and there's so much prattle about it that you could just C+P Light Side/Dark Side and have dialogue from the worst sort of SWEU franchised writing. This just doesn't work at the most basic level because I can't grok how fear is supposed to be harnessed for individual strength. Maybe this is what GL was always about, I dunno, never read the comic. What I do know is this movie had four credited writers and that is definitely too many cooks.
All of the above also kind of makes Sinestro look like an idiot. Wasn't real optimistic about the movie going in, but I at least figured Mark Strong would be good at running the whole extremist cop too hardcore for his own good angle. He really doesn't get much to work with, though, and the conclusion just makes him look like a twit. Hal Jordan kills the bad guy all by himself, which you figure would dispel Sinestro's doubts about the effectiveness of the whole Green Lantern thing. But then he takes the yellow ring anyway. What? Why? Oh right, because they had to set him up as the villain for a sequel.
Not sure what they were going for with Hector Hammond either. He initially comes off as a modest, curious sorta guy, which you figure could be a springboard for a sympathetic villain arc, but that goes out the window the moment he gets telekinesis and starts being a jerkass pretty much just because he can. Also apparently he's kind of a stalker now, which doesn't go anywhere except the expected kidnapping of the hero's girlfriend. Again, too many cooks. Villain lameness is pretty endemic, given the antagonist is an evil cloud of I dunno evil or something. When the villain's listed in the credits (oh hey it was Clancy Brown!) down with the redshirt pedestrians, your story has problems.
Also obliged to note: criminal waste of Amanda Waller. What was she even doing here?
Okay, that was more words than this movie probably even warrants. Moving on to never thinking about it again.
-
From what I know of the GL comics (never been a big fan), the yellow-ring power is about inspiring fear. Which is actually even less of an emotion than "will."
Edit: The Muppets. Did I seriously just watch self-insert Muppet fanfiction?
-
Cabin in the Woods- Was kinda interested in seeing it from trailers, but a high recommendation from a friend finally forced me into seeing it. TOTALLY FUCKING GLAD I DID.
Man... so good. So good. It really is one of those movies though where I don't want to say too much about it. It is in the Evil Dead vein though. It is also Joss Wheedon.
If you are a fan of Joss Wheedon, Evil Dead or Betrayal at the House on the Hill, go see this movie.
It is still in theaters, so go see this movie. Seriously.
-
With Sopko as the third absolutely -glowing- review of Cabin in the Woods, I went and saw it tonight. I must echo that it is the best light-hearted horror movie I've seen in recent years, and I'm actually a big fan of the cheesy-horror-movie genre in general. I'd say that this movie will strike a chord even with people who -don't- tend to like any horror/suspense films.
The big "Holy Hell!" scene (there are several, so to avoid spoilers but to specify for those that have seen it, I'll call it "The First Wave of Escapes") is -really- well-timed and vivid. I'm -still- re-living it as I type this. Joss Whedon's mind is a beautiful and disturbing thing.
I really hope the movie manages to make some money. It would be nice for people other than Buffy fans to know who he is.
-
I think the movie would have been better if it had ended about five seconds earlier.
What was important wasn't the ancient itself, it was the ritual surrounding it. Leaving it open draws the focus away from the ritual itself to the object of worship, which if the point of your movie is "horror movies operate under rules very similar to ancient human sacrifices," should not be drawn away from. By adding a god, you've retroactively made everything about the god. To me, it was always about ritualized killing, and by not ever showing it you make the ritual itself the object of sacrifice.
Plus, I was expecting some kinda twist at the very end?
-
Mind spoiler tagging those, Rob? Not that it's really spoilery, but the less people go in knowing about this movie, the better.
Not that I don't actually agree with you. It would have been great if the movie ended on "I don't even think he has a cousin." Rumble, rumble, fade to black.
-
Re:Cabin There was less of a message of "Horror movies are like ritualized killing" and more of message satirizing horror movies, the slasher genre in particular. The movie spent all of its time deconstructing "what was wrong with the Horror genre", particularly the idea that it is so cliche as to be a ritualized killing for the sake of enjoyment for an "audience". If the Great Old One/audience didn't actually appear (and therefore have an ambiguous existence in the movie's universe), it would kind of be like absolving the guilt of the Horror-movie-fan public.
-
Djinn: Um, not that I read it (fortunately), but that text reaaaally isn't small enough to serve as an effective spoiler guard.
-
Djinn: Um, not that I read it (fortunately), but that text reaaaally isn't small enough to serve as an effective spoiler guard.
Just echoing this. I looked at the first few words (which aren't spoilers), and they were perfectly legibly, even if you casually look at them.
-
The Secret World of Arietty: Outstanding. This is the Miyazaki we know and love, and helps you forget about the trainwreck that was Ponyo. Miyazaki's attention to minor background details and an excellent use of perspective makes this visually stunning. And the story is very heartwarming as well.
==========================
Hunger Games: Really enjoyed this. Unlike Soppy I thought the cinematography was excellent. Just enough shaky-cam to add emphasis to children being violent to each other without overdoing it. Also the orange and teal thing? They do it rather creatively here. District 12 is all washed out and "tintype" looking. The Capitol is completely orange and teal - as it should be! And the forest area of the games themselves is a nice muted green. Granted, I'm colorblind, so what looked just right to me might be jarring to other people.
I would have liked more time spent in District 12, since that was the best part of the book. But the movie does the Capitol and the Games better than the book does, so it works.
Pretty happy with the casting also, thought Peeta was particularly effective.
-
Avengers: Pretty much perfect. Go see this.
-
What the Ciddy said. It was awesome.
-
Avengers- the movie is not perfect. This is because perfect is the after-credits scene. The rest of the movie only achieves that level like 75% of the time.
Yeah. This is the best of the non-X marvel films, if you liked any of those go see.
-
That's actually an interesting question. Since this is the DL which loves to rank things, randomly kneejerking from what I've seen of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_Marvel_Comics ... (warning: Not a comics nerd, never read the source material)...
X-Men 2, Spiderman 2, Iron Man (have an actually dramatic plot arc and some points to be made while also delivering awesome action)
Captain America (Cap is shockingly interesting, though the villainy could use some work. I'd rather more Nazis, less Hydra.)
The Avengers, Spiderman (Spiderman: Formulaic but fun, I buy the moral. The Avengers: About as good as a superhero movie teamup can be, but that trope still limits your ultimate dramatic potential.)
X-Men First Class (sucker for alternate history, for all that they should have cut the rando-mutants and the plot actually makes no sense and the mutant hatred is grafted on in a weird way.)
X-Men, X-Men 3 (They're okay, and have Magneto hamming it up at worst.)
Spiderman 3 (3 decent movie ideas crammed into 1 mess here)
Hulk (I don't hate the movie like some, but it definitely feels like it was written by Hideo Kojima on an off-day. Pretentiousness that goes nowhere, then suddenly Hulk vs. daddy the lightning monster.)
Anyway, Avengers was good enough to convince me to watch Thor & Iron Man 2 sometime.
A few spoilery comments:
* I was a little worried about the blatant fanservice of having Our Heroes have testosterone fits and fight each other, ('cuz that's what people want to see?), but it didn't actually impact the plot at all, so hurray. If, say, Loki had escaped while Thor & Iron Man stupidly fought it out, then that's extreme idiot ball penalty flags. Whedon definitely contained the potential script damage by just having the inter-hero fighting be side stuff mostly. Also, weirdly enough, good decision to introduce BS mind control, since that enables the villaincam to develop some of Our Heros too, important for a large cast with only so much time.
* As another random comment, I am very glad that Black Widow just fought Hawkeye and won rather than having some weepy "Remember yourself!" conversation. Definitely helped her stock. More generally the movie did a good job at selling Hawkeye / Black Widow / Fury as not being just dead weight, which is hard.
* The movie didn't explore it which is maybe for the best, but I assume Hulk is more controllable when he voluntarily transforms or something? He was the mindless engine of destruction at the midpoint which was kinda expected, but he's all set to work with Our Heros in the final set piece. I guess they needed to do that to sell Hulk working with SHIELD at all, just still a little weird.
* In actual nitpicks / complaint. The dramatic potential was hampered by this being a comic book movie that needs to obey comic book rules, e.g. never kill named characters and leave villains around for sequels too rather than execute Loki on the spot as they should have done a third of the way into the movie. I understand it, and the movie didn't have it become a horrible crippling plot hole, but oh well. Iron Man sacrificing himself for the good of everyone else to save New York from being nuked? Badass, and potentially dramatic & important, albeit at one-way trip. Being fine after a blatantly fatal plummet to the ground? Eh. You're killing the drama here. Couldn't they at least have had Stark laid up in the hospital for a month, there be some price to pay? Same with Thor plummeting 30,000 feet trapped in a cage. This is blatantly fatal, and if it's not, then I'm not sure how we're expected to see anything able to threaten Thor. I dunno, the idea of him falling to his doom trapped in a cage was a pretty good one, but I was expecting the script to think up some clever way for him to not die, rather than not dying because ummmm look over there. Superheros need to do superheroic things, I understand, but this is over the top; leave indestructibility as Hulk's gig.
Also, they better not resurrect Agent Coulson.
Plenty of more praise I could give to the character work & dialogue, but I'm sure everyone agrees, so.
-
Mostly I don't want to try and separate my personal affection for the x-men from the quality of the first two movies enough to offer an objective comparison between them and avengers.
-
Damn it, I wanna see Avengers. Stupid promise to sister to take her while parents decided the weekend they're going to Rhode Island is grumble grumble grumble grumble...
That said...
Captain America (Cap is shockingly interesting, though the villainy could use some work. I'd rather more Nazis, less Hydra.)
I think the lack of Nazis was done to make it a little more...tasteful? If you're going to do a super hero movie with a dramatic presentation about World War 2 and such, displaying Nazis in that kind of light can be sensitive, so just making them all Hydra could have been just them trying to avoid the scenario entirely.
At least that's what I felt like it was anyway.
X-Men, X-Men 3 (They're okay, and have Magneto hamming it up at worst.)
X-men 3 I found awful. It has a bunch of useless sub-plots (HEY LOOK ARCH ANGEL! This could be interesting *he has 3 scenes total, and like 4 lines the entire movie*), spontaneously kills off a few characters because HEY KILLING THINGS IS COOL (and Cyclops' fate wasn't even on screen, which is ESPECIALLY insulting), and its basically just a train wreck.
X-men 1 was good, though I thought X-men 2 and First Class were better. But seeing as X-men 1 was the first of the modern Marvel movies, its shortcomings are more understandable.
Spiderman 3 (3 decent movie ideas crammed into 1 mess here)
Hmm...not sure if "3 movies" but it definitely needed to be split into at least two, I agree. If nothing else, doing the entire Black Suit nonsense in one movie was a huge mistake.
Hulk (I don't hate the movie like some, but it definitely feels like it was written by Hideo Kojima on an off-day. Pretentiousness that goes nowhere, then suddenly Hulk vs. daddy the lightning monster.)
For what its worth, Incredible Hulk is a lot more typical of a movie.
It just simplifies the formula to be:
Banner and Ross are on the run, Army wants Hulk dead, lots of collateral damage ensues, Hulk fights a monster that the army unwillingly created because of their obsession!
Also builds up said opponent at the end to make an actual logical rival than just "Ok, I'm going to fight you because YOU DISAGREE!" (also begs the question "Why did you trust the clearly crazy janitor who knows too much?" aspect.)
-
Re: list of Snowfires
Generally agreed on the top tier (though I would likely slide Avengers up with them); swap Spiderman and Captain America (I liked CA more before it went full action movie; the most exciting sequence in the movie was just him chasing one dude through New York); detach X1 from X3 and kick the latter down with Spiderman 3 because X3 is dreadful for reasons largely cited by Meeple.
Thor could hang out with X-Men, I guess? I need to watch this one again. Thor never sold me on the romance and I don't like Portman as an actress, but I am a sucker for grandiose architecture and Asgard looks fabulous. Iron Man 2 would be a notch below those. Not bad, but the actual movie's plot felt it suffered in order to allow time for Avengers setup. I haven't seen Hulk movies and can't comment there.
-
Iron Man: Damn near perfect except for semi-lame final battle
Spider-Man 2: It doesn't hurt that Doc Ock is my favorite comic villain, but it's quite good regardless
X-Men 2: Got the characters down really well
Hulk (Eric Bana version): I rather liked it. A deep psychological drama, which is kind of what the Hulk is supposed to be. Also dug the comic panels.
Captain America: Covered what Cap is rather well.
Spider-Man 3: Shrug, it worked for me. Mainly because of Harry Osborn.
Spider-Man: *Big* improvement over previous Marvel movies. A little dated now, but great for its time.
X-Men: Again good for its time but a bit cheesy.
X-Men First Class: Lots of fun if nothing else.
Thor: Also lots of fun.
Iron Man 2: Decent, but fails to reignite the thrill of the first one.
Fantastic Four 2: Nice visuals, like the Torch chasing the Surfer. Still has acting problems like...
Fantastic Four: Human Torch is 100% comic accurate. Everyone else couldn't act worth a crap.
...
...
...
X-Men 3: Worst comic movie ever. Not exaggerating in the slightest.
Haven't seen Avengers or Edward Norton Hulk. Not bothering to rank things like Ghost Rider, Wolverine, Punisher, or anything else that belongs in Marvel Comics Presents.
-
X-Men 3: Worst comic movie ever. Not exaggerating in the slightest.
-
http://www.jabootu.com/s4.htm
-
http://www.jabootu.com/s4.htm
As bad as that is...
http://www.cornponeflicks.org/batrobin.html
-
The Avengers was indeed awesome. Tis a shame Norton wasn't part of this movie, but it was good even despite him.
-
http://www.jabootu.com/s4.htm
As bad as that is...
http://www.cornponeflicks.org/batrobin.html
I see you and raise you:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm701664000/tt0091225
The Avengers: Fantastic movie. Did a very good job of giving everyone screen time and making them interesting. The action was wonderful. All of the characters were badass, including Fury and Hill. Fun little stinger at the end.
MINOR SPOILERS
The Loki v Hulk fight was indeed the single greatest part of this, or perhaps, any other movie. I was happy that no one important got the ol' Joss Whedon treatment. On the whole, this was a very well done piece by Joss. In fact, he was so true to the previously established movie versions of the characters, it doesn't even feel like something he wrote, aside from being generally high quality. Hawkeye and Black Widow were both done really well. Widow's scene with Loki was amazing. Hawkeye's scene on the top of the building, with how.... mechanical and confident he was was just perfect. I spent the scene watching his feet/legs, and they only moved when they HAD to. Some giant dick-swinging shit right there. Only thing I didn't like was he was "The Hawk" and not "Hawkeye". C'mon, Son. Best part of the movie was BY FAR the Hulk. Second best?
COBIE SMULDERS. Damn girl, where you been keeping that ass? I'd watch your show more if I'd known.
The only other thing I have to add was early on there was a rumor that this movie would have Ms. Marvel and that she would be played by Yvonne Strahovski. While I'm disappointed that I didn't get to see Yvonne in that outfit, this is overrall a good thing, because unlike Hawkeye and Widow, who can be explained relatively quickly, Ms. Marvel is pretty much her own thing, and giving her an origin would have eaten up too much time and fucked the pacing of the movie tremendously.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As for ranking the actual Marvel Movies? I'll put it at maybe third overall in Marvel's library? Maybe Fourth. My tier list looks something like this:
Thor ~ This was majestic. Extremely well written, very human, very ridiculously pretty. I actually teared up when I saw Asgard for the first time, and I hope somewhere out there, Jack Kirby did too. This movie was especially interesting to me as a film major, because it's basically the only film I've seen that.... sexualizes and beautifies the male form like another film would a woman. It was primarily a picture about a beautiful man (god, whatever), and it reserved camera angles and lighting tricks almost exclusively used for sexification of ladies.
Spider-Man 2 ~ This also came close to making me cry at one point. Forget where, exactly, but it was very emotional at times, without getting into the emo of movie 3, and it was overall better paced and thought out than movie 1. The fight scene from the clock tower to the train is one of the best superhero fights ever, if not the best. (Not counting Loki v Hulk)
Avengers, Captain America ~ Both movies that set out to do what they did in very fine form. Very nicely done all around. Captain America dealt with a lot of sensitive subjects that could have blown up in your face and made them seem effortless. Avengers, well, I already talked about.
Iron Man, X-Men 2, Spider-Man ~ Very good movies all around, I'm probably inflating the latter two, Iron Man really is either a tier of its own or up there with the previous two, but I don't want to break this up too much. Downey Jr. is an absolutely fantastic Iron Man, and, let's face it, AC/DC makes every single goddamn thing better. (Also props to wearing a Black Sabbath shirt for most of this movie, too.) X-men 2 had some great character moments and the Nightcrawler Scene, which is probably just after Spidey v Ock (or Loki v Hulk) in the "Greatest superhero fights" library. Spider-Man was done very well, but missed some key stuff that made the story they ran with important. Such as, I dunno, GWEN FUCKING STACY. I wrote a college paper on this.
Daredevil ~ The forgotten son of the Marvel Films, this was actually very well done. The director's cut would be placed in the level above, but that's not what they released to audiences, which is a goddamn crying shame, because it, I dunno, patched up the big plot hole the theater release had, and it ALSO had a fucking scene with DAREDEVIL DRIVING A CAR. At any rate, people shat on Affleck way too much when he made this a pretty decent film, Colin Ferrel was fantastic and made a very threatening Bullseye. Michael Clark Duncan as Kingpin is not offensive, what is offensive is Hugh fucking Jackman as Wolverine.
X-men, X-men First Class ~ First Class, I suspected, would be horrible, but once I decided that the entire mythos was made up and it was even then only loosely connected to the previous films, and was just gonna do it's own thing, I loosened up and decided to like it. I think the exact moment was the first time Professor Xavier said "Groovy". X-men was a decent film, but it didn't have much of anything I'd call "amazing" going for it, so there's that.
Iron Man 2 ~ Not a bad movie. Very average. Very much felt like it was done explicitly to be a setup for the Avengers more than to be an Iron Man movie, and I think that's a tad unfair, because Downey and Paltrow are fantastic, have amazing chemistry, and deserved better. They pretty much willed this movie to be better than it was.
Spider-Man 3 ~ 3 is a bad number so far for Marvel. See also:
X-men 3 ~ Not the worst modern Marvel movie.
Elektra ~ Getting closer.....
Hulk ~ The worst modern marvel movie. Ang Lee's direction made me physically ill, and this is not an exaggeration. It's like if someone saw the excellent Conversations With Other Women and took ALL THE WRONG messages from it, and then made it a movie about a giant green guy who smashes things. Bad bad bad bad bad.
I have not seen the other Hulk movie, either Fantastic Four movie (I hear bad things. It's a shame, I fucking LOVE the Fantastic Four), any Punisher movie, or Ghost Rider's movies.
NEEDS A MOVIE YESTERDAY:
Dr. Strange
Luke Cage
Iron Fist
Spider-man v Mysterio
-
To their credit, Ang Lee's Hulk is only in continuity within the universe of the 40-Year-Old-Virgin.
-
http://www.jabootu.com/s4.htm
As bad as that is...
http://www.cornponeflicks.org/batrobin.html
I see you and raise you:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm701664000/tt0091225
...what its say about the scenario when I have to question the appropriateness of a "touche" in this situation?
-
Luke Cage
Iron Fist
First you do the Bruce Lee-inspired Immortal Iron Fist movie. Then you do Luke Cage as pure Black Dynamite style. Then they team up.
-
Rumor has it that they're working on a Heroes for Hire movie. but...you know, rumors...
-
Howard the Duck had Lea Thompson in panties. That makes it infinitely more watchable than X-Men 3.
-
Luke Cage
Iron Fist
First you do the Bruce Lee-inspired Immortal Iron Fist movie. Then you do Luke Cage as pure Black Dynamite style. Then they team up.
He use kung fu when he want to, have sex when he please?
-
Avengers: ...yeah, I'll just echo everyone else, though add in one thing:
2nd After scene = Pure Gold.
-
Just saw The Avengers. It was awesome, but you already knew that.
Glad I could contribute to this discussion in a relevant way.
-
The Avengers: thought the first half was a little slow, but the second half rocked. Hulk was pretty much the highlight of every scene he was in. Great action sequences all around, and lots of "teamwork" scenes that punctuated why these guys needed to work together.
As for after-credit scene one, all I can say is OH SNAP.
-
I was going to see Avengers again but the theater was inexplicably showing Yellow Submarine today and I was obliged to see that instead. I believe now I can confidently say I know what it's like to be on LSD.
Cap: Indeed, not at all someone I expected to see in a big-budget comic movie there. Interesting choice, should be fun to see what they do with him. And yeah, if I haven't said it already, Ruffalo was great as Banner. All these nervous little scientist mannerisms going on, no one even has to say anything for the inner tension to be obvious.
-
Plus Ruffalo even had some of the best lines as Banner (as well as the best scenes as Hulk!)
Example:
Widow: You may want to get inside, its going to be hard to breathe soon.
Cap: Oh, so its a Submarine?
Banner: Me inside an underwater, high pressure, small space? Yeah, that's a good idea.
*Helicarrier pops up*
Banner: ...oh no, this is MUCH worse!
And yeah, Ruffalo was great as Banner. I pretty much echo everyone who keeps saying he's the best Banner/Hulk to date, because...well, he is. Mind you, Norton was good, and worked well in Incredible Hulk, but Ruffalo just was better.
I was going to see Avengers again but the theater was inexplicably showing Yellow Submarine today and I was obliged to see that instead. I believe now I can confidently say I know what it's like to be on LSD.
Considering how many times I've seen this movie, both as a kid on my own time, and through my little sister going through an obsession phase with it, it makes me worried that I might be desensitized to the effects of such drug!
-
Actually I think Cap had the best line.
Bystander: What can you do? They're gods!
Captain America: There's only one god, ma'am, and he doesn't dress like that.
-
Heh. My favorite Capt scene was probably the part right after the Helicarrier goes up, with Nick Fury. Nicely underplayed yet a good way to follow up on a joke set up earlier.
-
Ranking, because that's what the DL does.
Iron Man
Avengers
Spider-Man
X-Men First Class
X-Men 2
Spider-Man 2
X-Men
Captain America
Thor
Iron Man 2
The Other Movies are All Bad and Don't Exist (Ones I've seen in descending order of quality: Wolverine, Fantastic Four1+2, Spidey3, X-Men3, Hulk, Punisher)
I guess I just need to see Daredevil to complete the list?
Thor ~ This movie was especially interesting to me as a film major, because it's basically the only film I've seen that.... sexualizes and beautifies the male form like another film would a woman. It was primarily a picture about a beautiful man (god, whatever), and it reserved camera angles and lighting tricks almost exclusively used for sexification of ladies.
...and you wonder why you have troubles with girls? >.>;;
(It's because they think you're not interested. I mean, c'mon man, not even -I- talk like this and I'm pretty open about liking both genders...)
-
Psst, Djinn! Your spoiler tags are still very legible!
Make you sure you say "1pt" and not just "1" <_<
-
It is entirely intentional here.
-
Heh. My favorite Capt scene was probably the part right after the Helicarrier goes up, with Nick Fury. Nicely underplayed yet a good way to follow up on a joke set up earlier.
Agreed. I'm biased because I really liked Captain America's movie (Chris Evans is quite good) but I thought his humanity and general fish out of waterness helped carry things.
-
I'm just glad Jim from the Office didnt get the part. He was one of the last four people in the audition process, you know.
I don't think I could have taken a scene where he kills a Nazi, then looks at the camera and shrugs.
-
Love Evans as Cap, but I keep flashing back to Not Another Teen Movie and giggling.
-
...and you wonder why you have troubles with girls? >.>;;
(It's because they think you're not interested. I mean, c'mon man, not even -I- talk like this and I'm pretty open about liking both genders...)
You saw me raving about Cobie Smulders' ass in the same post, right?
-
Everyone's a dude from behind.
-
Well, yeah, but only because you've stuck a picture of your face on the back of their head.
-
I only love them if they have it tatooed on.
-
Well, sure, if it's love. If it's just somebody you're humping in a dumpster behind Burger King then maybe you should be less picky.
-
It was a Wendy's at last con wasn't it Zenny? Close enough.
-
So I log onto a friend's Netflix to get my movie on for my Movie on Mondays. What the *hell* happened to its interface? Even the most *simple* title brings up old or irrelevant search results: are warehouses denying releases to Netflix? Where is Sherlock Holmes 2?! Is it out!? Am I crazy!? Why am I so out of the loop now? This is fucking annoying.
-
Lotta companies are pulling out of Netflix these days.
-
Yeah. Netflix is getting hammered.
-
Two movies that should have been called something else:
Avengers: Decent, it got too ridiculous but we all knew it. The sequel could go too far to be a good movie.
Every character is enjoyable, and it's a bit shocking. It's a shame that Scarlet Johansson's status effects are worthless in the second half against monster enemies, while America/Thor/Hulk/Bird Guy/Iron Man are enjoying their (respectively) gamebest defense/gamebest damage/Auto Haste+Auto Berserk combo/Back row glass cannon style/second best stats in everything.
Margin Call: More compelling than Thor vs Iron Man: Kevin Spacey vs Jeremy Irons. Who steals all the scenes? (Answer: Irons)
-
Yeah. Netflix is getting hammered.
Turns out if you can pay eight bucks a month to watch movies, instead of thirty bucks for each movie, people who take the first option won't buy the discs! Luckily, if you stop offering the $8/month plan, they all go back to buying DVDs instead of downloading them for free or something. Man, that'd be crazy.
-
It especially turns out if you can pay that to just stream them as much as you want after a point, it severely decreases purchases as well.
Yeah. What's happening with Netflix (and Hulu) is making me kind of sad.
-
Avengers (finally!): It's weird to say that the best thing about a movie is that it's thematically and structurally coherent and to mean that as a compliment, but, well, here we are. Whedon knocked the ensemble thing out of the park, as he does, and the end result is a sequel to four very different movies that manages to feel true to all of them. I never dreamed that was possible. Oh, and the teaser: FUCK YES. That was the first big comic story I read and I still have a soft spot for it. Cannot. Wait.
Despite having the best action sequence of the series (and holy crap that was a fun fight), it's still in the middle of the pack overall - behind Iron Man and Captain America, ahead of Incredible Hulk, waaaaaay ahead of Iron Man 2, maybe a bit better than Thor (which is no insult). It felt....not "forced," really, but deliberate. You could see Whedon putting in the effort to make all those moving pieces fit together. And they did! But not transparently so, at least until the end. That last fight, like I said, was the best of the series. It's big and dumb and goes on forever and has a Bayian level of explosions, but it's gleeful. You can feel everybody thinking "okay, we've done everything possible to justify this, now we just cut everything loose." Team-up attacks, special effects out the wazoo, Hawkeye in his element, the Best Fight Ever™....just a hell of a lot of fun.
Oh, and Widow and Hawkeye were shockingly well done. I figured they'd just be tossed in but Widow justified her presence on the team and then some in the Helicarrier segment, and Hawkeye...well, between this and EMH, I think Hawkeye's hax has become a genuine superpower.
-
Oceans 13: Pretty good movie. I have been playing this game (I guess it's a game) where instead of playing characters the actors are playing themselves, and I just re-watched Snatch before this, so it was nice to see Brad Pitt clean his act up and stop being a fucking gypsy alcoholic and start... robbing casinos.
Also, Eddie Izzard and Super Dave Osborne.
It's not as good as Ocean's 11 but by no means is a bad movie.
-
Snow White- This is really bad (Djinn, forget books, this was sub basic JRPG plot). Really pretty, but really bad.
-
Men In Black 3: Not as good as the first, way way way way better than the second. Josh Brolin is superb as young K - just the right mix between parodying Tommy Lee Jones' performance and an actual character. There's a bunch of great little touches too, like (not a plot spoiler, but I don't want to ruin the gag) the aliens in 1969 having the production values of an episode of Star Trek. And casting Jemaine from Flight of the Conchords as the villain? Inspired.
The big downside, oddly, was Tommy Lee Jones himself. I don't know if he was phoning it in because he's barely in the movie, or he's legitimately getting too old for this or he got Botoxed recently and can't move his face anymore, but yeah.
-
Watched the Two Towers and met Eomer, the guy who Rob loves. It's a very good movie up until the king of Rohan is unzombified, then we have a lot of dickwaving between Aragorn the awesome and fantastic and the king and 30 MINUTE BATTLE SCENES OH MAN. I definitely am WTFing at them not having that Boromir/Faramir scene in the non extended edition (their dad is a DICK! "I know Faramir's uses and they are few") and props to them for Faramir immediately bringing me to say "that dude has to be related to Boromir" since it sounds like that is a plot point in the book. I'm glad they managed to slip in Elrond into the movie because he's awesome. Gollum is so good and so creepy and I really loved those portions in general. I'm not sure how I feel about the first vs. the second but I quite like both.
-
John Carter - Not sure about this one. Was this supposed to be something grand from Disney? Was it ever a book? I have no idea where the concept comes from, but the movie itself was not that good. Now, the weird thing is that I enjoyed the story enough and the ending was fun, but the presentation and actors all made me cringe. It rips off Star Wars in so many scenes, among other movies I imagine. Wish they had done a better job, because it was almost good.
-
If I'm not mistaken, it's a lesser-known series from the guy who wrote Tarzan. So it's been around a while.
Snow White and the Huntsman: I liked the part where the werewolf broke in to stop Bella's wedding and Thor hit it with a bolt of lightning.
-
John Carter, from my understanding, was this big budget movie Disney sunk a lot of money into, thinking they could get money on merely advertising a movie that looks like it'd be totally awesome, whether it was good or not.
...it failed, miserably, and Disney lost a lot of money on it from my understanding. At least, that's the impression I got when how Avengers was doing ridiculously well, they were saying "Disney needed it after the failure that was John Carter."
-
John Carter isn't that well known anymore, but all the stuff that was tired and clichéd about the movie (well, most of it) is tired and clichéd because people copied it from the books. Kind of a Lord of the Rings situation, except the original isn't nearly as well remembered.
-
It wasn't so much that John Carter failed, but rather that it went waaaaaaaay overbudget. It cost 250 million to make, but was no Avatar as far as getting bang for the buck; it was intended to have been a 100-150 million movie. Had it hit that budget, Disney would have broke even, which is acceptable (minorly underperformed box office hopes but still didn't lose money; hit them and get a little money; exceed them and get a LOT of money. Hollywood economics, it's gambling.).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_in_film
It's #9 so far in the year with 72 million domestic gross. That's disappointing but okay.
Anyway the marketing for the movie was incoherent and bad, but the other thing that helped make it a failure was allegedly that Andrew Stanton was too used to animated movie directorial habits, where it's comparatively cheap to redo a scene that could use tweaking. So he re-shot a bunch of stuff when he realized it didn't work. Some reshooting is expected, but it's done far more sparingly for expensive action movie pieces in exotic locales, where every day of the shoot is expensive. This excessive reshooting alone probably helped balloon the budget a good deal.
-
Sopko made me watch a movie called Redline.
I cannot accurately describe Redline, but I am pretty sure watching it was one of the ticks that get checked off somewhere before I'm allowed to die. So thanks for putting me one step closer to death, Sopko.
-
So over the past few months I've been padding out the DVD selection I have, focusing on movies appropriate for small children since by and large I do most of my movie watching when small children are present. Thus...
Monters, Inc- Cute movie. There's really not a lot else to say about it. It sets out to be just an adorable movie featuring a toddler and achieves that goal admirably.
Toy Story 2- This is the first Pixar movie I've seen that really felt like they were just making a movie for the sake of money. Not to say there's not some good scenes, but it's very formulaic and just doesn't have the sort of soul their movies are known for.
Incredible Hulk- Hey something for older audiences. Pretty decent. I do like Ed Norton, and in general the movie is well-cast. The action is a bit forced but that kinda makes sense; Hulk action scenes really should seem to come out of nothing. Probably the weakest of the MCU movies, albiet it's better than Iron Man 2 in most ways but lacks Robert Downey Jr. as Robert Downey Jr. as a featured attraction.
My Neighbor Totoro (yes, anime, but lazy)- This is very different. It's reminiscent of... like if you made a good parts version of having kids. The movie really seems like that. The contrast between mundane and fantastic works pretty well, and the kids are really fun to watch because, if it's not like how real kids act, it's like how you remember acting as a kid. Cool stuff.
All-Star Superman- Not bad. probably even better as a comic. Should totally get that.
Beauty and the Beast- I haven't watched this in many years. Some parts aren't as strong as memory has made them (Belle as a character is still alright, but a little more passive than I remembered), but what really sticks out about this movie is... not just the music itself, but how it's integrated into the film. When a lot of other Disney films use music (and they do, the musical is their real forte), characters break into song because we've gone too long without a song and we need another song. not always (Hellfire hype yo), but too often. In Beauty and the Beast, the songs are very much the best way to convey a lot of story in an entertaining way. Townsfolk talking about Belle behind her back would be sorta uncomfortable. The entire town singing about their daily lives and how Belle doesn't fit conveys the same thing in a more transitional and interesting way.
Gaston is the best singer.
-
CK, all great films (except I've never seen All-Star Superman, and I don't like most Toy Stories). Despicable Me is great. Happy Feet is worth of adult-child viewership. Cars 1 is funny (I'm Southern, get over it; Mater all the way). I believe you've already seen Up. I am impartial to Madagascar 2, but the Ice Ages are funny. Do not waste your money on Open Season, any number, whatsoever. I realize you're not asking for suggestions, but I love animation/kid's films. Actually, you may really enjoy Ratatouille.
-
You should find a copy of Man Bites Dog.
-
Justice League: Doom - Pretty damn good. It's the cast of the old Justice League cartoon plus Nathan Fillion, so that's awesome, and the script manages not to give any of them short shrift. Good fights, good pacing, and it adapts a decently long (5 issues, I think?) plot from the comics into 70 minutes without feeling rushed. Best part: They took the best scene in All-Star Superman, which didn't make it into that movie because we live in a cruel and uncaring universe, and worked it damn near seamlessly into this one. Granted it ends differently, but Superman's part is there and that's what matters. It's "you're much stronger than you think," of course.
If I'm going to nitpick for flaws, there are a few issues with time. After the first round of fights, there's a scene that makes it feel like it's hours later, but then they cut back to the heroes and it's been at most ten minutes. Later on, I'm pretty sure the plot requires Superman to fly faster than light.
-
Snow White and the Huntsman - This was really really pretty. Particularly Charlize Theron and Chris Hemmsworth. Also, I think Kristen Stewart may have a use in movies - Action Chick. Niji turned me on to the whole idea - all she has to do is stand there in Plate Mail and look ANGRY. No dialogue or anything. It could be the only smart move she ever makes in her career.
Also: Forgot to mention that this was probably the worst movie I've seen in years. C-.
-
I don't think that'd work. Eventually she'd get a close-up and her face would be stricken with that terrible disorder than forces her mouth to go slack and look like she's gone braindead whenever it's exposed to camera radiation for an extended period.
-
Note to casting directors: If you're going to cast someone as "fairest of them all", please make sure she doesn't have buck teeth and a penchant for standing with her mouth agape.
-
Judging from Thor and Avengers, I was under the impression that that referred to Hemsworth.
-
Later on, I'm pretty sure the plot requires Superman to fly faster than light.
Superman's speed is generally defined as however fast or the slow the plot requires him to move.
-
I did say I was nitpicking.
-
Judging from Thor and Avengers, I was under the impression that that referred to Hemsworth.
:o
Objection! >:(
-
Maybe he meant Hemsworth was "Fairest of them all"?
Because he is pretty hot.
-
I'd hit it.
-
Maybe he meant Hemsworth was "Fairest of them all"?
Because he is pretty hot.
It's Thor the Mighty, not Thor the Fair. Vikings said so.
-
One of Thor's many hats was the god of boners. He's obviously supremely masculine and handsome in addition to everything else.
-
Also: Forgot to mention that this was probably the worst movie I've seen in years. C-.
It amuses me that the worst movie you've seen in years is a mere C-, especially considering the source material.
-
Not really that surprising. When you can selectively see whatever movies you want, and so so rarely, the selection criteria become so stiff that the odds of truly bad movies getting a watch in the first place become vanishingly small. C- would indicate "just barely competent", which is a pretty good summary of that particular movie; there's some neat stuff in there but Stewart really drags things down and it's just ridiculous after a point.
-
I was actually just being a pretentious hipster and making lame social commentary that nothing is actually graded on a 10-point scale anymore, only translated to letter grades because I always think of eBay ratings due to the "A++ would buy again" meme.
Ergo, "WORST MOVIE EVER!" ..."A-" would probably have gotten my joke across more clearly, but Snow White and the Huntsman really was that bad in comparison to the usual "WORST MOVIE EVER" that "C-" is what it gets.
Ladies and Gentlemen, this joke has officially died and I am dancing on its grave.
-
Lesson being you suck at pretentious hipster and should stick to things you excel at, like hitting on Snow.
-
Djinn can't even pull off plaid shirts, so this is a given. But then, Djinn and shirts don't usually agree much (insert obvious innuendo joke here).
-
It's true. That shirt was all like "Dude man, I totally want to be on you!" and I was like "Step away, bro."
Dark Shadows:
The latest vehicle for getting my Tim Burton/Johnny Depp/Helena Bonham Carter fix. It is exactly what you expect from Tim Burton. This is not a bad thing.
I know nothing about the original series of Dark Shadows (apart from what Nostalgia Chick's reviews have told me), but I enjoyed the interpretation here. It had a lot of energy, and the melodrama was intentionally over-the-top in a hilarious way (At one point, a supernatural character literally rips her still-beating heart out of her chest and offers it to her love, only to have it shatter like glass seconds later... a more on-the-nose metaphor does not exist!)
I suspect that had Burton played the characters closer to their original incarnations it would have been incredibly boring and cliched by today's standards.
-
Sin City - Mind ... BLOWN.
-
Superman vs. The Elite: That was shockingly good. The first DC animated movie that feels like it's really using its runtime, instead of straining to fit a story that should be longer into the time allotted - mainly because it's based on "What's So Funny About Truth, Justice and the American Way," which was a single issue (and worse for being so short). The Elite have personalities now! They're not just vague stand-ins for the Authority! I didn't even think that was possible. Also, holy shit at the final fight. It's played absolutely perfectly, thanks in equal part to some really great directing and George Newbern being an awesome Superman. The only knock on it is the art style - feels like they're going for a super-cartoony Ed McGuinness vibe but it comes off just looking kinda sloppy. Stops mattering once the action scenes kick in, though.
-
Was "What's so funny about Truth, Justice and the American Way?" Issue #776 or whatever, which my friend deemed like the single best issue of Superman because it explains why he's such a good character in just one issue?
-
That's the one (#775, I think? It was a round number). The movie is written by the same guy who did the original comic, and it feels like the story he meant to tell in the first place, but couldn't fit into a single issue.
-
The FP- Is amazing. It's perhaps summed up with this quote from KC/DC:
"Now, no one drinks unless L-Dubba-E says so. With no booze, we ain't got no drunks. With no drunks, we ain't got bums. And with no bums, ain't nobody takin care of the ducks at the park! What's a town without ducks? Huh? IT AIN'T NOTHIN! How's a nigga s'posed to sort his shit out without no ducks? We the last of the 2-4-8 and we bringin booze back to the people from the Underground."
His plan to do this is to have the main character beat L-Dubba-E at Dance Dance Revolution. It's like the Warriors and The Wizard had a baby and then it got real fucked up on some medium-grade booze and everybody acted like they were in weird post-nuclear gangs except they're just in a shitty town in Bumfuck, NorCal.
-
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
Pure entertainment. Also pretty much exactly what you expect (barring some bad CG; seriously, movie studios: it's 2012).
Brave:
Not at all what I was expecting. Definitely good, and appeals to me much more than the typical Pixar movie. But part of that might just be Pixar deciding to break from their tradition of having only one "smurfette" token female character who is also the token love interest.
-
Brave: Right. I saw this.
Kind of in a weird spot on this one. The movie was fun, but it wasn't that good/was highly forgettable. Could have done a lot better focusing in on certain elements and abandoning others.
-
Men in Black 3: This was actually... good. I wasn't expecting much after the phoned-in MiB2, but this is a worthy successor to the first film. Good characters, good story, and the villain does one hell of a Tim Curry impression.
-
Brave: rather boring actually. Not up to the usual standards of Pixar.
-
Brave: Went into the movie only having seen a few trailers. None of which inspired any confidence. I expected it to be all "RAWR! Female Empowerment Bitches!" Thankfully, it was better than that.
Not that I don't think Pixar could make a good feminist story, but they instead chose to make it more of a mother/daughter relationship story against a High Fantasy setting. Lots of really good moments there. The actual "plot" going on in the background was much less interesting, despite my being a sucker for A) Strong Female Characters, B) High Fantasy, and C) Pretty Backgrounds.
So basically: see it for a cool mom story and some humorous one-liners.
Despite it not being the best Pixar movie, I really enjoyed it overall, I should make that clear.
-
See I think that's what bugged me about it. Meryda *isn't* a strong female character. She's spoiled, whiny, and disobedient. When things don't go her way, she resorts to cheating to get what she wants. And it's her mother that undergoes character growth, not her. Meryda acts like a brat and ends up getting what she wants anyway.
-
So... you're saying because she has faults that she's not a strong character?
I disagree. Yes, she's young, but she's also clever, resourceful, and skilled. Also, strong-willed enough to try to break out of predetermined gender roles. She doesn't always go about it the right way, being whiny, disrepectful, or manipulative (to a magical degree even) at times. But I think having flaws doesn't preclude her from being a strong character. You'll notice that in the end, she was even willing to make a sacrifice back into her hated gender role until her mother basically let her off the hook. I think this shows growth for both of them. It was probably the hilight of the movie for me, too. Bear Sign Language and all.
-
If you're not cheating, you're not trying.
-
Moving out and into my new house this week - barring any further unforseen circumstances - and will be staying over my first night/weekend later this week, so to settle in, to have something to do/watch/etc < celebrate is totally the wrong word! =P I bought Tape 407 and the entire sixth series of Dexter on DVD. Totally the best way of doing it right!?!~
I've never watched Dexter before. Read the books though. At least the first three, don't know if there were more~
First though I am going to watch the latest repeat of Dr Who~
-
Jesus, season six is all you've seen? That would turn anybody off that show.
Watch Season 4. Lithgow is magnificent.
-
Amazing Spider-Man: Overlong, but quite enjoyable. There was really no need to rehash the origin yet again, but if they had to do it, the story they told was as good a way as any. Hit the same notes as the “real” origin, and hit them well, while changing up the actual events so they weren't just re-filming the first hour of the Raimi movie. Garfield makes a pretty great Peter Parker, Emma Stone looks creepily like Gwen Stacy, and Martin Sheen and Sally Field are downright perfect as Ben and May. Seriously, Sheen is the only Uncle Ben who's ever actually come across as a character, and the way Field's Aunt May slowly falls apart as Peter's life does is genuinely heartstring-tugging. She's still a pretty flat character, but even giving her two dimensions is shockingly better than how the character is usually treated.
Plot after the origin wasn't special, but did the job well enough. Fight scenes were good. Spidey's costume didn't bother me for long. Will definitely see the inevitable sequel (Spectacular Spider-Man, presumably), especially since they're following the broad strokes of Gwen's arc and that's going to be fun to see on film.
-
Amazing Spider-man: Mostly echoing Shale, the main thing that got me was rehashing the Origin story, not in how they did it, but rather given the Raimi movies are still quiet modern, most people know Spider-man's origin story, so devoting nearly half the movie to the origin story felt off. Not that this was badly done or anything, more saying I felt they probably should have abbreviated that (maybe even montage'd it?) and then devoted more time to the actual meat of the plot.
Other than that, good stuff. Different take on Spider-man, but worked out pretty well, and that's all you can ask for. It is nice to see Spider-man actually acting like Spider-man (namely the quips), which is especially notice-able after reading a good deal of USM, and seeing the series Spectacular Spider-man, and yeah, sequel should be interesting.
Also, is it wrong that, ignoring the existence of X-men Origins (probably a good thing), this further shows how X-men and Spider-man as movie series are quite parallel? Observe!
1st Movie: Good start to series.
2nd Movie: Sequels that surpassed the already good predecessors
3rd Movie: Dramatic drop in quality compared to the other two (to be fair, Spider-man 3 was more just "mediocre", while X-men Last Stand was...uhh...significantly worse than "mediocre")
Reboot/Prequel/Etc.: Different take on characters, lore, etc. of the other movies, but generally well done and back on par with the good parts of the previous series.
EDIT: Oh, one major flaw of the movie?
No JJJ :(
-
Lack of J. K. Simmons is a flaw shared by far too many movies.
I'm curious whether they're making any attempt to tie new Spider-Man into the same universe as the other recent Marvel movies? I kinda figured that was part of the point of the reboot.
-
From my understanding, the plan with the new Spider-man continuity is that they're going to make a movie based entirely on Venom (without Spider-man), about him being a hero, and ultimately tie that in with Amazing Spider-man continuity, getting both into the same movie, where they fight.
I'm curious about this mostly because it seems they're just giving the entire Black Suit the finger which as classic as story and lead-in to Venom as that is, its probably better for concise narrative in this format all things considered.
Dunno about tying it into other Marvel films though...
-
Won't tie in. Sony owns the movie rights to the character not Marvel/Warner. Even if the had good intentions they likely wouldn't do it with the cost involved.
-
Lack of J. K. Simmons is a flaw shared by far too many movies.
I'm curious whether they're making any attempt to tie new Spider-Man into the same universe as the other recent Marvel movies? I kinda figured that was part of the point of the reboot.
The point of the reboot was the opposite, actually. If Sony doesn't put out a new Spider-Man movie once every like four years, I think it is, the rights revert back to Marvel, who will then do a movie that integrates Spider-Man into the Avengers continuity. X-Men is in the same situation, but with a different company (that's why Wolverine got made).
-
That is it. Same reason First Class got made. So hey it isn't all bad! But yeah you aren't likely to see Spiderman or Wolverine in an Avengers movie any time soon no matter how long they have been on the team in comics.
-
Oh, one thing occurred to me that I did want to bring up regarding the Origin story that I forgot to!
The way they handled the web shooters. One thing that bugged me (as well as my father back when he read Spider-man in the 60s) was how this High School kid could invent this complex chemical compound that mimics spider-webs so well. I mean, ok, he's smart enough I can buy, but how would he get all the resources needed to pull this off?
This movie did it better by saying Parker DIDN'T invent the material, just the shooters, so yeah, props to the movie for avoiding that little nuisance.
The Raimi films side stepped it with Organic webbing, which is fine, and avoids the problem entirely, just wanted to say that and illustrating "one isn't better than the other, just different approaches!" thing.
-
He was able to make it because the spider DNA made him able to combine the chemicals by smell or something like that. Wasn't even about smarts TBH, just weird spider DNA. It was not the best move and yeah, shoulda been organic shooters from the start like he now has in the comics.
-
Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter: Absolutely terrible. I find it hard to believe the screenwriter was the same guy who wrote the book. Because yeah, he pretty much shit all over his own work. One word: gunaxe.
Ice Age 4 (or 20, I can't remember anymore): I hadn't seen Ice Age 3 so I was worried I wouldn't be able to keep up with the plot. Fairly entertaining, but nothing groundbreaking. Well except perhaps the CGI. Everything is so... shiny.
-
The really annoying thing is that it's not even the same company that owns Spider-Man and the FF, so we'll never get so much as a Spider-Man/Human Torch team up.
-
Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter: Absolutely terrible. I find it hard to believe the screenwriter was the same guy who wrote the book. Because yeah, he pretty much shit all over his own work. One word: gunaxe.
Pity. I was hoping the film would be at least slapstick entertaining.
-
Blade: You know, I've never seen this movie before, and I'm told its the movie that broke the mold of Super Hero movies from the 90s being "Campy, Cheesey stuff you can't take seriously" and made them actually bad ass. So I decided to finally see it!
It...was ok, I guess. I mean, I guess its a very "for its time" piece because compared to other Super Hero movies of the 90s, it was probably a huge breath of fresh air to see something take itself seriously, and just focus on the "This is bad ass" and not "guys in silly costumes", but as it stands now? Eh, felt more like a typical action flick with Vampires as a gimmick. I will say that the 3rd Act was so...slow moving honestly, until the point where the movie goes "ok, time for the Hero to KICK ASS"; did we really need like 10 minutes of ritual special effects while Blade sucks some woman's blood? Couldn't we cut that time down and just give us more of the ass kickings?
Again, its not a BAD movie, I just don't think its very hype worthy. Like I said, it's "ok", though I think X-men was notably better, and feel that is the real "Start of Super Hero Movies being good", so I suppose Blade gets a nod as the transition movie away from the silly stuff of the 90s, into the good stuff of 2000+. I mean, before Blade, how many good Super Hero movies were there? Offhand, there was '78 Superman, and '89 Batman...yeah...
-
The second one was a bit of a step up. Mostly budget fixing some of the problems. It still isn't X-men or the sequel but it is obvious the wave of Comics movies penetrating the pop culture bubble.
-
It's also Guillermo del Toro directing and clearly having a lot of fun with it.
-
Just woke up from having attended an in-theatre Batman trilogy marathon. Quite exhausting, but pretty worthwhile.
The first two movies do a surprisingly good job of tying directly into the third movie, even though each movie tells its own story quite well. Christopher Nolan knows his stuff. Bane was a surprisingly effective villain, and someone finally found a camera angle that makes Christian Bale look less dumb when he's shouting at people in his rubber suit. Only took three movies!
Third one has the same problems as the others: Bale makes a better Bruce than Batman, overlong, messes with comics continuity. But it also has all the same strengths and vastly improves its female characters.
Having watched the first two back-to-back, I really missed Katie Holmes in the second movie. Her replacement was just bland. And none of the other antagonist characters have been able to top Liam Neeson. Though, nice twist at the ending of this one. I hadn't read the comics in a long time, so it actually surprised me.
Finally, there's this character called "Blake" played by Joshua-something. I don't know if he has an analogue in the comics. I suspect this name is just a pseudonym to keep fans of the comics from knowing who he is so they won't have any bias against him during the main meat of the movie.
Honestly, while this trilogy wraps things up perfectly, I still want to know 'what happens next'.
-
And none of the other antagonist characters have been able to top Liam Neeson.
I did not just read that.
-
Upon watching it a second time, I didn't like Heath Ledger's Joker nearly as much. Still good, but I guess I got overexposed to the deluge of memes involving it.
Fact of life, memes can ruin anything.
-
To be perfectly honest, Liam Neeson's character (whose name I doubt I can spell correctly) is my least favourite in the two Nolan movies. He felt like an utterly generic evil kung fu master villain spliced with the always ridiculous league-of-assassins setup and motivations that I found quite difficult to swallow. Joker and Dent being dramatically better is the main reason I significantly preferred the second movie, I think. Scarecrow's pretty cool but he there wasn't much resolution there; it felt like he was being saved for a sequel but then they went in another direction.
As for Bane, I just hope he's less stupid than he was in Arkham Asylum, which played him as a boring thug. I'm actually pretty much unaware of him beyond that.
-
Saw the Dark Knight Rises.
This had some of the normal flaws of the Nolan Batman movies. It does go on for too long. Where I found it really fell short was Bane- I just did not care about him at all. It also trend over the same ground the Dark Knight did, which should've been edited down. Villains in general were a large step down from Joker and Dent/Two Face. On the flipside, I strongly agree with Djinn about the female characters. Hathaway was way better than the previous women in the series, and she had good chemistry with Bale.
The supporting cast was excellent (Blake, Alfred, Gordon), Bale turned in his best performance and the film overall was quite well done. Like the Dark Knight, it is very good but not great. The Scarecrow cameo was amusing as well.
Edit: Spoilers here. The 'twist' with Talia was incredibly easy to see coming. I am not knocking it, though. It's clear her accent and look were meant to be a tipoff to some relation with Al Gul. Her and Bane were both incredibly lame. Joker trend the same ground with having the people turn on cops/the violent revolution. It was just a waste of time to invest so much into it again, and in a film that is nearly three hours I take some exception to this. I don't care about the league of shadows, that was wrapped up in the first film. Talia was better than the unending fail of Rachael from the second film, but that says *nothing*. I rather like the very end- this trilogy was always more about Bruce Wayne than Batman. Nolan gave him a happy ending, while leaving Robin to take over as Batman. The scenes early on in the hospital were very good foreshadowing as well. Bruce Wayne has paid a physical and emotional price for being Batman, and the film makes it overwhelmingly clear that he can't keep on keeping on. The film's ending is surprisingly light hearted for all of the darkness of the Nolan films. I think I am fine with that, since it does give closure.
-
On the flipside, I strongly agree with Djinn about the female characters. Hathaway was way better than the previous women in the series, and she had good chemistry with Bale.
This is very good to hear, as frankly that was my biggest (perhaps only?) complaint about The Dark Knight.
-
Female characters have always been a problem for Nolan. I think every other movie he's done, at least one of the women is largely there to fuel male character development by dying. Dark Knight Rises is better about this, finally. Hathaway is fun to have around.
I am onboard with the "Good but not great" distinction for this one (although I would actually call The Dark Knight great). A lot of this is familiar material, and it's less variations on a theme than it is here are plot points from the first two movies grafted onto each other. I think it would've been a vastly stronger movie if the villains had their own distinct reasons for doing what they were doing, instead of trying to finish someone else's work and stating that fact in one of the most cursory villain explanations ever. Of course, it's still Nolan Batman, so there's plenty of good material despite the inevitable padding. All the Bruce stuff was excellent and Michael Caine makes every scene perfect as always. I just can't help but feel something's missing here and that something is principally an infusion of new ideas on the villain side. I also think the movie was missing one of its own points by having only the cops put up any resistance whatsoever. So, not entirely shaking the curse of superhero franchises faltering at the third movie, but certainly a more valiant effort than any other has put in.
I actually found Bane one of the best aspects of the movie just because his voice is mesmerizing. He's still a thug, but he's a thug with perfect elocution. He just sounds so completely convinced of his right to do whatever the goddamn fuck he wants, which as far as I can tell is pretty much the League of Shadows' M.O. anyway. The nebulousness of their ideals was a problem in Batman Begins and it's more of a problem when we're still relying on it two movies later. He's genuinely menacing. Not a step up from Ledger's Joker, but way more presence than the principal antagonist had in Batman Begins.
As for the ending, I couldn't help but think Alfred spotting Bruce in the cafe would've been the perfect shot to end on. Then we had to cut to a shot of Bruce, just in case anyone in the audience had any doubts whatsoever. I dunno, Alfred's reaction shot alone would've been satisfying enough. Also Fox really, really looks like he needs a hug in his last scene. It was generally good, though. Ties everything up with a general implication of people moving on.
Also I think we can all agree that we would be better as a nation if more cities built civic monuments to Batman.
-
Amazing Spiderman: Meh. I like Dennis Leary, and the guy who played Spiderman was okay. Just... not a strong movie overall I think? Not a bad one, but there's too much of trying to have its cake and eat it too between comic and real life logic. Spiderman needs to STOP TAKING OFF HIS FUCKING MASK ALL THE TIME.
I liked the inclusion of the webshooters, but any competant detective could track down Spiderman given the setup.
-
Dark Knight Rises: Mostly the same thoughts as El Cideon. Good, not quite great. It's also the most serious of the movies by far.... although maybe serious isn't the right word. "Solemn" perhaps. The first two movies did good work to make you take the work seriously as not as a "comic book movie," but the first two movies are also, well, fun. Not all the time, but enough. (Yes, Dr. Crane & the Joker's manic charisma count.) Dark Knight Rises has a little of it in Catwoman, but that's basically it, since everyone else except maybe Fox is srs bizness all the time. It does the serious *well*, no doubt, and Bane wouldn't have worked as a wisecracker, but I wish they could have resculpted things to add a bit more lightness or dark humor somewhere.
Comments / nitpicks:
* I get that new high tech gizmos are expected in comic books, but the bit with the fusion reactor was awkward and silly because it was "too" realistic yet everyone acted like it was a comic book threat. Uh, Bruce? Fission reactors already exist and they function the exact same way. They make clean power BUT can also be used to make a weapon. Thus both sides look silly - Bruce, there's no harm in turning it on, the world already has to deal with that problem. Miranda, there's no need to fund it at great expense, you can probably just build several fission reactors instead (with or without Wayne) then reprocess it Iran style if you have fanatical followers who don't leak (which all comic book villains do to make their plots sort of work).
* Couldn't they have figured out a better excuse for the Bane-raids-the-stock-exchange bit? He did it to mess with Bruce's eTrade account or something and it somehow involved fingerprints and trades were somehow still being conducted despite massive terrorist attack. Seems like these plot points could have been separated - raid the stock exchange for some other reason to get a bit showy spectacle, then hack Bruce's finances later. I'm not quite sure I approve of the functional setting change either. Comic book cities are malleable, but in Batman Begins, Gotham was clearly Pittsburgh or something - a once great city, now fallen. Dark Knight Rises, it was blatantly New York, which I'm not sure fits a Batman setting so well anymore.
* The Paris Commune was a little wacky. Okay, I can buy that Bane's men have the Wayne Enterprises Applied Science showcase and lots of machine guns, which very much helps encourage people to do whatever you ask them to. However, releasing all the criminal prisoners? Threatening the city with a nuclear bomb? Killing the person who can disarm the bomb publicly? Nobody else is going to be on your side. This is going to get you & your men killed fast unless they do something like hole up in a fortress and never leave. Also doesn't the fact that some people do kind of contradict The Dark Knight, where the ships refused to blow each other up?
* Also, the Bane takeover was so apocalyptic that it really feels like more Jack Bauer should have been called in and not been a 2 minute section where the special ops guys are immediately tailed & found. If Bane is relying on the army itself to enforce the cordon, it's going to be pretty darn leaky. Ninjas swimming in before the ice came if nothing else. Batman Begins had an apocalyptic evil plot but one that the authorities found out about only as it was happening, so Batman had an excuse for his role. The Dark Knight, well, while the Joker might have committed 9/11 multiple times in short succession, I can see it being seen as an ultimately local gangsters problem by the feds & the army. In Rises, it just seems like there's so much time that passes with no Batman that you can't begin to imagine the implications along with SOME kind of plan cooked up by the world.
* Probably a studio request for watchability, but wish the Pit scenes could have been a bit darker.
* Not an uncommon problem in comic books or any recurring media where it's tough to kill people, but letting Bruce escape at the end also devalues Tate's betrayal. I get that both Bane & Tate are big on drawing out the suffering over time and the illusion of hope blah blah blah, but when you're sticking Bruce with a knife? Can we trust that she knows enough to make it a mortal wound, or at least a mortal-wound-if-not-treated? Then you can have Batman making the choice between trying to stop the bomb or getting emergency care, if functioning hospitals still exist in Baneville. Or just plain having him die on the spot from Talia, and let Catwoman / Gordon / Fox save the day in the end if you want to REALLY drive the comic book fans up a wall. (Okay the studios would never let that happen.)
* Bruce wants to get with Selina after all in the ending? I can sort of buy a "need any allies I can get + misplaced trust" argument for keeping with her during the movie, but, um. She kind of got the shit kicked out of you followed by you being locked in hell for 3 months while Gotham burned down. That's a pretty epic betrayal. I'd say that Selina can date Bruce, but only if she escapes from a wretched pit in Algeria first.
I'm not totally complaining about where the movie ended up. Echoing El Cid on the villain's plot being the same but more drawn out kind of disappointing. To the extent that the League of Shadows has a coherent ideology, it seemed something like "Make Gotham stand as Sodom, an evil example of societal decay" or something. And you know, even if it was enforced by drugs, having a third of the city rip themselves apart isn't a bad start in Begins. How "make an example of Gotham" turns into "Give power to the people, then blow them up with a nuke" I'm not really sure. I just wish they'd come up with a different villainous plot. Batman in the pit was clearly the vision Nolan had in his head, and the plot is an excuse to get him there. And I liked the pit scenes & plot! Just... have something else that Bane is up to and able to do unstoppably for 4 months while Bruce Wayne has to do pushups and go on his journey to rediscover the fear of death and the joy of life.
super: Maybe knowing the comics changes things but the big plot twist with Tate seemed pretty out of the blue to me. I guess Bane just lied about being born in the darkness in his first fight with Batman if he was thrown down there like a vanilla prisoner. There really isn't any reason to think Tate is Ducard's daughter - everything points to it being Bane at that point. Assuming that a French accent means she's related seems a bit of a stretch.
Djinn / Elf: Well, I thought Neeson had solid presence at least. They just inexplicably botched Batman's final fights with shaky cam & fast cuts, and the League of Shadows villainous plot is silly, which drags Neeson down a bit. (Dr. Crane and the Joker are crazy, perhaps, but not silly.) Having rewatched Batman Begins yesterday, something that still mildly annoys me is that the movies seem to run with the idea that Ducard was Ra's al Ghul the whole time. But Neeson goes on in the training speeches about how a man can be killed and brought down, but an idea is unstoppable, you must become a legend, etc. Thus it seems entirely obvious to me that fitting with that would Ra's al Ghul merely being a *title* - and thus someone who is unstoppable. Ducard merely took over as the next Ra's al ghul then. Sadly it seems the movies don't quite agree with me despite it fitting. Oh well. (Why is this in spoiler tags? Because I said "movies" and the fact that it comes up again in Rises is a bit of a spoiler.
-
BAMANS - Watched it. It is still good movies. Pretty much positive stuff above but some rambling that I will spoiler out just in case someone knows the stuffs reads this before seeing the movie.
No one seems to have noted how crazy it is that Nolan managed to straight up use two big 90s comic events of Knightfall (BREAK YOU) and No Man's Landyet. That is pretty awesome after two movies of largely originalish plot to go to two of the big touchstones of the 90s for Batman without going to the big defining events. Like there was no Killing Joke or Year One here. Nolan went with big stories that have kind of fun ideas that never really penetrated the cultural zeitgeist. Pretty cool. For all that Gotham being a flaming hell hole after the quake in No Man's Land makes way more sense (because you know, entire rogues gallery and their endless supply of henchmen fucking around).
If it helps with the League of Shadows thing in the comics Ra's al Ghul is more of an environmental terrorist who pretty much wants to remove humanity from the planet because they fuck shit up and ruin the balance of the natural world. So the central goal is kind of this nebulous genocide where he doesn't really want to do much harm to the world around him, just the people. So his route of attack is quite oblique by nature of the goal.
For the confusion around Neeson's claims to have always been Ra's and it being an immortality thing? He lies. I do think he was intended to always be Ra's, but the nonsense he feeds Bruce about immortality is bullshit. He lies and awful lot. All of the villains do in Nolan Batman movies. This also goes for Bane and Talia. The Joker especially lied all the time. It is something I highly enjoy. This goes for the whole parts of the plot that are retread from Dark Knight. They are thrown out there because they are just smoke and mirrors this time. Also if you remember back to Begins part of the reason Gotham is as bad as it is was due to the League of Shadows backing the criminals and their rise. The whole thing really is part of a plan to use Gotham as a beacon to lash out against the modern industrial world as a modern redo of Soddom like you noted.
Also military dudes coming in to Gotham? I don't think that mattered so much as preventing people getting out of Gotham.
Paris Commune they can do whatever the fuck they want if they give me more Cillian Murphy (I think that was him right? He is creditted in the movie and I didn't see him anywhere else).
Also for Blake? He feels like a mix of Tim Drake and Jason Todd to me. He has a lot of Jason Todd's origin without being batshit fucking insane and a douchebag. Not to mention picking up the mantle as an adult does a lot of stuff Tim Drake has between the whole Nightwing thing and filling in as Batman for a few years between Final Crisis and the Return of Bruce Wayne. You could totally cut that ending either way to be him picking up the Batman persona or doing his own variation of it. Hopefully if in 5 years time they come back to this cash cow it is still set in Gotham and not Bludhaven though. Because hey, we already ended with a threat of nuclear explosions this time, lets not end another set of movies with it actually happening.
That said I did come out of it with some odd little things that bothered me as well.
I don't think it is so much only the cops rising up (that was more a symbolic thing on Nolan's part IMO) that seemed counter to the ships with bombs sequence from Dark Knight to me. It was the way the cops blow the bridge when the bus full of kids are trying to leave. Like really? You just straight up risked getting a bus full of kids killed that are screaming about how the city is going to blow at any second now? Wow. I know it was forming the whole part where Blake was frustrated with the system because just following orders doesn't solve all problems, but damn son, that is fucking ice cold.
Also Batman? Straight up kills a lot of dudes here. Also holy shit how many people died in those buildings he got those rockets to hit when he is trying to get to the bomb in the Batplane? Holy fuck he really just blew up a building while flying the bomb away. Sure hope no one was living in that apartment block. Also why the shit did he have to lie to his best friends and family about the Autopilot working. So he could run off and tell them later with his new girlfriend? Who he just tricked into thinking he was dying, because he directly told Catwoman that there was no autopilot in that final sequence. Such a fucking dick move.
That said now in my dream world we get a Nolan directed Jim Gordon movie exploring the James Jr. plot from Scott Snyder's run on Detective Comics and a Question movie (Renee Montoya obviously) and hey I guess there could even be a Nightwing one as well.
Edit - Oh yeah nonspoiler thing I can bitch about.
Bane is okay. Not great. None of that is Tom Hardy's fault. After watching this movie I came to realise I just don't like anything about Bane as a character. I probably should read Secret Six since he is supposedly good in that. Generally speaking though, Bane does absolutely nothing for me.
-
Bane always struck me as a total lamer in the source material, which is why I'm impressed with Hardy for breathing any life into the character at all. He sounds like he's enjoying himself, which is something I always like to see. The origin story still doesn't work at all, though.
-
Responses! I don't follow comics at all, but I did know about Al Gaul's daughter. The entire setup of the character screamed betrayal to me, and the one that would make that fit is Talia. Bringing in a family member also makes sense, since they were tying in the league of shadows to the plot anyway.
Gref Rant.
I can understand Wayne doing that. He needed a clean break from Batman, and the only way to do that was to make everyone think he had died on that plane. Fox/Alfred do figure it out (And Kyle obviously) but I thought it worked fairly well.
Also, the shot of Bruce was for people w ho thought that inception's ending was way too complicated. Cid is right that it would have been better if it ended on the shot of Caine looking at the camera, but oh well.
-
Bane worked really well in he story he was invented for but had no use at all outside of it for years, and kept getting shoehorned into stories as the big guy with ill- defined motivations. He's awesome in Secret Six though.
-
Batman 3. Didn't expect the betrayal. Expected the uber happy ending even less. Only realized that OMG ROBIN late. Yeah, I suck.
Only having Alfred smile at the end would have no ambiguity, unlike Inception's ending. At least we know that he's with Catwoman.
As expected it's worse than 2, way better than 1, and all in all pretty great.
I've grown to like these films in spite of Batman instead of because of him. I realized I just didn't care about Batman after shelling too much money on two critically acclaimed games that bored me. (The Lego game and the not-Lego game) Nolan rocks, etc etc.
-
TDKR - Thoughts
It's a shame that this movie will forever be associated with that douchebag mass murderer. With that said, I probably would have enjoyed the movie more had that not happened.
Dunno what's a spoiler and what isn't so it all gets mini-sized!
The Harvey Dent Law is great and all, but this shit storm started back in The Dark Knight. Remind me again why Gordon didn't just blame The Joker for Dent's death? Why did Batman have to become the scapegoat if there was already prime to steal that label?
Blake being the next Robin/Batman was great in the end. I read that Gordon-Levitt was going to be this John Blake guy and it threw me off the scent that a Robin type character would be in the film. I imagine this Blake bloke will pop up in comics now. If they do make more movies staring him, he has the body type for a Robin as well.
Is it me or did the whole back breaking scene seem a little rushed? I mean it looked identical to the comic as far as visuals, but I feel they could have emphasized the whole back breaking instant a little more. That way it is more memorable and stands out a little better? And just who is this doctor that can cure paralysis by mere punches! "Hey there is a vertebra sticking out right here." WHAM! "All better!" Instant cheese.
You had to imagine with all these Ra's al Ghul references popping up in this flick, that Talia was going to show up at sometime. My brother pointed it out early on and was spot on too. I mean fucking hell, can I watch a movie that Liam Neeson is NOT in! Mother fucker is everywhere, for reals.
Ann Hathaway is hawt. She played the best catwoman since Halie Berry! >_>; (All jokes aside, she did real good livening up the dark undertones and atmosphere the movie usually left.)
Bane was fun. I had a hard time understanding what he was saying a every once in awhile. After Talia shows up, and he becomes nothing more then a glorified goon, his role gets diminished fairly quickly.
Hines Ward returning kicks! Come on Hollywood. You should have cast Devin Hester for that instead. Make it believable!
In the end I really enjoyed Gordon-Levitt in this film the most. I feel that he stole the show, because...Batman just isn't in this movie all that much.
It was a good movie. A little less fun then Avengers, but the story was better. In the end both flicks did their thing well. TDKR is not a bad way to end Nolan's vision. While this film isn't as good as The Dark knight it did more then enough to keep me satisfied throughout.
I did not stay after the credits, because I think that's a marvel thing anyways. I didn't miss anything did I?
Also, I guess the Superman teaser was good and all, but really...
ALL THEY NEEDED TO DO WAS SHOW SUPERMAN THROW A PUNCH AND I WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD. REAL TALK!
-
Nothing after the credits, no.
-
Scar, regarding spoiler point A (this all concerns TDK alone, so no spoiler text needed I think): would've been tough to blame the Joker for Dent's death given he'd been caught halfway across the city by the time Dent died. All those cops who stormed in to grab Joker after Batman left him hanging would've had to lie about it forever along with Gordon.
-
The Dark Knight Lights Up: A bit slow at the beginning, but I found myself really enjoying it later. The whole Gotham takeover was fairly riveting. I'd say it's the best of the Nolan Batmans, but mind you I'm not as enamored with the first two as most people.
Good job telling us exactly who the villain is and then making us forget about it by the end.
And yeah, Anne Hathaway in a catsuit leaning over a motorcycle. God bless Hollywood.
-
So Cap, as a discerning gentleman, Anne Hathaway or Julie Newmar?
-
They both have their merits!
-
I had problems with how they repeatedly telegraphed everything, personally.
Anyway, now that Nolan and actual vision are out the window, I'm sure DC is looking forward to trying to ape Marvel.
-
Oh I forgot to mention that the new DC logo where the D peels back is stupid as fuck.
-
I don't remember Arachnaphobia being so.fucking.hilarious.
Busy busy day sent me to homegirl resident-comicgirl-colleague Iris, and we caught the Coolidge Corner 12AM showing of it. Beer beer beer before (3x), and 2 beers inside... I don't remember John Goodman being that damn awesome. I don't think I understood his swag when I was younger. Doctor's wife was absolutely useless. Epic nail gun shot was funny when the spider turned all hulkish.
They had a running Godzilla promo going on - reeeee: godzilla shirts. Certain the decal came from Godzilla and Mothra: The Battle for Earth. Bro behind the counter -did not- cite any specific Godzilla saying his "tastes change from time to time" when asked if he liked in which he responded "OMG I FUCKING LOVE GODZILLA." What a poser.
-
Yeah, Arachnophobia is awesome like that. John Goodman makes that movie.
Hellooooooooo?
-
the new DC logo where the D peels back is stupid as fuck.
-
Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1.
Booooooooooring.
For a movie with so much inaction, they could have spiffed up the fucking sex scene. Yeah, so he broke the bedframe and shit. I wanted to see THE BEDFRAME BEING BROKE.
Preferably by a tannish, muscly man by the name of Jacob.
But nope, pale pale pale Edward.
God Jacob needs some fuckin nutbanging action, maaaaaaaaaaaan. Movie needed more sex!!! BORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRING. God damn, I wanted to see shit break ]= "Breaking Dawn" Pt 1 mah black ass.
-
I have never seen this movie, but that is possibly the best review of a Twilight anything I've ever seen.
-
If you take the love triangle out of it, a girl moves to a town in Washington. The end.
-
Spoilers the dog man falls in love with a baby.
Also if that was the best review of Twilight you have seen then you need more Chris VS Twilight in your life.
As I'm reading this book, I'm rewriting it in my head. So far there are dirtbikes and Frankensteins.
-
Well that's not fair. How many books aren't improved if you add dirtbikes and Frankensteins? Watchmen maybe? It would have been pretty crass if the Comedian came back as a dirtbike-riding rapist Frankenstein.
...unless it happened after a nuclear apocalypse occurring in an alternate timeline where Ozymandias' plan fails, because then it would be consistent with the reinvented setting and FUCK DC is going to steal this idea and make another Watchmen spinoff.
-
WHAT IF Watchmen. I might actually buy that spin off.
-
What If...? Nite-Owl was King of the Vampires?
What If...? Comic fans understood that Rorschach wasn't someone to idolize?
-
What If...? Nite-Owl was King of the Vampires?
What If...? Comic fans understood that Rorschach wasn't someone to idolize?
One of these will never happen.
I look forward to Count von Nite-Owl.
-
Well, I actually have read some of Chris VS Twilight, and yeah, it's awesome.
I think what I was getting at is that Idun's review is the best one that explains the viewpoint of why -anyone- would ever be interested in attempting to watch Twilight in the first place.
-
To be consistently cock blocked? I guess if that is your thing.
-
Batman Begins + The Dark Knight - Because it's all the rage.
Both movies are pretty sweet, I love love love Harvey Dent and the supporting cast of both. Going to watch Dark Knight Rises on Thursday.
-
To be consistently cock blocked? I guess if that is your thing.
It's called "cuckolding" dude.
-
That implies any cheating happens. Baller is all "I want to fuck that corpse" and that corpse is all like "but corpse fucking is gaylol" and then the wolf dude is all "hey check me out the knot in my cock will make you come super hard yo" and then the corpse is all "rigor mortis all up ins" and Baller is all "I want to fuck that corpse" and then they fuck off camera and wolf dude is all "i am gonna fuck ur babby".
I don't call that cuckolding though. more like cock holding riet?
-
I don't think I will know exactly what to call that until I find the guy who sells me pills. Once that happens I'll come up with something.
-
Dark Knight Rises - OMG!!! SCARECROW!!! YAY!!! I could done without MORE LEAGUE OF SHADOWS PLOT!!!! though. Probably my least favorite of the three due to that. Catwoman is pretty awesome.
-
Dark Knight Rises - Saw this, it was good. I'll have to think about it vs. the first, initial kneejerk is that TDKR is a bit weaker but I'll have to reflect on that, there are some things it does better.
Eh, spoilers for everything.
Was a fan of:
-Catwoman. As good as the Nolan movies are they really lack characters with any moral ambiguity; Catwoman definitely delivers there. I think her perspective and her differences from Batman are pretty valid ones and the exploration of them is fun. Also she's badass.
-Scarecrow's cameo as a giant troll. "Death... by exile!" best line. Narrowly beating out Batman's "So that's how that feels."
-Holy shit they made a Robin who is actually a real human being and not annoying, cool. I'm somewhat apathetic to the character but I liked the way he was set up as the Batman successor and his scenes were generally fine.
-Alfred steals scenes as usual. It's a crying shame he's virtually absent from the back half of the movie.
-The villain reveal twist I thought was very effective, I was a bit suspicious but still largely blindsided (not familiar with the comics though). Also the "ohhh shit she DID have the ability to flood the control unit fuck" is great.
Was not a fan of:
-The league of shadows is baaack! Okay, I'll admit, I never liked these guys. Their ideology seemed kinda stupid and nebulous, but y'know what? At least Liam Neeson could act. Bane felt like Neeson minus some acting pedigree and plus a stupid mask. We get another whole movie of League of Shadows and this time their plan makes as little sense as their ideology. Why not just blow up the bomb days earlier? At the VERY least detonate it the moment the cops mount their overt resistance or... something. C'mon guys. The Dark Knight is the best movie in the series for the sole reason that it has Joker and Dent instead of these losers.
-Gordon and Fox made less impact on me in this movie. They aren't bad (Fox's "Q moment" was fun), but I list this as a negative because I definitely liked them a lot in the first two films. This is largely a byproduct of their roles being reduced due to Catwoman and Blake, and I liked them so I can't really complain.
-Not sure what I think about the ending. Somewhat agree with Grefter there I guess. If you're going to have Batman live (which seems improbable to me given the bomb has a blast radius of how many miles again?) you can maybe not have him lie to all his friends.
The good outweighs the bad as usual and the movie should be seen etc.
-
I think he just jumped really early from his plane despite what the editing would let you believe. (not doing that would be really stupid anyway)
I think he didn't tell anyone about the autopilot because he was willing to cause some grief for a while to be 100% sure he could start a new life. Him and Catwoman weren't exactly settled at that point of the movie. I can see how reapparing out of nowhere to her like a badass would look more attractive to him thant just telling her he was going to survive, and it kinda fits the Batman/Catwoman dynamic better than what a normal reasonable couple would do.
The other people here weren't really friends of Bruce Wayne; I'm sure he also didn't want to have a "srs don't tell anyone K you guys" scene.
-
Making this post now to save time later this year.
Silent Hill 2: Revelation 3D: Movie was terrible. Generally repeated all of the same mistakes of the first movie. The apparent love interest was completely pointless, especially given the really obvious twist. Once again, sticking closer to the source material would have been a wiser decision.
Visuals are generally decent, but failure to use proper monster designs is really, really stupid. Pyramid Head was utilized incredibly poorly, the nurses are a poor use (why did those become a staple anyway?), and the monsters used otherwise really had nothing to do with the plot.
Also, cult may have been stupid, but lulz witch plot.
Oh yeah. And the 3D sucked.
There we go. Saved some time come October/November.
-
Because the first game had a hospital with nurses (not sexy?) and SH2 had sexy nurses because of SH2 main themes and then suddenly STATUS QUO hits the series.
So I take it that the love interest doesn't turn out to already be dead and was killed by the main character?
-
Andy you forgot the part where Sean Bean dies.
-
Sean Bean dies in every movie ever made, it's kinda easy to.
-
Whenever he does actually die, I kind of want his obituary to be titled "SEAN BEAN EXPLORES METHOD ACTING."
-
He may actually be working on that.
-
Return of the King - Yeah, I watch movies slowly, what of it? I'm not sure what to make of this movie. First half bad, second half good. I'm not sure if the extended edition adding the bizarre sequence at the beginning where Saruman dies was good or not, since it shouldn't really be in RotK. (I know the book doesn't have Saruman die there of course, but clearly he disappears from the story in the movie.) Also the Aowen/Faramir romance out of nowhere is kind of odd. Frodo/Sam/Gollum arc for the win in this movie.
-
That's actually something from the appendixes that lay out what happens after. Faramir and Eowyn marry a while after the book ends and everyone has settled into their new gigs. Course they can't hardly put that all in there so it was moved up on the timetable.
-
I am fine with moving it up in the timetable because by the time they get around to that shit in the book you are well into the "WHY THE FUCK IS THIS STILL GOING JUST LET IT END" section of the books (which is to say it is any time after the first mention of elevensies).
-
That's actually something from the appendixes that lay out what happens after. Faramir and Eowyn marry a while after the book ends and everyone has settled into their new gigs. Course they can't hardly put that all in there so it was moved up on the timetable.
Technically, its more like Chapter 5 or Chapter 6 of Book 6 that it happens. The Appendices are more about background information and
The books dedicate an entire chapter to nothing but Faramir and Eowen's relationship, in short, which I seem to recall that Return of the King pretty much cut out entirely beyond showing them standing together in the ending. I feel part of the purpose was both characters suffered some pretty drastic losses in the preceding war, why not give them a little bit of an extra happy ending? Maybe I'm looking too into it though.
Frodo's Journey actually ends really early in Book 6, and most of that Book is all the aftermath stuff. Yeah, it drags on, but there is some purpose in it, like "Sarumen in the Shire" was there to indicate "Sauron is gone, but there is still evil in the world", and its a follow up to Gndalf's line to Treebeard "He still has his most powerful weapon though: His Tongue" or something along those lines.
That said, I have no problems with them cutting all this stuff out in the movies, outside of the Sarumen stuff (as in, cutting out any sort of closure the character had entirely was done. Whether you like how the Director's Cut handled Sarumen's scene or not, at least it gave him a sense of closure, which is better than simply saying "He's in his tower, being useless.")
-
The books dedicate an entire chapter to nothing but Faramir and Eowen's relationship, in short, which I seem to recall that Return of the King pretty much cut out entirely beyond showing them standing together in the ending. I feel part of the purpose was both characters suffered some pretty drastic losses in the preceding war, why not give them a little bit of an extra happy ending? Maybe I'm looking too into it though.
No, that's pretty much what Tolkien said. That, and the implication of a double-dynastic alliance between the House of Eorl and the Stewards of Gondor (Eomer marries Faramir's cousin-once-removed).
-
So, do you guys think this Hobbit movie is going to be cut in half?
~
Also, what about the future for the Batman movies? Nolan and most of the cast said they are done, but do you think the studio will (once again) start from scratch, or start with a new Batman taking over?
-
They'll have to reboot him so they can make that Justice League movie they want to make so badly (that will suck).
-
Pretty much. They're already doing that for the Arkham games for expressly that purpose.
-
Hey they could have some faith in the general public who have already been privy to this concept of rebooting, especially in terms of comic book characters and just throw Batman into Justice League movie without doing some lame filler movie just to say NO DIFFERENT BAMANS NOW. I mean if anyone has penetrated the pop culture enough for people to just pick the character and run with it sans hand holding it is Batman.
Not that I expect this to happen, but it is something they could do.
-
I don't understand why there is this need to retell origin stories for Batman, Superman, Spider-Man or the Hulk. Iron Man, the X-Men, the Flash? Tell that shit, your audience might not be familiar. But those four characters specifically have penetrated so far into pop culture with origins that are simple and iconic and huge parts of the characters that they literally don't need to be retold. At this point you can drop Spider-Man into any movie and the audience will say "radioactive spider, great responsibility, got it."
The Superman people have an excuse, I mean, there's so few good Superman stories you can tell as a movie, but the rest?
-
I would say any random All Star Superman story, but that is cheating. That said, retelling Superman's origin story is kind of the done thing. Think we are up to 4 retellings in the last 10 years now just in comic books.
Hulk I didn't mind so much in the Ang Lee version because it had been 20ish years since Hulk was really part of the wider pop culture phenomenon.
-
I think that the Hulk origin stays in the collective cultural lexicon solely thanks to comedy tbh. All of my brother's friends know it if for no other reasons than Family Guy loving to make Hulk jokes. Norton's Hulk did fine without it (technically they just used the origin from the TV show but it's totally a non-issue). My point is if you're making a movie about these four characters you can pretty much to straight to Act 2 of your hero story.
Also Gref, I said "that can be made into a movie." All-Star is a lot of things but I can't see it being a summer tentpole film.
EDIT: I came to this conclusion of familiarity by quizzing my 55-year-old mother and those were the four superheroes whose origins she could describe. My six-year-old niece was additionally able to tell me about Captain America.
-
I would expect someone around for the 80s TV show to remember Hulk pretty spot on. Also kids fucken love the Hulk because Hulk is pretty much a giant kid.
A movie about Jimmy Olsen running FUTURESCIENCE corporation for a day and saving Superman from Bizarro dimension is something I would watch the shit out of. That might just me wanting to be able to make Bizarro jokes and having my direct family able to get them.
-
We desperately need a wonderwoman/origin story though if justice league movie is gonna be done, it has such great potential to be epic....though can any modern actress ever beat linda carter for this role? even the VA's after JLU for the varius wonder woman featured movies has been so bad....doing her up amazon/south american/native american seems a good choice...but all that ancient gods stuff has a lot of potential too... Could be a really epic movie.....but also immortal so....so many things they could do to tell her story(or just straight up port the 80s era wonder woman into the movie.....WITH LINDA CARTER....or something....lulz).
I guess the main thing holding them back from that is...potential for fan and/or woman audience rage if they fuck it up could run whoever makes the movie out of business/mass mob attacks. And....finding a current gen female actress actually capable of the role...(as you must both look, and act the part...and looking the part would be pretty damn hard, as you have to pull off diana AND wonder woman, and they look very different.)
-
Could you use more ellipses please? I'm not feeling like I'm in a JRPG monologue yet.
e: I had the word shitty in there, but trimmed it to reduce redundancy.
-
FWIW, all the buzz I've heard to this point is that DC is, in fact, going to do Justice League before a rebooted Batman. Man of Steel, then Justice League, then new Batman is the schedule I've heard. So for once, they actually are trusting the audience to know who this Bat-dude is.
Mind, I wouldn't put it past them to make the new Batman movie an origin story flashback. :B
-
I feel they should make a Wonder Woman movie before Justice League. Batman and Superman are pretty much standard fair at this point (plus Man of Steel is coming out next year anyway), and Green Lantern just had a movie, so he's good. Flash can be handled with some dialog or a quick flashback (no pun intended) in the movie explaining his origins.
A Justice League movie could be good, but needs to be handled properly. Just a "Hey, Avengers worked, so Justice League should work too!" isn't necessarily the case, as the reason Avengers worked was because the movie was well made and it was built up to appropriately (5 movies and all that, 4 of which were decent at worst); basically, it needs to be handled in a way that doesn't scream "Its DC's attempt to counter Marvel's Avengers success!" the way Green Lantern felt like it was DC trying to promote a non-Batman/Superman hero, in a response to Marvel getting all their Avenger heroes spotlights (face it, before the movies, was Iron Man really that mainstream outside of comic readers? I'm not saying "obscure, not well known", more like how many people knew that "Tony Stark' was the man behind the armor, for example?
-
Iron Man not only wasn't all that well known outside of comics circles, he wasn't even all that popular of a character in comics circles until the movies made him a household name.
I think Marvel benefited immensely from not having their most marketable heroes available for their shared universe. If Spider-Man and Wolverine had been available, would we have an Iron Man movie? I'd be stunned if we had a Thor movie.
On the DC side, it seems like they should do World's Finest (and probably Wonder Woman) between Man of Steel and Justice League. If nothing else, we've seen a superhero team movie now. That's not going to stop being cool, but it is going to not stand out anymore. A teamup between Superman and Batman would be a different thing, and a good leadin to a DC cinematic universe.
-
I would say prior to the Extremis arc and New Avengers, he was known mostly in comics circles for being the drunk guy who argued with Cap in the Avengers. But those books were widely popular and started to get more people interested in him (then again, New Avengers vol. 1 was the point a lot of those characters started to get more interest after the Avengers being kind of a second-tier book for a long time).
-
Cabin in the Woods - Surprising no one I loved this. Character actors I like in a Horror flick about horror flicks made for Cthulhu. Loved pretty much every twist they took on your horror tropes. A little disappointed that they didn't go down an alternate possible ending route I thought they flirted with twice. When Bradley Whitford make a reference to the virgin not being required for the sacrifice and later when Sigourney Weaver is talking we're both times I thought they might more implicitly invlolve Dana in the sacrifice. Mentally flirted with the possibility that they might have The Director be a former surviving Virgin herself or some such. Mostly I just wanted that so it could have been a franchise though. As is the ending is the most Whedon ending we could get, so whatevs. Interesting way to introduce someone to Cheis Hemsworth, little. Either hadn't seen Thor or Avengers. He is really quite good here, good comedic delivery.
God Bless America - This movie is exactly as stupid as it thinks it is, which is no where near as smart as it wants the audience to think it is. It is a petty revenge movie at the end of the day. For all that if you agree with its politics makes for some fun character moments, but they are hollow and meaningless in the end.
I know the writers knew this, but it bares repeating. Nabokov wasn't praising the thing he wrote about, not like the character references.
-
I still think the past couple minutes really detract from the movie. When it was clearly shown that yes the ritual is 100% necessary and supernatural shit is 100% real, it kind of simplified the movie a bit for me.
I liked the possibility that maybe the whole thing was just ritualism, and the real monsters were the people who perpetrate torture out of a sense of unthinking obligation. Since the whole movie was about horror films, and the scariest monsters are always the ones you imagine rather than see, I thought the break at the end explaining and showing something they had gone out of their way to explicitly confirm was a misstep. I rather liked the ambiguity.
-
Bourne Legacy - This was a Bourne movie pretty solidly. Not particularly deep, some dudes get shot and stuff. Jeremy Renner was fun and it was nice seeing him carry a movie by himself. Will continue to watch if they came out with more.
Pontypool - So we have a zombie movie where you see like at most 30 zombies in the couple of mob scenes they have? There is really like 2 sets and 2 Zombies outside of mobs. The virus has infected specific parts of the English Language and this is actually pretty creepy when they are running with it. Whole thing takes place inside a Radio Station that is built under a church, so it starts off as one room and cramps down to just the sound booth at its tightest. You hear about the plague more than you see it for the first half the movie. Tension is kept pretty well. It stops being tens in the last part when they are discovering the full extent of the virus and kind of how to deal with it, but the movie has shifted completely into high concept rather than horror at that point.
Fun zombie movie presumably for people that have worked in radio (going to suggest it to a friend on those merits at least!) and hella fun for people that enjoy Communication or Neural Networking. Just generally stuff that is how abstract concepts are built up and associated. Do suggest you check it out if you are an English or a Psych major with a love for zombies.
-
I still think the past couple minutes really detract from the movie. When it was clearly shown that yes the ritual is 100% necessary and supernatural shit is 100% real, it kind of simplified the movie a bit for me.
I liked the possibility that maybe the whole thing was just ritualism, and the real monsters were the people who perpetrate torture out of a sense of unthinking obligation. Since the whole movie was about horror films, and the scariest monsters are always the ones you imagine rather than see, I thought the break at the end explaining and showing something they had gone out of their way to explicitly confirm was a misstep. I rather liked the ambiguity.
If the last scene doesn't occur to prove the "Audience" isn't real, then the film's whole meta-commentary that "the state of the horror movie industry sucks, and it's your fault for watching terrible formulaic movies" falls apart because it absolves the horror-movie-audience of guilt.
-
I still think the past couple minutes really detract from the movie. When it was clearly shown that yes the ritual is 100% necessary and supernatural shit is 100% real, it kind of simplified the movie a bit for me.
I liked the possibility that maybe the whole thing was just ritualism, and the real monsters were the people who perpetrate torture out of a sense of unthinking obligation. Since the whole movie was about horror films, and the scariest monsters are always the ones you imagine rather than see, I thought the break at the end explaining and showing something they had gone out of their way to explicitly confirm was a misstep. I rather liked the ambiguity.
If the last scene doesn't occur to prove the "Audience" isn't real, then the film's whole meta-commentary that "the state of the horror movie industry sucks, and it's your fault for watching terrible formulaic movies" falls apart because it absolves the horror-movie-audience of guilt.
There's too many negatives in here and I'm still drunk from last night. Are you agreeing with me? The last scene exists to prove that the audience is indeed real.
-
Yeah, sorry. That should be an 'is'. Of course I'm not agreeing with you. That would probably destroy the universe.
Resident Evil # (whatever the latest one is)
So I went to see this. It's the usual fun schlock that the RE movies have been since the third one. Alice kills everything. Alice somehow ends up wearing weird-ass fetish gear (highlight of the movie?). Some of the game characters cameo to kill some zombies, but ultimately are unimportant. Wesker shows up at the end in Spandex. Cliffhanger ending for the next Milla Jovovich vehicle.
Honestly, they keep getting better. If they make like 20 more of these movies, we might have something genuinely entertaining.
-
If it helps (I assume this will) they are less motion pictures and more homemade softcore Role Play porn with a budget.
-
Look at this thread. It isn't full of people talking about how Looper is the best movie of the year.
Go watch Looper. It is the best movie of the year.
There was not 5 minutes in that movie where they didn't do exactly what I hoped they would do with a scene. Holy fucking shit this movie is great. The setting is fantastic, the casting is amazing, the story is great and the dialogue is well written. The tagline and quick run down do absolutely nothing to do justice to this film.
I think the only thing I can really talk about without spoilering stuff (meh to spoilers as per normal but you know, respect for the audience and all that) but most importantly with sufficiently describing what is so great about them.
The setting is a run down near future. It works really well because they keep it vague on the how or why of it, but it is pretty much Future Depression, there is vagrants all up ins and people skip town on trains. Crime is pretty all encompassing and people kill drifters often etcetc. The really cool part is that while there is still nods to technological progression and there being newer inventions, the vast majority get by on fixed up functional modern technology. Cars are repurposed for alternate more efficient cheap power sources, but those expensive bulky metal chassis are reused (cars with solar panels strapped to them and random tubes is pretty much it for set design). They use some of the more automated tech for heavy work (maintaining a farm), but plenty of simple work is still done by hand.
It honestly reminded me of two films from the last few years in setting. Starting with the sacrilege first, honestly it is a similar approach to tech that Real Steel took. Its lo-fi sci-fi, its cool and simple. No where near as soft and friendly as Real Steel of course (though it does actually head in a bleak direction like I mentioned I would have done after watching Real Steel!). The other one is Children of Men. Both are set in a bleak kind of run down future, but for their own reasons. Children of Men is bleak and run down because people just gave up because everyone is sterile. Definitely going out with a whimper there. Here stuff is more run down, but it is just that they both use conventional functional design for everything. Its cool.
The other great thing about the setting? Well it is a story that involves time travel* so we have a second even more future future that is referenced. We find out fuck all about this. Just some simple bits and pieces. There is Time Travel there. Some stuff happened. People still live and mostly get on as they always do. Tech is higher and tracking people around the world is much much easier. That is about the extent of it.
Watch this movie. It is Inception good and well worth your time and money.
*As opposed to a time travel story where it is the thing that drives the plot, in this it is merely a tool and is kind of set dressing.
-
Dragon Age: Rise of the Seeker - Okay this was laughable. It is pretty much generic anime Fantasy (so Lodoss War template) thrown in to Dragon Age Setting. Even more mediocre than it sounds.
-
Looper- I disagree with it being Inception level good myself. It was very goddamn good though, best film I've seen this year. There is a bunch of dystopian scifi stuff in there, but for the most part the movie is about the characters rather than the world. It manages to get across a horrifying level of violence without going into torture porn (Be here in three minutes. Man, that entire scene was just painful to watch but so good).
The entire core cast was very good, including a child actor who did a fantastic job. You can take issue with the pacing of the film, but I don't think I do. You just have to realize that the film is a character study rather than an action film and accept that all the scenes on the farm are building up to something important.
-
Yeah the child is good, I give more credit to the director though, but that might be me giving child actors too little credit.
It being marketed even suggesting it is an action flick is terrible.
I wouldn't say the movie is especially violent. It is brutal as hell, but there is very little on screen violence in the run time (noting that in comparison it is running at the same time as Dredd). There is a bit of gun violence, but by far the worst stuff happens off screen (which the movie is better for, the three scenes in particular that I like best have the violence happen off screen).
-
Speaking of Dredd, I was really impressed with Karl Urban. Dude was really evocative despite only showing his mouth. Say what you will about V for Vendetta (I know I have) but Hugo Weaving was similarly impressive.
-
Easy A - Hilarious, and entertaining. Emma Stone is a good actress in non-zombie movies. Just enjoyable overall.
Snow White and the Huntsman - Decent. Way longer than it needed to be, but overall enjoyable for the nearly 3 hours. However, the sound manager was terrible, as it was hard to hear a lot of the dialogue. Still, decent action.
Dark Shadows - Uh...ok. I don't think I've been this conflicted on a movie in ages. It...I don't know what to make of it. The acting was great, the scenery excellent, etc. But...the movie felt conflicted. It was a comedy...and a drama...and a horror movie...and...odd. I mean, good, in the grand scheme of things, but I feel like it should have focused more maybe one genre of sorts. Just felt a bit all over the place.
-
Expendables 2: Is Expendables 1 except they play it cheesy instead of badass. Plus Chuck Norris makes a tank explode by roundhouse kicking it.
ParaNorman: Was surprisingly good. I didn't like the art style but the story was much better than I was expecting. Takes a lot of the usual zombie tropes and flips them around in a new way.
Hotel Transylvania: Not treading any new waters in the story department like ParaNorman, but it's well-executed and entertaining throughout.
-
Just "Saw" Insidious.
I am.
NOT.
going to sleep tonight.
fuckfuckfuckfuck if I do it's because I passed out from exhaustion.
FUCK.
At least I got the Saw easter egg but oh my GOD why did I choose to watch a horror film by myself
my heart hurts.
-
Skyfall - So, I have a fair deal of knowledge on the cultural phenomenon of James Bond, but never watched any of his movies in its entirety. This was basically the break. I was expecting pretty much nothing (I'm pretty neutral on James Bond culture shenanigans, don't care about action movies, let alone blockbuster-friendly stuff), but the movie was quite a pleasant surprise. Good pacing, well-acted, well-directed and actually well-written, especially considering the constraints of the genre and the medium. The whole experience had a surprisingly personal feel, which ties into the themes of paradigm changes and generational transitions pretty nicely, and there were actual shadows of insight towards both James Bond and M (this I utterly didn't expect). Actually making use of Judi Dench's raw talent, in whatever manner the context actually allowed, was a complete breath of fresh air, for all that I felt Albert Finney was sorta underused even within his limited role. Of course, Daniel Craig is also pretty danged good. It was just a pretty tightly knitted experience given context, and the quality casting hands quite a paint of dignity to the whole movie (the actress who played Evelyn was also not bad at all. The designated Bondgirl was pretty much a waste of time). And, of course, Javier Bardem was responsible for some of the best lines and one of the best scenes. Not much to complain about at all. Except maybe Adele, but bloo bloo the bloo blooest. If you want to talk about embarrassing Bond themes, Madonna is available at the wax museum to your left.
EDIT: Ralph Fiennes and the kid who donned the Q moniker were both charming, but weren't used much. The final transition involving Fiennes' character was quite appropriate, though.
-
Have you seen Casino Royale? Or the beach scene at least? There is a reason Daniel Craig jokes about being the Bond Girl in that one.
-
I watched multiple beach scenes in Bond movies, for whatever it's worth. I can remember the one in Die Another Day (*facepalm.*) and the one in Dr. No. That beach scene in Skyfall -did- bring me back to Ursula, at least.
-
Watched Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. Is a Guy Ritchie film. Enjoyed it. Had trouble understanding half of what anyone was ever saying. I think Snatch is a better movie overall but this one was pretty good.
-
Snow watching movies, what is this madness.
I watched multiple beach scenes in Bond movies, for whatever it's worth. I can remember the one in Die Another Day (*facepalm.*) and the one in Dr. No. That beach scene in Skyfall -did- bring me back to Ursula, at least.
See Grefter: Casino Royale beach scene is Something for the Ladies (and presumably the Snows). In all seriousness, you should totally check out Casino Royale/Quantum of Solace if you liked Skyfall that much. I was very impressed by both.
-
I may end up doing just that. Skyfall definitely impressed me given context.
-
I liked Casino Royale but thought Quantum of Solace was lame; kinda interested to hear how Skyfall ends up compared to those.
-
I liked Casino Royale but thought Quantum of Solace was lame; kinda interested to hear how Skyfall ends up compared to those.
That. Apparently the development of Skyfall was closer to CR than QoS (that is to say, they wrote the script then shot the movie), so I'm hopeful.
-
No one cares about the plot. Is there A) Parkour again, B) Pistol Whipping and C) Both of the above in the first 10 minutes.
-
On the Waterfront- Golden Oldie here. Good stuffs. The kid killing all the birds bothered me though.
-
Watched in close succession, each for the first time...
Jesus Christ: Vampire Hunter
Dictator
Skyfall
JCVH is...impressively creative and random. Like...you basically can't predict what will happen next. At the same time the production values are very low--seems like it's just some students holding a video camera, and there's some pretty bad acting. There were also times when I wondered if the film was originally English or French because the lips didn't seem to sync up with the sound. Overall probably the movie I got the most enjoyment out of the three from watching.
Dictator was...ok. Had a lot of "I see what you're trying to do, and why it's supposed to be funny, but I'm not actually laughing." For a movie based around a lot of inappropriate shock value, though, it may have lost most of its bite by being watched immediately after JCVH, which made it seem pedestrian by comparison. Still had some memorable and funny moments.
Skyfall...the strange thing is I can't really point to anything the movie did wrong--from an amateur's attempt at an objective standpoint, everything seemed pretty good. Hell, even the programming had some research put into it. Actual line from the movie: "He's writing deliberately obfuscated code--security through obscurity"--which is real stuff that lots of people do. And yet, I just didn't feel engaged for most of the movie; I want to say maybe the pacing was a bit slow. Granted, I felt the movie picked up when they got to Skyfall. Although, there are some spoilers that...seem like they were supposed to have a big emotional effect on me and...kinda didn't. Dunno; I can see why it's getting lots of positive press, and I enjoyed the skyfall part of the movie, but large sections of the movie just didn't really click with me.
-
I liked Casino Royale but thought Quantum of Solace was lame; kinda interested to hear how Skyfall ends up compared to those.
Better than Quantom of Solace, pretty much objectively.
I definitely remember feeling more entertained during Casino Royale, but to be perfectly honest I don't actually remember CR's plot at all or what I felt made the movie entertaining. I will say that Skyfall arguably has more plot and character development than...all the other Bond movies I've seen put together.
-
Sooooo out of interest, what made you run in to JCVH? No one in the DL really bit much when I was trying to peddle it a few years ago. If you want more crazy silly nonsense there is Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers which I enjoyed just as much.
They are Z movies and know it. What is bad is either intended or not worried about because it fits the aesthetic.
Black Dynamite is a more deliberate version of the phenomenon in a different genre. Both are highly enjoyable.
Dredd - Looks like I forgot to say this was good. This was good.
-
Sooooo out of interest, what made you run in to JCVH? No one in the DL really bit much when I was trying to peddle it a few years ago.
Where have all our lesbians gone?
Anyway, saw Skyfall. Also walked out thinking, "Better than Quantum of Solace, not as good as Casino Royale." Villain's plan was a little more convoluted than it needed to be but you mostly don't care because he's Javier Bardem; there were a couple nods to earlier Bond movies that were a little too obvious as "Look, I'm being clever" moments (I blame John Logan scripting); and making a plot point of Bond aging out of the job is a dangerous thing to do when you're planning to make more movies with the same actor and same continuity. Granted, it is very easy to read that last one as just Bond being disenchanted, but it does draw more attention to the fact that Daniel Craig is quite visibly older.
Very good despite those minor complaints, though. Story was an effective examination of how badly things can go awry when the type of extreme personalities this work calls for are mishandled. The finale was great despite/because of shooting for smaller stakes than any other Bond movie. Visually, the movie does some excellent work. Everything in China was especially gorgeous.
Javier Bardem looks seriously weird as a blonde.
-
Sooooo out of interest, what made you run in to JCVH? No one in the DL really bit much when I was trying to peddle it a few years ago.
Where have all our lesbians gone?
I'm not sure CK counts as multiple people.
-
Saw "Wreck it Ralph". It is as good as you'd expect and is of course better if you're a gamer. "Toy Story but for video games" is a pretty accurate description. It evokes a lt of the same emotions and uses its set pieces similarly, though it's playing with a different actual theme. Instead of "inevitability of growing up and dying", it's more about acceptance of self. Pretty fitting and should really strike a chord with gamers who tend to feel ostracized and uncomfortable in their own skin as is. It certainly moved me and I'm probably the least suited to fit that description around here (well, except OK).
-
Although I think the best part of the movie is that they went full on balls-to-the-wall in making the main settings. Five seconds in Sugar Rush can make your teeth hurt.
-
Oh yeah. We saw it Wreck-It-Ralph on release day.
More or less a Pixar movie made by Disney. Worked out much better than the Disney movie made by Pixar.
-
Wreck-it Ralph: I wasn't really feeling the first third of the movie. But it picked up and made me laugh a lot and the scene where Ralph wrecks the car was really heartwrenching. Ralph versus Street Fighter bonus stage is hax.
-
Skyfall - Wow. There were a lot of cool movies this year, but I think this one really takes the cake for me. Character development? Plot that makes sense? In my James Bond film? Yep. All that and some nice symbolism and finishing touches really does make Skyfall probably the best of the Bond films I've seen (just starting from Goldeneye). Although its a James Bond film, there's also a lot of emphasis on M, which is cool because Judi Dench was pretty underused for most of Brosnan era Bond and she's awesome when she's on screen. This was not only a nice transition into the complete new Bond era (basically with all new actors) but it made for Bond film that had its share of action along with giving personalities to everyone. Just awesome stuff.
-
Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 2: It starts as your standard Twilight movie. Lots of longing looks,
Kristin Stewart Bella trying to pretend she's human. Awkward sex scene that you just wish would end faster because they're not showing anything but closeups of elbows.
And then...
HOLY FUCK WHAT DID THEY DO TO TWILIGHT THIS IS CRAZY I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DID THIS I...
Oh. OH. Well played film, well played.
So yeah if you're vaguely interested in Twilight, see it. If not don't.
-
TWILIGHT ...
Well played ...
You know I love you man, but seriously.
(http://members.optusnet.com.au/grefter/eyebrow.jpg)
I am assuming this is a relative thing? Like the "twist" is just so out of left field that it feels crazy as fuck?
-
Apparently it is a top contender for Troll of the Year.
So is this baby as creepy as advertised?
-
*Googles spoiler.*
That sounds stupid as fuck. I know you have no standards at all bro but jesus fuck dude.
-
Yeah it's definitely a massive troll to the fans. You have to remember the movies aren't written by Stephanie Meyer. She's not clever enough to come up with something like that.
And no, the baby isn't creepy at all, rather cute actually. It was much weirder-looking in the book.
-
Skyfall- Felt like seeing a movie, since I have a pile of free passes. I've heard the most good things about this as anything else I wanted to see that's out. Awesome stuff. Haven't seen any of the other Craig films, but I will endeavor to do so now. A black Money Penny? I guess it worked in Blazing Saddles...
-
The "twist" sounds like the kind of thing where you download or rent the DVD so you can skip straight to that part, but I'm not going to lie, the combination of "Twilight" and "multiple onscreen decapitations" is not without its charm.
-
Rise of the Planet of the Apes: this movie is so much better than it has any right or need to be. Great directing and Andy Serkis is basically the god of motion capture at this point. Wasn't a big fan of the blatant sequel-baitness of the ending, but it's not a fatal flaw by any means.
-
Skyfall - MORE LIKE SKYFAP. 10/10. Would watch Snow the Gay James Bond in a period piece set in Hong Kong between 1986 and 1997. Series will end with him tortured and trying to commit suicide. 20/10.
-
Skyfall - MORE LIKE SKYFAP. 10/10. Would watch Snow the Gay James Bond in a period piece set in Hong Kong between 1986 and 1997.
You're too kind.
-
You should watch Skyfall. Some of it is the delivery, but Javier Bardem does have some of your cadence of speech (in English to be fair) in his delivery. Mostly when you are carefully considering your phrasing. Other times it is just pure Snow (Especially when he is talking to or about Judi Dench). He also has similar gestures and body language. It is a little uncanny.
-
I -have- watched Skyfall. And I have to re-emphasize what I just said anyway, because Javier Bardem and Javier Bardem in that movie, mind-rusting blonde wig notwithstanding. I'm not sure I can see the resemblance, but I certainly don't pay much attention to how my language comes across non-verbally.
-
Well then you need to watch it again and remember some lines and work them into your dialect.
-
If you wore the Draco Malfoy wig it'd be totes capital too.
-
I think you look better as a brunette.
-
Javier Bardem looks better as a brunette too.
-
This is not a new movie, but it is my official "hey, it's Christmas" movie, and I've broken it out for the first watch of the season. It is by far my favorite.
Love, Actually.
SHUT UP. I'm allowed to like chick flicks.
-
CHICK FLICKITY FLICK FLICK
Well, if I told Idun she was allowed to be girly, who am I to tell you otherwise. At least Love, Actually is pretty good!
-
Needs more Princess Bride all up ins.
-
Wreck-It Ralph- Great movie. They took what is a pretty gratuitous concept and worked it out fantastically. Setup is great, just the transition from there to Sugar Rush feels a bit rushed but getting to it quickly was worth it. They used the classic characters in clever ways as well.
Pretty much all the original characters were great. Vanellope was adorable. Villain was hilarious. Sour Bill is awesome. I should avatar him.
My one problem with the movie is that Jack McBrayer (Felix Fixit) is playing Kenneth, pretty much. A bit distracting, since it... I dunno. Hard to tell if the character was crafted to him or he just decided to go that route. It sort of fits but is also sort of just... meh. Also kinda iffy on Jane Lynch's voice (in general) but it fit the role.
Fuck it. Time to go to Tappers.
-
Dead Poets Society: Rewatched for the first time since I was in high school. Still an amazing film, perhaps moreso than the first few times I watched it as a kid. Do highschoolers count as kids now? They certainly count as people who did not appreciate this film enough, that's for damn sure.
Twilight: Gave up watching it when the rifftrax mp3 wouldn't sync up with the film. This is the lovestory of our age, everyone, and like everything else CaptainK likes, it is goddamn terrible.
-
It amazes me you even bothered, rifftrax or not.
-
Expendables 2: So...the first was disappointing, being a movie that tried to have actual plot, characterization, and make the characters look like "Yeah, we're awesome" and all that, and had freaking ERIC ROBERTS as a villain against an all-star action movie cast...
...this movie is loaded with silly one liners, gives Bruce Willis and Arnold actual roles (if still overall minor), a female who actually compliments action scenes as opposed to sitting on the sidelines, CHUCK NORRIS appearing to the song from The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, and Van Dam as the villain, which is far more acceptable!
This is what the first movie should have been. It's self aware, campy, plot is basically just there for a vehicle of "Go here for next action scene" and basically embraces the spirit of an action movie. THIS is what I was expecting; a movie that is nothing but embracing all the Action Movie Cliches.
-
It amazes me you even bothered, rifftrax or not.
The things you'll do when someone else is choosing the film.
-
Lincoln: The acting was good, but I didn't realize going in that this was an alternate reality piece. I mean, there wasn't a single vampire in the movie!
.
.
.
Seriously though, I don't really like historical movies because there's no suspense. You already know the North won the war and that the thirteenth amendment passed, so it just kind of goes through the motions. The acting was very good. Sally Field will be a serious contender for the Oscar this year.
-
Seriously though, I don't really like historical movies because there's no suspense. You already know the North won the war and that the thirteenth amendment passed, so it just kind of goes through the motions. The acting was very good. Sally Field will be a serious contender for the Oscar this year.
Titanic was bad because you know the boat's going to sink. James Bond was bad because you know James Bond lives. Does Kevin Bacon escape from LA? The answer is yes it is the name of the film.
-
Ah, but Kevin Bacon *didn't* escape from LA. He wasn't even in that movie, therefore he must have already died.
-
Nobody escaped from L.A. because there was no such movie. There was only Escape From New York.
-
<Ciddy> I am become Ciddy-kins, retconner of worlds.
-
WATCH LOOPER WATCH LOOPER WATCH LOOPER WATCH LOOPER WATCH LOOPER WATCH LOOPER
-
The Hobbit: in sum: good!
The beginning at Bag End is particularly good. I was really hoping the song the dwarves sing about trashing Bilbo's house would make it in. It's in, and it's better than I could have hoped. The shot selection does a great job of playing up Bilbo's exasperation and the humor of the whole thing. It's delightful, probably the best sequence Peter Jackson's ever directed.
Most of the movie grounds the grandiose setting with humor, to great effect. If you're not a fan of entertaining but superfluous action sequences, though, the movie will begin to drag somewhere in the mines. Movie reminded me of the island in King Kong in that respect.
Two gripes: the LotR victory lap material was a bit forced, and Thorin was miscast, or if not miscast needed to be told to look more regal and less surly more often.
-
I was really hoping the song the dwarves sing about trashing Bilbo's house would make it in. It's in, and it's better than I could have hoped.
yessss
Is the Gollum sequence good? That was pretty easily my favourite part of the book.
-
It was ok, but I thought the movie's take on the scene was too light - both figuratively and literally. Gollum is delightfully creepy and mercurial, but the riddle contest never feels like a life and death affair.
-
Conan the Barbarian (v.1982)- So I'd never seen this. It's... I hesitate to say good exactly. But this movie really oozes love from it. The guys writing this and doing the sets and action and music and all that wanted more than anything to make a grand adventure that would be remembered for years to come. And obviously they succeeded there. But yeah, despite being such a product of its time the care taken with things really gives it a boost.
-
I wouldn't hesitate to call it good. It knows exactly what it wants to be and accomplishes that with aplomb. Doesn't make Arnold talk any more than is really necessary and has just enough dramatic weight to not be pure, brain-dead spectacle. The music in particular is possibly the most effective soundtrack I've heard in a movie (it's that or Wrath of Khan).
Admittedly music goes much further towards making a piece of entertainment work for me than it probably should.
-
<Ciddy> Music nerds are the best nerds.
-
The Wind that Shakes the Barley - 4/5. Great film about the Irish War of Independence and its Civil War. Also best watched after Hunger, a film I saw quite some time ago now.
Speaking of---
CT
when you see this, you got any movie suggestions for Scotland cinema?
-
Skyfall- So like... what were they going for with the title drop in the second half. That is a fucking weird place to take a goddamned bond movie. I think there's a joke here I'm not in on.
Rest is pretty great, last half has moments, just... weird man.
-
Skyfall- So like... what were they going for with the title drop in the second half. That is a fucking weird place to take a goddamned bond movie. I think there's a joke here I'm not in on.
I'm pretty sure the joke is making people think about it.
-
Les Mis- That youtube commenter was right. Just give Anne Hathaway the Oscar now.
-
Wooh! Glad there is great feedback. Going to see it this weekend with the Hobbit!
(-=
I love the new roles that Hathaway plays these days.
Magic Mike - 3/5. Sexy, sexy, sexy. Abrupt end? Bah. Movie where I finally like McConaughey? (SP, wtfever, I don't remember actor names...)
Avengers - 4/5. Funny, funny, liked intermittent parodies... SMASH.
Batman Rises - 3/5. Boring. Bane, liked. Series of events at the end happened way too quickly. Uprising in the city almost unbelievable until I remember them playing on Gotham's civil issues. Mmm, eh. I would have given it less of a score had I not enjoyed Alfred so much.
-
Les Mis - I did not know I was going to make a close study of everyone's pores. Also, it was very true to 19th century France -- everyone was sweating all the time!
Overall, pretty great. Definitely not a movie I should have seen on Christmas Day because, well, it's fucking depressing.
Thenadiers were a much needed source of levity, and well cast. I approved of most of the casting, for that matter. Kept pretty true to the musical, but made a few changes to favor the movie format that called upon some book material. Only real downside was, sadly enough, the opening number: the sound mixing favored the landscape over the singers, and it took some of the oompf out of the performance.
-
Hey, Les Mis is a great Christmas movie! It's all about the fundamental nobility of the human spirit and the power of love and community.
See, no matter what indignities life might heap upon the characters, being shown any real measure of kindness and dignity burns straight through the cynicism and awakens altruism, love, a desire to change the world for the better. But it's important to remember you have to bring others into your community, not just give them a drive-by kindness. Without a sense of worth and belonging, even the most dedicated among us can fall into despair.
Be with those you love. Bring those who are needy to you that you might show them kindness. Judge a man not by his actions, but by simple virtue of his humanity and show all people the same respect and love you'd give your dearest brother.
Viva la France.
Clearly the world did end on Friday. It has transformed into something far stranger and more terrifying.
-
Vive.
-
Be with those you love. Bring those who are needy to you that you might show them kindness. Judge a man not by his actions, but by simple virtue of his humanity and show all people the same respect and love you'd give your dearest brother.
And, in the end, it won't matter and you'll probably die unloved and a failure.
-
In the end the only one that will love you is yourself. That is why I intend do go out during a drug fuelled bout of auto-erotic asphyxiation.
-
The truest christmas statement of all, yes.
-
GI Joe: Rise of Cobra:
...no, I don't know why I watched this. Probably because I never saw it, it was on TV, and "commercial free" (which was true) and I said "what the hell, how bad can it be?"
...it's bad. It's not even fun to make fun of, it's just dull, predictable (outside of Disney deathing the Black Guy Best Friend instead of killing him off straight up), and I can see how true fans of GI Joe must have felt betrayed by this movie.
At least Transformers had giant robots that turned into stuff, blowing up vehicles; GI Joe didn't even have that much!
-
The Dark Knight Rises: That might be one of the most ambitious movies I've ever seen. It falls far short of what it tries to do, but is still a good movie, and sometimes ambition is a virtue in itself. I mean, yes there are a few jarring continuity issues and the third-act twist is predictable and the ending twist is heavy-handed and (mostly) dumb - I liked JGL taking over as Batman, although I say he should be Azrael instead of Robin, come on it's already Knightfall - but it's Dark Knight Returns and Knightfall and No Man's Land, and all the storylines are woven together into a narrative whole without feeling like any of them got short shrift, even if the plot doesn't make much sense in some areas. Plus, while the fight scenes weren't especially good, they also weren't filmed in Bourne-O-Vision anymore, which is a massive improvement.
Oh, yeah. Bane. The character was....fine, I guess, although his comic self has potential they just kind of tossed away in favor of the third-act twist. More importantly, his voice. I could have dealt with him being muffled and growly. That would be okay. He sounded like Darth Connery.
-
Jarring as it is, there is nothing wrong with Darth Connery
-
Darth Connery was exactly why I liked Bane in the movie.
-
If nothing else, we can all agree that it's way way better than this version of Bane:
(http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080902212240/batman/images/b/b4/BaneJS.jpg)
-
Also gave us this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTYmuHatJ14
-
The Hobbit: was good. I liked it better than I expected to, and I can now stomach the idea of it being split into three movies (which I found an abhorrent concept before).
As for the new super-fps thing, for the most part it isn't noticeable. However the fight against the goblins is extremely video-gamey in appearance. And it's painfully obvious that the eagle talon picking up Thorin is made of cloth.
The movie also had Rock-em Sock-em Stone Giants.
In trailer news, someone loves Japan so much they made a fanfic of Godzilla vs Robotech: http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2197006105/
-
Resident Evil Retribution: Really, really, really bad movie, bad action scenes, too many characters (hinting already at a sequel with everyone there---!!!), very bad camera panning and slow motion, pretty bad music, pretty dumb ending, pretty boring last battle. But Alice did this all in wedge heels. 1/5.
Snow White and the Huntsman --- Chris Hemsworth, and Charlize Theron. Much, much better than RER. I am quite happy that Kristen Stewart had as few lines as possible. Girl looks a lot better with black hair and additional weave for some more volume though. So, I thought the movie had some very -good- moments, but the majority of it was just -okay- moments; triangle love plot seemed fairly transplanted considering producers almost always hype a love arc because love arcs are love arcs and capture attention because everyone is lonely, unhappy or at the moment dissatisfied with their partner.... [/needless rant] It's getting almost to RPGlol territory. Very beautiful movie though (3D graphx notwithstanding), and Theron's wardrobe is to kill for. Enjoyed it, esp. after RER.
Sherlock Holmes 2 - not done with this yet. It's funny, but I'm starting to like BBC's Sherlock with Benedict Cumberbatch than RDJ. Not finished with the movie yet! Just saw Moriarty fail.
-
ParaNorman: Not bad, but not nearly as good as the job the same crew did with Coraline. Starts really slow and the humor is obvious, but the plot twists are reasonably creative and the final "battle" (of sorts) is really interesting visually. Turns out claymation lightning is neat!
-
The Hobbit - Decent, very nice looking, at times quite funny, a little on the plotless side compared to the other three movies, but still a fun watch.
-
Decent is pretty much my reaction to The Hobbit. Has its moments but nothing to convince me it really needed to be three movies. For a movie called "The Hobbit," there do seem to be some long stretches in which there is in fact no hobbit on the screen. I think this is the principal problem. Most of this is material that's invented for the movie and/or heavily embellished from the book, and it constitutes the slowest parts of the film. Providing an adversary for Thorin doesn't really help much of anything. Big mean jerk wants revenge on big mean jerk. Yawn. Also yawn to wizards sitting around talking to each other about necrodude. Cut all this stuff and condense it to one, maybe two movies, massive improvement. Jackson being self-indulgement, studio not stopping him because it'll make bank anyway. Oh well. Fun enough for one viewing, can't see myself wanting to see it again though.
Movie mostly looked fine, but yeah, giant eagles were glaringly obvious as an "Oh, that's a special effect" moment.
Oh, and the songs that made it it into the movie were shockingly effective.
-
Weirdly enough, I suspect the studio might have egged Jackson on, so both deserve the blame. LOTR is now a franchise, thus it's bookable money, thus even if all 3 films turn out mediocre loyalists will show up and see them anyway, thus 3x the cash. The Matrix Revolutions was a huge disappointment critically and at the box office, but it still made money anyway, so the studio probably said "3 movies? Score, they can even suck and we'll be good."
-
Madagascar 3.
I liked every single one of them. This one adds demonic French woman solo'ing Piaf & afros. Yes.
-
Les Mis - 5/5.
Short preface: I like musicals, operas, live plays, etc.
Jean Valjean: Because I am me, I did not recognize that Hugh Jackman played this role until the final, unfurled and large-chop scene towards the end. Needless to say, he captured Valjean's spirit. I am somewhat upset at the pacing of several scenes regarding his characterization: for example, they hastened part of interaction with Fantine before Javert enters, the court scene definitely could have used two or three more minutes for the sake of clarification behind Champmathieu -- since these are the two fundamental scenes they chose to keep, they should have minimalized a few acts: Cosette's yearning for Marius & the swift debate between Marius & Javert's first solo.
Anne Hathaway, expected a great performance. She's chosen very good roles, and has done nothing but act well since.
Javert was on point, and Seyfried -almost- escaped me, because I felt she was ill-picked. Then I remembered the convent the movie/musical ignored, and decided that her voice fit teen Cosette to a t.
Was very pleased with myself; I caught several bloopers. I think they call that something specific in movies. Anyway, M. Lemaire ce n'est pas Madeleine dans le musical; Hathaway, sa visage change entre deux scenes; plus, Valjean's visage d'apres la scene d'egout fait le meme-chose; Valjean's no. change par le fin du premier scene avec Javert, d'avant il recontre Cosette.
Music could have been better in parts; but all-in-all, me loves it long time. Definitely adds a little balance to all these plays from Commedia dell'Arte ) :
Edit* EDIT* So I also just thought about Eponine's amazing fucking corset. This reminds me over and over that I need to be properly fitted for one.
-
Brave- zzzzz.
I'm honestly with internet consensus- I think they secretly swapped the credits between this and Wreck-It Ralph. Brave is a middle-of-the-road Disney with Princess affair, Wreck-It Ralph is an emotional, slightly cheesy flick that obviously had a lot of love put into it, Pixar's usual MO.
-
Fuck. I just got Brave on redbox. ._.
-
I thought Brave was a solid movie, excellent in places. It does creepy atmosphere really well.
-
Brave was gorgeous, and not bad. But it felt much more like a standard Disney Princess flick than a heart-warming character special by Pixar.
-
Crisis on Two Earths: Didn't know this movie was made based on a canned idea for the bridging of the finale of Justice League and the beginning of Justice League Unlimited, as well as this was the original idea that eventually spawned the Justice Lords stuff! That's not largely relevant however...
What is relevant is that this is a fun flick. Just a lot of little "ok, writers clearly just having fun" moments, like Wonder Woman vs. Bear (not saying what it is for those actually curious), as well just running with fun concepts, just playing with the "Everything about Heroes and Villains are backwards in this world...EVERYTHING!"
Superman vs. The Elite: Superman vs. the 90s, and is fun as a result. That is all.
-
Wait, they made Kingdom Come into a movie?!
*research*
Oh. There was another Superman vs The 90s story.
-
Brave - I don't know what to say, honestly. It wasn't a bad movie, it wasn't a great movie, but it got its point across pretty well... Mm, I really thought the artistry was great: beautiful rendering of foliage in dark & light scenes, etc. Her naps of hair are great (& real to boot - everyone supposedly has different textures in different spots w/o alterations); animation team did great on the gestures and texture!
I suppose I just couldn't get into Merida's character because I am so used to Merida's character in films, she was pretty boring. Father was -there-; I suppose the parts I liked most was her mother's becoming scenes... really thought about Land Before Time in the final scene, which is awkward since they were dinosaurs, and it was.. Oh, it -was- the mother, not the grandmother? I don't know, I don't Google everything I say. Someone can correct me.
The Campaign - funny movie. Very good scenes. Not a CF fan, but I loved his part in the campaign office. I am a Marty fan, because I know several Marty's of the south. Find the irony of this being in North Carolina -hilarious-. Wonder how far this humor gets in telling real people that they're stupid. . .
-
Wait, they made Kingdom Come into a movie?!
*research*
Oh. There was another Superman vs The 90s story.
From what I understand, Kingdom Come is more "the 90s vs. Itself"
-
Anyone seen Django Unchained? I don't plan on seeing it, no, not because I'm black and have angst towards Tarantino. His movies are generally boring to me - great characters, great dialogue, bad pacing, bad shots, bad panning. . .
Just did a quick google, and of course there is hooplah over the film, n word, slavery, and for some fucking odd reason - Spike Lee. He is a spitting image of the older generation of living blacks that simply see the word as disrespectful -- not because a white man uses it, but because it too often defines black characters and types in films. (Sidenote next to this sidenote: hope someone with patience actually writes on this topic of the generational divide between blacks on popular media)
I'll see it when I don't have to pay for it, but if someone has had a positive experience, that only encourages me to see it sooner. It's got good ratings at least, but so do most of his movies that I just can't stand watching. He should really write books, or get into it. Not sure it translates that easily, but it's just a suggestion.
-
Wait, they made Kingdom Come into a movie?!
*research*
Oh. There was another Superman vs The 90s story.
Kingdom Come is Superman vs. the Rob Liefeld 90s. What's so Funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way? is Superman vs. the Warren Ellis 90s.
-
If you don't like Tarantino movies as a rule I wouldn't bother myself. I have only heard good things from the sources I trust (that like Tarantino movies).
I will be watching it when it comes out down here and let you know I guess.
Just go watch Looper instead or something.
-
Just go watch Looper instead or something.
If time is a factor, watch the short version. (http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6853540/looper-has-sex-with-himself)
-
Django was a fun movie, but I think the most fun I got out of this experience was watching my girlfriend's expressions.
You see, she really does not like graphic movies. Scary movies and anything with gore and blood aren't really her style.
So when she told me she wanted to watch this film, I smiled in my pants.
When we sat down in the theater, I whispered in her ear, "You do realize this film is going to be filled with blood and guts right?"
Her eyes widened, and after the initial scene I could hardly contain my laughter. I think she had her hands covering her eyes for most of the film.
Good times.
-
The Last Stand: He's back.
-
Rise of the Guardians: Better than I was expecting. Nice feel-good movie.
-
Hansel and Gretal: With Hunters: Bwhahahaha, this was great.
-
Hansel and Gretal was so bad that it was almost good. The cast (Especially Famke Janssen) is chewing scenery so hard and fast that you barely notice how bad the plot is. Said plot is literally every Hollywood film stereotype rolled into one.
That said, any film that has a holy water blessed machine gun mowing down witches is an entertaining film.
-
I've now seen The Hobbit in IMAX 3D twice, and have nothing much to say about it.
I think that says about enough.
(Oh. Except that I still like Martin Freeman no matter what.)
-
I really should post here more often...
Anyway, most of the time, I don't see movies I want to see, and get stuck seeing ones I have no desire to see...can't remember them all, but...
How to Train Your Dragon - Good overall. Nice kids movie, and I like how there's a consequence at the end for the hero. Makes it realistic.
Couples Retreat - Just...it's exactly what you'd expect. The actors feel kind of wasted (seriously, Steve Carrell, Tommy Lee Jones...really feel like they could have done a lot more). It's...not bad, but it's going to go exactly the way you think it will.
Birdemic - Hahahahahaha oh god this was awesomely awful.
Sex and the City - Like an extended episode of the show. Which means it's good. But...really, a movie? Definitely feels like it was planned for the series finale, but just got made into a movie instead for more money.
Sex and the City 2 - Annnnnnnnnddddd this is why you don't go beyond the series finale (i.e., the first movie). Just stretched way beyond what it should have been, and stupid, and I can definitely see why it was considered offensive at some points. Also, Samantha is a terrible person and I wish she would have died of breast cancer (damnit, why couldn't if have been T4N3M1?! Stupid lucky bitch..). Even the movie's cover poster looks stupid.
Les Miserables - Holy shit. Uh...wow. This is probably the best adaptation of a musical to the movies I have ever seen...and...I honestly think it may be better. It is excellent. All the actors do great (seriously, BORAT can SING!?) - none of them are voice trained, but I think that helps - a few imperfections in the voices make the song so much more meaningful. Some songs are cut (Dog Eat Dog...but who the fuck cares), some are moved around (I Dreamed a Dream and Do You Hear the People Sing come later) and some are shorted (Turning and Empty Chairs are combined into a song shorter than either of them originally were), but all of it WORKS. My only real complaint is that there are a lot of close-ups. Like, a lot - several scenes and songs (i.e., What Have I Done) are entirely close-ups. It's not even a major complaint - it really lets you see the emotion better - but it would have been nice to see a bit more of the scenery (which is excellent). Also, the title is still mis-leading - Anne Hathaway is miserable, but she bisexual at best. Seriously, though, see this movie. It is excellent, especially if you like theatre like me.
Eat, Pray, Love - I've talked about this before, but I saw it playing on TV the other day, and feel it needs to be re-iterated again: it sucks ass. Cracked's Photoplasty says it best: http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_370_tiny-changes-that-would-have-saved-terrible-movies_p21/#3
Really looking to go see Warm Bodies this weekend, and still need to see Wreck-it-Ralph
-
Resident Evil Degenration (...I think it's this one? damn movies and their subtitles): Saw this because it came with RE6, which I was getting rid of and I want full money's worth!
Movie is basically just Claire finds herself in a zombie outbreak in an Airport, government sends SWAT team to deal with it and a SECRET SPECIAL AGENT on top of that, who of course is Leon S. Kennedy because IT'S LEON DON'T ARGUE, then they proceed to a Pharmaceutical company where a giant monstrosity appears because they need a final boss.
...throughout the entire movie, I was basically asking "So...why wasn't this turned into a game?" In hindsight, I can see; the plot makes too much sense for an RE game. Guy comes up with Vaccine to stop the T-Virus, but then finds a way to make a huge profit off it by selling it to other countries, and helping causing outbreaks. He uses some other terrorist dude to hide this fact. Said dude uses G-Virus that they had in said company because they need a final boss.
It's mindless entertainment, nonetheless, and somehow more relevant in the continuity than RE3...not that this is hard. That said, a movie I could have not seen and not cared about missing anything, but damn it, I got it in the package so I'm making use of it! That's more than can be said about my free FF7 Advent Children UMD that came with Dissidia <_<
-
I heard Leon was written wildly different from RE4 for no good reason. It wouldn't surprise me?
-
I heard Leon was written wildly different from RE4 for no good reason. It wouldn't surprise me?
He doesn't crack jokes because there's no Spanish napoleon to laugh at.
-
Yeah, sadly Leon is played straight as basically just "Hard Ass Super Special Awesome Agent Dude" and not much else. this is still more personality than you get out of Chris Redfield on average though...
I guess one thing the movie did right was present Claire as a competent character while not being a bitch about it either, so...props to that?
-
I don't actually know, it's just something I heard on the internet?
I do like that Chris has more of a personality in MvC3 than he does anything else though.
-
The Maltese Falcon: Caught this, haven't seen it before. Fantastic movie. The Big Lebowski cribs sooooo much from it it's not even funny. Still, good stuff.
-
Oscar Animated Shorts: "Adam and Dog" or "Paperman" are pretty clearly going to be the winners. What the fuck "Fresh Guacamole" is doing in there is another question.
-
Clerks: Finally saw this after putting it off for...well, too long!
Not much to say about the movie other than Dante is a douche, and Randal is a total waste of human life.
-
Beautiful Creatures: Very good. The young male lead is quite charming; I think we'll be seeing a lot more of him in the future. Haven't read the book but apparently it's quite a bit different.
-
Clerks: Finally saw this after putting it off for...well, too long!
Not much to say about the movie other than Dante is a douche, and Randal is a total waste of human life.
Congratulations for understanding the basic thrust of the film.
-
Oh, I'm totally aware that's literally all there is to the movie, I just felt like I had to say SOMETHING other than "I saw Clerks".
-
Argo - Wow, quite solid. I really liked how minimalistic both the storytelling and tension building were throughout the movie, forsaking melodrama for a visible sense of anguish and helplessness, which just grow with how outlandish the premise is. A lot of emotion can be recognized throughout the script, but it's never thrown in your face. The subtle dread and animosity seeping through every minute of the screenplay pretty much make the story, which also avoids a lot of the excesses I usually attribute to this kind of film. All in all, this is atypically elegant for Hollywood standards, and definitely worth watching. Plus, it has John Goodman and Alan Arkin being John Goodman and Alan Arkin, which is almost worth the ticket price alone.
(P.S.: Ben Affleck looks far better than he has any right to in '70s fashion.)
-
The Cabin in the Woods: WELCOME TO 2012, LOLOLOL
So yeah. It was an interesting concept, and ... well, yeah. That's about it. I watched the whole thing, curious to see how it would end, but there was never really any suspense. Or horror, for that matter. I had no idea what the "twist" of the movie was (other than that it had a twist), but it was not subtle. I am sure it has a lot of nuance a la Joss Whedon's masterful hand of characterization and pop culture analysis, but whatever.
Entertaining, and I can definitely see why it got 90%+ from the critics but only ~70% from the audience. I'm not entirely sure who it was targeting, frankly. It feels like a student project with a Hollywood budget.
-
I'm not entirely sure who it was targeting, frankly. It feels like a student project with a Hollywood budget.
(http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=1964;type=avatar)
This guy (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=20)
-
Dredd: Very solid. Urban is great at dissolving into a role, as usual, and the gunfights were really well done. The story was surprisingly... small, I guess is the word. It could have been adapted from a filler arc of the comics. Not a bad thing, but it sticks out. The 3D wasn't too annoying, and the last bit, where a villain's head gets crushed RIGHT AT YOU, is just hilarious.
-
So a common thing I have heard said about it that I am interested in your take on.
"It feels like it could be the pilot for a TV series" or "It is setting itself up perfectly for sequels without sequel baiting".
I myself loved Dredd obviously and will buy when it hits stores here.
-
I can see it, but without that opening "here's how Megacity One works" scene, the entire thing is self-contained in the extreme. It could be a TV pilot for the adventures of Dredd and Anderson, but it could also be a mid-season episode with Anderson as a one-off guest star.
-
Anderson as the opening audience surrogate is the normal spin (and clearly what she is in the movie) and common setup for TV shows.
But yeah all stems from it being day in the life sort of movie, feels like filler arc of comics, feels like small start up to bigger ongoing story of a TV show or series of movies. Really just pinpoints to it being a good cheap way to do a movie while making it feel true to its roots.
Also I am TOTALLY fine with it being a filler Dredd comic, those tend to be the better ones from my incredibly limited experience. Dredd in full overarching plot is a bit too WH40K for my taste (the 90s as fuck chainswords GRIMDARK component WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO LOSE EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE bits) where filler stuff is more future dystopian police procedural where it works best. The best part of Dredd isn't when big things happen, but the same shit that happened today is going to happen tomorrow. That is really what makes for good Dystopia, not ROMG THERE IS NUKES IN THE EVERYWHERE AND INTERDIMENSIONAL ZOMBIE VAMPIRES.
-
I'm not entirely sure who it was targeting, frankly. It feels like a student project with a Hollywood budget.
(http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=1964;type=avatar)
This guy (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=20)
Damn right.
Enjoyment of Cabin in the Woods in proportional to how many horror movies you've watched, pretty much. It IS more of a comedy than a horror film (With stuff like Unicorn death, can you REALLY argue otherwise?). The way it turns the genre on its head is why you watch it.
EDIT: Not to mention the Betrayal at the House on the Hill setup.
-
It still would have been better if it were 15 seconds shorter. The last 15 seconds absolves everyone of all guilt.
Anyway, I too saw Dredd because they talked it up on the Warrock and Ajax podcast. It was pretty good, except that I wasn't clear for a while whether the evil Judges were actual Judges or some hired guns who were in disguise. I mean, I got it eventually, but it could have been clearer a little sooner. Most of the 3D stuff wasn't too noticable except for a couple of occasions that I found kind of eye-rolling.
Urban was great, but Urban is pretty much great at everything.
You know what it needed though is Rob Schneider. For reals.
-
It could have used a recycled food joke yeah.
Rob your continued good taste should really stop surprising me like it does. It is never "oh man Rob likes that????"; but "Oh man someone else likes that???? Oh of course, it is Rob."
-
The recycled food joke from the original was actually the only time the movie made me laugh intentionally.
-
I quote it often. Laaawwwwwwwwwwwww gets a laugh out of me though.
-
I used to lay sick burns on that movie but after this (http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/12/10/comicsalliance-reviews-judge-dredd-1995-part-two/) review's description of him stealing that motorcycle I realize that there's literally never going to be a better insult to it:
Anyway, after Stallone makes a majestic, slow-motion leap down a flight of eight stairs - hilarious - he hops on the prototype flying Lawmaster and punches it in the screen until it works. This is how he makes his escape. I refuse to believe this was actually written as filmed in a script, as no one would write down a sequence of events this stupid
-
I would believe it, as an adaptation of how 90s movie studios saw 90s comics, Stallone's Dredd is pitch perfect
-
That reminds me, tip of the hat to the writer(s) for including the "betray the law" line.
-
More movies!
Looper: Good movie with a great cast and concept, but the pacing sadly turns to crap midway through. You have this really neat premise, you have JGL and Bruce Willis being awesome at each other, you have a script that takes some fairly interesting stabs at the continuity of self, and I'm supposed to care about the creepy kid and his dumbass mom for a quarter of the movie? Sure you don't want to think that through again? It comes together pretty well in the ending, but oy. Lost potential.
(Edit: responding to Gref from back when the movie was in theaters, Cid and Sarah definitely serve a purpose, but building up to it doesn't require nearly as much screentime as they got. It breaks up the flow of the movie and feels like it takes away the opportunity to explore its other themes more thoroughly, or at least to put Joe and Joe in a room together again.)
The Hobbit: Speaking of pacing issues! The movie being long as hell works to its benefit most of the way - including literally everydamnthing from the book and most of the appendices makes for a pretty damn rich world, if nothing else, but when it drags, it drags. The escape from the goblins needed to be about half as long as it was, and the whole orc battle felt totally unnecessary so soon after. Really, Riddles in the Dark should have been the climax. (Gollum was awesome, obviously. Loved the dwarfs, too. And honestly the whole movie would have been worth it just to see Gandalf's guilty-puppy expression in the White Council scene)
Also, after the LOTR films did such a great job with costumes and prosthetics, it's a shame to see them going all-CGI for the villains this time around. I mean, Smaug's not a surprise, but the orcs and goblins and whatnot.
-
If you didn't have the establishing time with JGL's character interacting, would you have bought the ending? Would you have bought the character arc he goes through? There is definitely some setting porn they could have explored and it would have been incredibly tempting to do so. A huge part of why I called it the year's Inception was because like Inception it was a Sci Fi movie that established a setting and then ran with a story instead of bogging itself down with minutia of the universe (you can see this as a Thing Grefter Loves in Children of Men also).
I do agree the pacing is all over the shop (I really need to rewatch it), but my memory of it is that it isn't so bad but much more that it is a very different story than you expect them to tell. The last story about a time traveling hitman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Terminator) that got that kind of budget was significantly different for instance. You are watching it far enough out from release though that you definitely aren't walking in expecting the action movie the trailers were pushing it as so eh. Need to review.
-
Oh, yeah, the parallels to Inception are pretty strong. Both come up with settings that could support high-concept stories, but use them to tell a story in that setting instead of the story of that setting. (Children of Men does this less, but do not imagine this is a bad thing because I do not say bad things about Children of Men. It is not done.) They also subvert the general expectation that a SF movie will have laser guns or whatever, and rest their action scenes on guys shooting each other with regular bullets.
Anyway, yeah, I think I would have bought the ending without as much time on the farm. It might not have been the same exact arc, but there were other ways to get him to that place; bear in mind that he literally spends two-thirds of the movie trying to kill himself. I figured that's what Johnson was going for at first - having Young Joe finally accept that he and Old Joe ARE the same person, that he can't kill him without killing himself no matter what. I do buy the ending as-is, don't get me wrong - but I still would have bought it if 10 or 15 minutes of the lead-in had been replaced with those deleted scenes of Abe and Kid Blue, with another Bruce scene or two to round it out.
-
Bare in mind, like I said last post I REALLY need to rewatch this and some of the tiny spoiler font there might just be me remembering the movie I wanted it to be (even more than every scene already was what I wanted it to be as it happened) rather than what was actually put to print.
Ehhh I wouldn't read someone indulging in their self destructive nature specifically as someone who is suicidal per se. The whole Freudian Thanatos thing is overemphasized on seeking out death. It is a willful thrust towards things that are not in your best interest and being seated firmly in the Id is a subconscious drive. Joe definitely isn't happy with his life and so many of his choices are not conducive to staying alive and well (we see that both in young Joe's behaviour and his behaviour in Hong Kong in the alternate timeline of Old Joe). I wouldn't go so far as to read it as willfully suicidal though.
I see it more as a result of his work (Obviously) and the setting in general. The bit where they talk about why people choose to be Loopers because it is better to have a chance to live well even if for a short time than to live like normal people do is really pretty central to the character. He lives like that, but it was kind of forced on him by circumstances. He is friends with the other loopers, but is distant in that he dreams of a way out. He isn't happy with his life.
Rather than him being out and out suicidal it reads to me more like the story of a depressive struggling with his conscious drive towards self destruction (which manifests strongly in people struggling with depression). Throw in years of desensitization to violence from the setting again and his job, have the only good thing taken from him and give him a time machine and you get Old Joe.
The fact that the ending is a heroic sacrifice is straight up a rejection of all of that. He kills himself because he sees what he becomes. He rejects going down the path where his "conquering" his depression and self destruction tempers him to the point where he becomes a child killing spree killer (holy shit the number he pulls on Abe's joint). Fuck him and fuck his life, who is he A) to judge the Rainmaker he doesn't even know in the future and B) even if he does actively close all the loops and destroys the lives of people like Joe is that really such a bad and wrong thing?
So... I guess I say I agree with your sentiment of he was accepting that he is Old Joe and he can't kill him without killing himself from a different interpretation of why.
Definitely not to say suicide is the right answer to depression. Just that hey maybe possibly it is if you have a time machine and future you is a child killing headcase with a severe case of PTSD that manifests itself in extreme violence.
Edit - And holy shit all that WORDS WORDS WORDS reminded me of how much I fucking loved that movie. Why didn't I find an excuse to go see it again?
-
I think we agree about Young Joe's character, we're just using different words. He's not suicidal, and yet he's still desperately trying to kill himself with a shotgun - that's part of what makes him so interesting. He doesn't like his life that much, but has no interest in dying. Yet, of course, he's put himself in a situation where the only way for him to survive is to murder himself, and he has to somehow reconcile that - thus the insistence that Old Joe is literally a different person. He's fucked up, but not in a clinical depression sort of way.
-
He is functional so I wouldn't diagnose it as clinical. I suppose since I am using Freudian terminology to describe it I may as well reach even further back and just say he is classically melancholic.
-
Saw Oz. It was enjoyable, but not particularly excellent. Was forced to see it in 3D, and since it was geared a little more toward a young audience it had its share of gimmicky 3D tricks. Some day I will get to see a movie in the theater without gimmicks, but I think it's been over a year since I saw a movie that wasn't in IMAX and/or 3D.
James Franco made an excellent dark Oz, but despite his and Raimi's best efforts this movie was more cheese than dark fairy-tale. Mila Kunis will forever be Meg Griffin so it was really goddamned hard to take her character seriously, which was kind of a problem. Zach Braff, too, was a little too much Zach Braff for me to get into the "character" he was supposed to be playing.
Had some witty bits. The first third or so was definitely the best part of the movie. The middle and ending felt weirdly forced, rushed and mish-mashed. It had potential, but it wasn't able to successfully balance the camp with the serious, and so it kind of failed at both.
I'm sure it has delightful nods to the original material, including the 1930s film, but I'm not a big enough fan to have caught them.
I cannot tell you how many times I wanted to yell "Shut up, Meg!" at the screen. I am ashamed.
-
Saw Oz. It was enjoyable, but not particularly excellent. Was forced to see it in 3D, and since it was geared a little more toward a young audience it had its share of gimmicky 3D tricks. Some day I will get to see a movie in the theater without gimmicks, but I think it's been over a year since I saw a movie that wasn't in IMAX and/or 3D.
James Franco made an excellent dark Oz, but despite his and Raimi's best efforts this movie was more cheese than dark fairy-tale. Mila Kunis will forever be Meg Griffin so it was really goddamned hard to take her character seriously, which was kind of a problem. Zach Braff, too, was a little too much Zach Braff for me to get into the "character" he was supposed to be playing.
Had some witty bits. The first third or so was definitely the best part of the movie. The middle and ending felt weirdly forced, rushed and mish-mashed. It had potential, but it wasn't able to successfully balance the camp with the serious, and so it kind of failed at both.
I'm sure it has delightful nods to the original material, including the 1930s film, but I'm not a big enough fan to have caught them.
I cannot tell you how many times I wanted to yell "Shut up, Meg!" at the screen. I am ashamed.
-
Les Mis: Wow they changed a lot. I was really surprised at the scene where Wolverine gutted Javert and then Borat teabagged his corpse.
-
Life of Pi - Not really my favorite. It's a very slow movie with a decent ending. Probably wouldn't have finished it if I'd been watching it alone, though; I am a bit impatient.
Avatar - A little heavyhanded, but great otherwise! Very colorful and fun.
-
Superman and Batman: Apokolips: Honestly, the name of the movie is an indicator of everything I find wrong with the movie...
It's clearly a movie meant to be about Kara Zor-El, aka Supergirl, and how she actually becomes Supergirl. That could be actually cool, and different person to use as a viewpoint of the movie. Except, you look at the name and you see it's Superman and Batman...and thus, the movie puts way more emphasis on those two than it should on her. Really, everything wrong with the movie takes place in the 2nd act (we'll say that starts on Themaskura (SP?)):
I have some minor gripes before then, but once you get to the island, there's like a total disregard of Kara as a character, and she's relegated to a Damsel-in-Distress. Oh, but that's fine, because the movie makes up for it with having most of the cast be strong female characters...no sorry, that doesn't do it, because it's not the female thing that gets me; it's that you did EVERYTHING WITH KARA off screen. I don't mind your Main Character being turned into a DiD if it leads to legitimate development, which the movie does. I do mind that they sacrifice like all her screen time in the 2nd act just so your BIG NAMES can get more screen time. Two obvious examples:
-The Attack on Themaskura with ARMY OF DOOMSDAY CLONES (...which was an absolute waste of Doomsday, but I digress). Ok, cool action scene, but wait, just a diversion for Kara to get kidnapped. Rather than showing Kara and Harbringer fight off the Furies and failing, we just see the aftermath, because watching Superman, Batman and the Amazons fighting DOOMSDAY CLONES!!! is way more important.
-Kara's brain washing is completely off screen. She's kidnapped, then Darkseid just goes "YOU WILL LEARN TO FOLLOW ME BECAUSE I AM DARKSEID!" then next we see, she's dressed in BDSM and is all evil and fighting Supez. Would it really be hard to ask to show SOME of that brain washing a bit? Instead it's just "Shock Reveal, she's a bad guy!"
To make matters worse? most of the Superman vs. Kara fight is OFF SCREEN AS WELL. Instead, we get Batman vs. Darkseid and the Super Powered Cat Fight of Wonder Woman/Big Barda vs. the Furies. Not that these scenes were bad necessarily, but again, just felt like padding to divert the focus away from anything Kara related.
Just contrast that to what Act 3 did, which is just Clark and Kara on Kent farm and RANDOM DARKSEID! They actually get Superman out of the picture quickly, and force Kara to fend for herself against freaking Darkseid, and she even puts up a decent fight all things considered, and even though she gets overwhelmed, she still is the one who ultimately saves the day.
See, that's keeping your main character in the spotlight. Sure, temporary deviations can exist...and should...but Act 2 just felt like it went out of it's way to try and keep Kara NOT on screen as much as possible.
Other than that...well, movie entertained me. Not one of the better DC Animated films, though, as it's leagues behind of movies like Crisis on Two Earths. I also need to hype Darkseid's Voice because the fact that they kept a dignified, straight commanding voice like that, and didn't try to SUPER EVIL DEMON IT UP like you'd expect with a design like his is nice. The voice contrasts his design, but not his character, and that's a good thing if you ask me. I know, Darkseid always has a voice like that, but this is just a good opportunity to acknowledge it.
Doctor Strange: Mandy was watching Hulk vs. Wolverine because Deadpool, decided since Netflix was loaded up I'd watch this.
Fun little movie, if different. They do a good job of making Strange a completely unlike-able douche early on, but at the same time, you do sympathize with the guy when something bad happens. Also, Wong was more fun than I was expecting, capable of delivering occasionally witty lines with an absolute straight face. Dormammu's fight was visually amusing but a little underwhelming at the same time. Still, fun enough diversion.
-
Hey, I see these.
Transformers Live Action: Watched the whole series. While not faithful to the original series, it's good if you ignore a lot of that. Also, ignore a LOT of the excess stuff. Revenge of the Fallen is the worst about it (seriously, cut out about 60 minutes of extra crap, movie doesn't change at all), but is probably my favorite of the 3. Still, I could do without Wheelie humping Mikaela's leg...let me do it instead!
Ahem.
Anyway, overall, it's good. Lots of action, and the storyline is generally nothing special (with the exception of Jesus Robots in Revenge of the Fallen...ugh so stupid), but overall enjoyable as a series.
Life of Pi: Decent movie. Pretty faithful adaptation of the book, minus a few points. But streamlined things well. Overall liked it - not my favorite movie, but doesn't do anything bad.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower: Really good. Definitely the best one I've seen this year so far. Really love its pretty realistic portrayals of things. Also, go Pittsburgh, yeah yeah. Just a great movie.
Think I saw more, but that's all I remember for now.
-
GI Joe Retaliation: This is objectively terrible, but hey, ninja mountain climbing. Also they pull a Cyclops and kill the main character 15 minutes into the movie.
-
Watchmen: I actually read the comic first and well, was interested in the movie because I heard outside of the ending, it was a very faithful adaptation.
And...for the most part, yeah, it was. There were minor detail changes here and there, but nothing too big; stuff that was changed to save time, expected changes because Movie =/= Comic, so you gotta do adjustments, etc. but overall, my sister (who also read it not too long ago) and I were able to appreciate the movie and what not.
Fun stuff, in any event, if a little too graphic at times which I didn't mind other than it felt like it was being graphic for the sake of being graphic.
The change in the ending...well, the plan I actually thought was an improvement because it fit better with what they were talking about throughout the story. What I felt didn't work was removing the fact that Dr. Manhattan tells Ozymandias that he hasn't changed anything, and nothing actually ends, illustrating that no, he hasn't actually solved the problem, just killed millions. Just going with Niteowl laying on the guilt and a beat down...yeah, doesn't have the same strength.
-
I remember Grefter suggesting the film wanted to maintain some of the 'shock value' the original comic had in the 80's, which I can kinda buy but I agree, a bit heavy on the ultra violence.
-
If it was going to be true to its roots it needed to be at or above the standards of the time. They succeeded.
-
Wreck-It Ralph was great. Well, obviously the arcade-community stuff was a riot (everybody hanging out at Tapper's bar was probably my favorite of those), but I was prepared to be annoyed at how much time they spent in Sugar Rush. And yet the characters playing off each other, plus the constant barrage of puns, kept it fresh until the actual racing went down. And it very much felt like a Pixar movie. Good for Lassetter, I guess.
-
When did movies get to be so expensive?!
Andrew and I were going to go see Jurassic Park in 3D IMAX for our anniversary. Then we realized it would have cost us $35 to do so. We considered seeing The Croods instead -- we like animation, it's gotten decent reviews, could be good, why not? -- and then realized that would itself have been $23. That is, of course, before concessions (of which we usually get the kids' snack box and maybe a soda).
With Netflix and Hulu and Amazon Instant Video, and DVD releases lagging only 3 months behind theatrical, I do not know that I'm going to feel like going to the movies unless there's something I really feel the need to see in IMAX. I hate 3D anyway, so it's not like I feel like I'm missing out by watching the DVD at home. It's the big & loud I go to the cinema for.
(For the record, we stayed in and watched the second half of Doctor Who, Season 3, which was a fantastic set of episodes.)
-
Holy shit that avatar is a chameleon on a tricycle.
-
Wearing a top hat. Posh, ain't it?
-
All Star Superman: Well, it's Action Comic #1's 75th Anniversary, which is to say, it's Superman's 75th Birthday and I only knew that due to listening to radio on the car ride home and it popped up, so I said "I should do SOMETHING to honor that." Not spending $60 on Injustice though, so I decided to just watch this on Netflix, because hey, based off a good comic.
It does a decent job of adapting the comic. Cut out a bunch of arcs, but to be expected; putting all 12 issues into one movie is what Watchmen did, and that was 3 hours long, and they clearly didn't want that, so yeah. I do question having the Not!Zod arc though; everything else seems to fit, but that just felt like "we need to kill 10 minutes of time, shoe-horn in one of the random issues." Personally, I'd have chosen the "Supermen from the Future" arc since it'd fit in better with the ending, the earlier mention of descendants, etc. Plus the gravestone scene wouldn't feel as tacted on.
But what they did show was pretty much spot on with the comic, and that's enough. Made me appreciate it more in some regards, since there were plot points I missed the first time around that the second established was actually there.
-
To be fair, Jurassic Park was a freakin awesome. I literally hadn't watched the movie since it first came out in theatres and it gave me nightmares about Raptors opening doors in my house.
Watching it again as an adult, I got that nostalgic feeling, but I felt like I was watching a whole new movie. It's actually a pretty fucking amazing film.
<RestoftheDL> Welcome to the 1990s, Djinn. Also, Citizen Kane is a great film.
-
Jurassic Park really does stand up amazingly well. I'm still somewhat impressed by the CG these days.
-
It depends in what way you're talking about Jurassic Park.
The "spectacle" shall we say as a loose catch all for Non-writing related things? Yeah, can't argue that. It's a fine case of "early CG DONE RIGHT" and especially impressive when you see all the 90s CG that looks awful by today's standards and came out years later. Oh sure, looked great back then because "wow, so real!" but then you see it now and go "man, that looks awful." Jurassic Park doesn't have that; the dinosaurs still looked damned good.
Also, I believe the movie wasn't afraid to use Life-size Models/Machines for some of the effects, so at times, there was something actually there on screen, which never hurts!
As far as non-spectacle related things go? The movie's plot was always kind of weak, and there really wasn't much there. I can't imagine this holding up because, you know, the movie wasn't good in this regard when it came out.
That said...I am totally on board with saying "The movie is fun enough to watch just because dinosaurs that I can overlook it's weak points." Fun flick, to be sure.
-
Saw a lot of movies, too many to include in a lazy post:
Hobbit, 3/5. Best thing were all the British actors I've seen from Being Human, Sherlock, etc.
Helvetica, 5/5. Eponymous user handle. 5/5 not for "cinematography," or anything other movie critical observ. More: "Wow, I never thought about typography having a critical and crucial place in mid20th c modernism." Great interviewees and a good pace, not too much ken burns.
Beautiful Losers, 3/5. Art film. Ha ha, Shepherd Fairey, pre-lawsuit.
Our City Dreams, 4/5. Art film. Fan of all the artists; women seem to have a better acumen towards talking about their work. <3 Ghada Amer. Ana beHeb Masr.
Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry, 3/5. Should have covered biennial responses much more. I like his work, but the more I learn about Weiwei and 20thc Chinese art, the less I think of him as an artist.
Poliwood, 2/5. Poli 2008 docufilm on election and celebrities. Eh.
Night Catches Us, 4/5. Life of a few Black Panthers in the aftermath of a symbolic "Huey." Kerry Washington, don't really enjoy her acting, but she did okay in this film. I enjoy anything related to the Black Panthers; I could see myself supporting them in another life back then.
Casa de mi Padre, 3/5. Good film; okay drama.
Portlandia (entire show): Great first three episodes; hipster jokes falter from episode 4 and on. The only continuity I see is finding humor in the possibility that people are as they depict (PS, lesbian bookstore owners, TOTALLY encountered people like them!)
-
Warm Bodies - Saw this last weekend but wanted a while to stew over it. It is a pretty good movie. It does a ton of things right but isn't 10/10 MOVIE OF THE YEAR GO WATCH THIS NOWOWWWW like the normal thing I come back from not picking bits here and there at. I don't think any way I could describe it does it justice and even worse anything I try to describe it with will make it sound even worse. The way it is marketed as a Zombie Romantic Comedy put me off it at first, it sounds like a fucking terrible idea where people are just jamming zombies into everything. It got good reviews though and its time slot fit what I was after. So it got a watch.
So read this next bit where I make it sound like a total pile of wank with a grain of salt, it is actually really cool about it. The marketing does not even remotely do it justice. It is not really a Zombie Romantic Comedy so much as Romantic Comedy with zombies as metaphor. At no point is it even really a zombie flick, mostly since the lead is one of the zombies (which I know makes it sound OH SO WITTY). It takes the concept of a romantic comedy structure, casts the male lead as a zombie and sets it post zombie apocalypse. It isn't a deconstruction, it isn't a pastiche, it isn't a satire. I don't even really know what to call it (Post Modern? That makes it sound even wankier). It isn't even a comedy first, but when it is funny it is pretty great at it.
I don't really know how to describe it properly, it just does a lot of things right. It isn't an amazing movie, it is just a good solid movie. I would recommend seeing it at the movies if you get a chance at an okay price. I would highly recommend seeing it when it makes DVD/Netflix/whatever your convenient easy way to see movies is. I worry that it is kind of going to slip under the radar because it isn't an earth shattering movie, it isn't a game changer at all and it is crossing over a niche (although one of growing popularity) of a Zombie flick and is being touted as a romantic comedy which is probably just going to turn off both those genres normal target audience. So try to keep it in mind and watch it. Spread the word a little because I think it is going to need some love.
-
Skyfall: yeah, that was completely awesome. It's basically the marriage of Gritty Bourne-Era Craig Bond and Joyfully Goofy Connery/Moore Bond, and they pull it off beautifully (favorite part of that: Bond says "we're going back in time," and then hops into a 60s sports car with machine guns in the headlights and an ejector seat, which is kind of an obvious tribute but still fun, before defeating the bad guys with the power of Scottishness, complete with his friend, a bad ass old Scott who is coincidentally about as old as Connery). Bardem owns as the villain, Eve is a great foil for Bond, the action sequences are really fun, and Q is a trip (and looks scarily like Matt Smith, which would have been fantastic).
Oh, and I saw it at the Alamo Drafthouse, which is amazing. Cid, you need to get your ass over to Ashburn while they're still running their preview week. $2 tickets and half price food (which is served to you while you watch the movie). They're playing Ghostbusters!
-
I saw Ghostbusters on the big screen when the local theater ran it last October. Have I mentioned this is one of my favorite movies? This is one of my favorite movies, so that was cool. It's pretty great still hearing modern kids crack up at it.
-
Iron Man 3
This was written by someone really clever. Tony Stark spends about 90% of his time outside of his suit, inventing stuff. And you know how some movies you're like "why don't you just do X???" or "If I was a mad inventer I'd just make X." well he does. Repeatedly.
I'm not enough of a biologist to know how reasonable the mad science was--what I did understand sounded like they did their homework.
-
Iron Man 3:
They clearly paid attention to the complaints about Iron Man 2 as this movie is not like Iron Man 2 much at all. It's also a better movie for it! That said...
First off, the biggest complaint I have is Mandarin. On one hand, yes, it's Mandarin, you gotta have him, he's Iron Man's arch nemesis. But the way they handled him by making him just some lackey of another guy, being an actor and face of the terrorist organization, and not the actual Magical Powered Ring Super Villain that people were psyched to see feels like a slap in the face. To be fair, it didn't come off as sticking it to the fans like, oh, Spider-Man 3 Venom, but still a huge "lame" moment. That said, the actual character and actor who played him were spot on, so I can't complain about that, and the plot twist with him was cleverly handled. Had they called him something other than "Mandarin", it would have been better. Call this a nitpick, but when you hear "Mandarin" you expect "Science vs. Magic, EPIC BATTLE! EXTREME!!!! *explosions*"
The good...everything else? Seeing Tony outside of the suit a lot got the point across that this movie is about Tony Stark, not about Iron Man, and by doing so, forces the focus on Tony Stark...by which I mean Robert Downey Jr....by which I mean THE REASON YOU WATCH THE IRON MAN MOVIES (and ONE reason to watch Avengers). There were a number of cases where I thought the movie was going to go in a direction I was thinking "No, please don't do this!" and...they didn't. They just kept on a straight path of putting him into what seemed like an unwinnable situation and showed how he can rise to the occassion. Also, Metal Gear Stark was a fun scene.
The main big thing, besides remembering "right, more RDJ = Good!" compared to Iron Man 2 is the movie has one focal plot point. It doesn't have a million and one little subplots that somehow work together for an ultimate big climax. Just one main plotline that gets developed, and thus the main story is that much easier to remember, the plot points, little nuances, etc. don't feel as forced, and most of the "Chekov Gun" scenarios are handled in a small enough time frame that they're still fresh in your mind.
So yeah, competent movie and worth seeing. Not sure if I can say it's better than the first, but it's significantly better than the second. The main thing it has going for it, as I said, is it took pointers from Iron Man 2 on what NOT to do, and went back to a more conventional story with just the stakes being raised because "potential finale, make sure we have something big to end on just in case we don't make more" though still ends in a way that says "We can make more without it being forced."
-
Iron Mang 3 - Playing with expectations is good. Solid. Do recommend. I watched the credits and came out of it stunned that there was no Matt Fraction involvement. The humor is amazingly spot on, the comic is compelling story with Tony not in the armour for the vast majority of it and it is all things told quite intelligent. Then that ending credit sequence. No Matt Fraction? Wow. They hit a lot of the same beats I associate with him. I see a nod to Warren Ellis in there (amongst others) in the special thanks, so they clearly had some good comic scene input, just not the one I expected to see.
-
Having just returned from it, I agree that Iron Man 3 was good, if not as good as Iron Man. (I skipped Iron Man 2.) My biggest problem was that this is a very humorous movie, which is good, except the framing plot is just too dang serious. Terrorism & the like is actually a more serious plotline than the alien invasion of the Avengers (even if in-setting, alien invasions are worse); Iron Man treated the issue of "Tony Stark running off to go kill dudes in Afghanistan" with a certain amount of respect for the implications of the idea. The terrorism plotlines in this movie are just... why. The good parts of the movie would have worked equally well with really any excuse for deaths & explosions; make it something more connected to Stark, like hostile raids on Stark Industries for its tech, rather than something that by all rights should have the military handling it all.
mc: Agree that lots of Robert Downey Jr. outside the suit (if for slightly overdramatic reasons at times) was pretty cool and doin' it right. The trick at the end was also kind of an obvious thing that seems like it should have been done a long time ago, but glad they showed it could be done (even if they then pointlessly threw it away before more aliens could even invade).
The biological mad science was on the reasonable end for comic book powers I thought (certainly better than "the sun makes my eyes shoot laser beams" or "DNA mutations give me mind control powers"), but still totally silly for actual science. (Starfish-style regeneration? Maybe. The ability to cook armor and get super-strength and also explode? Yeah no.) But I dunno about giving them credit for doing their homework. They could have framed the entire villain plot around it, really, and they just use it as a plot device to set up why the villain is scary instead. Most notably, this is one of those technologies that, if taken seriously for the setting (and not just an excuse to have superpowered mooks to fight), can have significant implications! Now, of course, they're running a comic book movie, not speculative science fiction, and I respect that. And, it did provide a rare excuse for extremely loyal villainous mooks who are willing to aid in all sorts of evil stuff without calling the cops (although really... still not enough, but better than ye olde "paid Evil Corp. security guards.") Still, bah, they easily could have framed the entire villainous motive around perfecting the project, now with less kabooms, and some BS excuse to need Stark's help*, coerced if need be. And if that risked making the villain too sympathetic, to make the project doomed somehow and the villain too blind to see it, and now forging forward into crazyland. I'd have found that way more interesting than the terrorism plotline. Unfortunately, the movie unceremoniously offs the minor villain who cared about the "make Stark finish the project, which would have amazing implications for injured people everywhere!" motive, and the main villain seems to sort of forget that motive as well, leaving only the I WILL RUN BOTH SIDES OF THE WAR ON TERROR UH BECAUSE motive.)
* (Yes there should be other supergeniuses in the world, but whatever, it's a comic book plotline, for our purposes only Stark could do it or something.)
Meeple: I dunno, I thought the way the movie did the Mandarin was pretty great, myself. I was expecting it to suck and it didn't! But then I don't know anything about the comic book version of the Mandarin at all aside from "Chinese dude with magic rings that blast magic around" and that didn't sound like a very good hook to me. (Sticking magic in a tech story is an unnecessary complication to screw up the ability to do sane plotting. It's fine in a crossover where it's just whose power zaps the most, not so much in the main series. Also heroes need to fight their own dark opposites somehow, so Tony Stark needs to fight technology-based opponents with ridiculous resources, just as spies face other spies, Batman faces crazy normal humans in masks, X-Men mutants face other mutants, etc. )
The movie did a very good job of setting up its Chekov's Guns, yes. It always let you see something Iron Man has ready in an innocuous context before returning it in a more dangerous one.
-
The movie did a very good job of setting up its Chekov's Guns, yes. It always let you see something Iron Man has ready in an innocuous context before returning it in a more dangerous one.
Saw Iron Man 3, liked it a lot, blah blah other people have mostly covered my thoughts. I really appreciated this part of it, though -- that it didn't shock with "omg it's future tech and OF COURSE it can do this thing that will suddenly and inexplicably solve this precise problem!" stuff.
I liked the Mandarin, and agree that it would have been unsatisfactory to put comic-book-Mandarin in this series. It does not fit with the current trend in superhero/comic book movies, which is unabashedly bro-science and humanity. (I'm ignoring Thor. Thor is always an exception. He's a fucking Norse god, alright? He just gets to do what he does.)
I did feel like the movie walked a fine line on having -all- its characters be clever. I liked it, but it very, very easily could have tipped over into being too much. The fact that it is a comic book movie, and I willingly suspend my disbelief pretty damn high off the ground to begin with, kept it safe. Still.
-
Hate to burst everyone's bubble on The Mandarin, but a quick perusal of Wikipedia says that his rings are tech-based, not magic (they're magic in a few subseries, but his origin and most of his incarnations have the rings as alien tech). Magic does factor into some storylines, but it usually blows up in his face or ends up actually being alien tech in the end.
But I agree with everyone. The way they did The Mandarin works and was awesome. I have to wonder if Marvel's marketing department is high-fiving themselves right about now. I agree with Snow to a point, but I'm fine with the way they had the villain use terrorism as just a tool in his overall plot. That's why they're villains. They're willing to use ANY underhanded, bastardly, morally reprehensible tool or action to succeed in their plans. Killian WORKS as a modern-day Mandarin, and the nod to the old-school one is fucking fantastic. They could have done classic Mandarin, given the above info, but this is better.
-
Sufficiently advanced tech that is functionally no different than magic. They could have probably pushed that route if they wanted a really strong tie in to Avengers 2 or Guardians of the Galaxy, but meh, I am happier with this being more of a standalone story that so strongly gives its props to the shared continuity without being bound heart and soul to it narratively.
-
Iron Man 3:
That was... REALLY violent!
-
I think people misunderstand my Mandarin point...
I actually like everything they did with the character, I just question why they named him the "Mandarin." It comes off as a huge cock-tease to all comic fans (AND FANS OF THE ANIMATED SERIES IN THE 90s!!! ...feel free to ignore this...) and is bound to piss more of them off than is worth, which I feel is the reason you put the Mandarin in the movie (he may be Iron Man's arch-nemesis or something, but he's not on par with the likes of Joker, Doc Ock, etc. so casual fans are likely to not give two shits.) Just felt like a way of opening the doors to an angry mob.
It hardly ruins the movie...heck, again, just about everything besides the name is well done. You'll notice I acknowledged "This is probably a nitpick"...or a pet peeve if you prefer. It's not something I'll hold against the movie too strongly.
-
Iron Mang 3 - Playing with expectations is good. Solid. Do recommend. I watched the credits and came out of it stunned that there was no Matt Fraction involvement. The humor is amazingly spot on, the comic is compelling story with Tony not in the armour for the vast majority of it and it is all things told quite intelligent. Then that ending credit sequence. No Matt Fraction? Wow. They hit a lot of the same beats I associate with him. I see a nod to Warren Ellis in there (amongst others) in the special thanks, so they clearly had some good comic scene input, just not the one I expected to see.
There's multiple Fraction nods, but they're in cut scenes. That said, it was Ellis who created Extremis, so if they do, say, a World's Most Wanted adaptation I'd expect more Fraction.
They should do a World's Most Wanted adaptation.
-
Haven't seen the movie, but Regarding the Mandarin...it seems like movie adoptions often fail to capture just what it is about certain villains that make them memorable in the first place. Deadpool in Wolverine Origins is probably the most extreme example.
-
The Mandarin is certainly memorable. Kingsley crushes it. Plus, the Mandarin as rebooted by Fraction is basically an elaborate collection of images designed to project a carefully designed image anyway. This just plays this that.
-
Well, the difference between Mandarin and Deadpool is at least Iron Man 3 did good with what they did with Mandarin, just at the same time, this act is going to piss off anyone expecting to see something resembling the character. As I said, remove the Mandarin name, and pretty much all my complaints go wayside. It was very clearly an intended design decision, and a bold one, just arguably not a smart one.
Deadpool felt more like the directors doing whatever the hell they wanted with the character, only so they could create a SUPER OPPONENT!!! for Wolverine to fight in the most un-creative way ever, and slap "Deadpool" on there so they could get people to see the movie by saying "Hey guys, Deadpool's in the movie!" and technically be telling the truth.
You could argue Deadpool was the same mindset, except the difference is that Iron Man 3 showed competence everywhere else that this came off as a "neat idea that WILL have polarizing reactions"; X-men Origins was anything but consistently competent.
-
Die Another Day - The villain has SPACE LASERS. 10/10 would watch again
-
The Great Gatsby: There's always a lighthouse, a man, and a city... Generally, decisively, decidedly okay. 5/10.
-
Was the book better?
Trolololol
-
The Great Gatsby: There's always a lighthouse, a man, and a city...
Booker believed in the bloom lighting, the steampunk future that year by year becomes more over the top racist. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will shoot faster, search more trashcans for food. . . . And then one fine morning—
So we beat on, mouse cursor against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the last checkpoint.
-
The book is unreadable garbage, so if the movie is average that is like a 100000000000000% jump in quality.
-
Andy, Baz Luhrmann movies are love it or hate it affairs, you are not playing by the rules.
-
Andy, Baz Luhrmann movies are love it or hate it affairs, you are not playing by the rules.
I'm a rogue, man. I don't play by YOUR rules.
I mean, it is in my name and all.
-
Iron Man 3: They had me at A.I.M.
While I do enjoy RDJ and his Tony Stark, in the end I go to superhero movies to see superhero stuff. I had been feeling the movie was lacking in this regard. And then they threw the Barrel of Monkeys scene in. Wow. Just fucking wow.
-
Andy, Baz Luhrmann movies are love it or hate it affairs, you are not playing by the rules.
On that scale, it failed. Maybe it was because we didn't see it in 3D, but it a serious lack of outrageous visuals and overacting and whatnot. Don't get me wrong: the colors are super-saturated, it's got some action, and the cinematography is as arty as it ever is with him. But it just never came together.
The first third of the movie was so. slow.
The other two thirds were better, I guess.
A critic said this: "It's not a satire, exactly, though many of its strongest moments are openly satirical. It is far too literal a translation to be considered an homage. And its oddly straightforward, even innocent, air disqualifies it as a subversion." I largely agree.
-
In which case it sounds like a very confused production.
-
Iron Man 3, 4/5. Appreciate that it didn't take itself seriously. Should have opted for the Great Gatsby. I figure it'd look prettier. Haven't been to theatres since Les Mis, but have taken notice of how trailers have gone from "over the top" to just complete stupid action. The Wolverine trailer had way too much ken burns at the end. Was a bit aggravating.
-
Dead Silence- Am disappoint. Meh, weak sauce dude really couldn't have kept that final scream in? I mean, well I suppose it was entertaining enough and there was the Billy reference and stuff and I liked the main and the cop dude well enough apart, cop dude seemed familiar, shame about what happened to him but seriously main done messed up there at the end. I dunno maybe I've outgrown the Dolls/Chucky type thing
Case 39- Was good. Could have been better. I still have some questions. Worth a rewatch, pretty well done on the whole~
Vanishing on 7th Street- Don't trust the dark, don't trust the light~ Adults dun had it all wrong, adults still have it wrong? Nevermind the adults, it's all meaningless. Don't trust that kid, do trust that kid? Oh look it's a horse! What is with this movie?~
-
Star Trek: Into DARKNESS- Way way better than the Star Trek openbrackettwothousdandnineclosebracket. Three main points:
- A lot less space battles, which Abrahms sucks at (... oh god they gave Star Wars to someone who can't make space battles. Fucking fuck.)
- The plot is actually grounded in the New 23rd Century, and consequently is actually about the core cast, taking advantage of their amazing casting.
- There's a coherent main villain.
The only major problem, since the space battle sucking wasn't near as relevant, is they telegraphed the main plot wherein they weave Space Seed and Wrath of Khan into one plot and end up with a DS9-ish arc somehow way too heavily. Playing it a bit more coy would have really made it better. I mean, I know the marketting made it obvious, but it shouldn't have been that obvious within the movie itself.
I'd still rather watch a new series with this cast. Although I know, they probably couldn't afford this cast on TV budgets.
-
I think my favorite part is watching the sort of people whose idea of "thought-provoking" is Star Trek TMP/TNG saying "what is it to be human? Feelings I guess." complaining that it has somehow lost the core of the series.
Star Trek's biggest strength has always been the dynamics between the crew. I think the new series captures that really well, and if you can nail an ensemble like that, you can carry your way through almost anything (something not exclusive to TOS. There's lots of episodes of TNG and DS9 that wouldn't have worked with a cast that didn't have the dynamics built up that they did).
-
Pretty much. What made the other Abrams movie not work was it wasn't about the cast. It was about the stupid future romulans and saying 'alternate continuity alternate continuity lalala' over and over rather than just giving us his new cast and letting them get to work. I get why they wanted the time travel->alternate universe plot, I really do, but it stole too much of the movie away from what was good about the thing to start with.
-
Children of Men: Easily the best movie I've seen in a while. Should have listened to Grefter sooner.
-
Man of Steel: First off, the important stuff!
Superman punches someone. Multiple times. In one scene. Needless to say, this movie made good on it's promise!
Otherwise? To keep it short and simple as a review, it feels like it's Jurassic Park logic applied to a Super Hero movie. Make the spectacle damned good and people will overlook other shortcomings. The action sequences are a lot of fun, look cool, and even last quite a while, so you won't have to deal with the plot getting in the way too much.
Mind you, it's shortcomings aren't "ruins movie" bad, just...kind of eh. It's a fun movie in any event. Not "WOMG AMAZING!" like, say, Marvel's better Phase 1 movies but decent enough in it's own right.
-
Oz The Great And Powerful: Well that wasn't worth the dollar I spent at Redbox.
-
Oz The Great And Powerful: Well that wasn't worth the dollar I spent at Redbox.
I enjoyed it. Wasn't as good as it could have been though. China girl was adorable.
-
Epic: Story was a bit generic but they put a lot of effort into the little (HAHA) details. Like the warriors having fighting styles designed around the fact that they basically weigh nothing.
-
Man of Steel: First off, the important stuff!
Superman punches someone. Multiple times. In one scene. Needless to say, this movie made good on it's promise!
Otherwise? To keep it short and simple as a review, it feels like it's Jurassic Park logic applied to a Super Hero movie. Make the spectacle damned good and people will overlook other shortcomings. The action sequences are a lot of fun, look cool, and even last quite a while, so you won't have to deal with the plot getting in the way too much.
Mind you, it's shortcomings aren't "ruins movie" bad, just...kind of eh. It's a fun movie in any event. Not "WOMG AMAZING!" like, say, Marvel's better Phase 1 movies but decent enough in it's own right.
I found that "as dour as its color palette" was a pretty good description of the movie, personally. On the other hand, for a movie about a living god, Superman racks up an enormous body count.
-
Wait, are you telling me Zack Snyder filmed every scene of a movie entirely in the same sickly, washed-out golden hue? You have blown my mind.
-
The hue is gray, not gold, IDIOT.
-
Clearly he's diversified since I watched 300 and tried to expunge it form my memory.
-
Oz The Great And Powerful: Well that wasn't worth the dollar I spent at Redbox.
I enjoyed it. Wasn't as good as it could have been though. China girl was adorable.
-
This Is The End
Good stuff. One of the funniest movies I have seen in quite some time. If you like these actors, you will most likely enjoy the film.
-
This is the End: It's good, not great. Coulda been great. When it gets on a roll, it's gold. There's time wasted on some stinker scenes though, and that final dance number, while funny, needed to either be shorter or spliced with credits.
-
So not "Shaun of the Dead" good?
-
No, different kind of movie though.
-
Pacific Rim: the anime est not-anime ever made. Michael bay finally found a good match for his talents: shounen anime robot fetish sci fi.
-
Del Toro directed Pacific Rim, not Michael Bay. You should have suspected he had nothing to do with it the moment the female lead showed any signs of independent thought.
-
Pacific Rim- Was everything it promised it would be.
-
@rob: I realized my error right around that time but I was literally posting that fifteen minutes into the movie. Del Toro and anime robots and my comments still apply. Why did everyone I talked to keep calling it a Michael bay film?
-
Talk to smarter people then. Problem solved.
-
If you just retroactively implied that just now Del Toro only just found a worthy use of his talents then I will fist fight you next time we meet.
-
I would say he has found an ideal use of his talents here. His previous work largely is better in some areas, but Pacific Rim is a sort of summation of all aspects of his career, if that makes sense.
-
It does not.
-
Movie things from Comic-Con:
Veronica Mars preview. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVJhjV3EOY4)
Avengers 2 will feature Ultron.
This happened. (http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/comicsalliance.com/files/2013/07/Untitled-221.jpg)
-
Looks like Warner Bros. is doing something actually different than Disney after-all, playing it safe by shoving Batman and Superman in a movie together before going all out with Justice League. Probably smart way of doing things I suppose?
Avengers 2 having Ultron sounds cool. Also GotG having more cosmic characters in it is nice too!
-
It's made by the same guys who did Man of Steel. Considering what they did with Superman, I imagine Batman will basically just be The Comedian.
-
So... audiences completely miss point, hail as greatest Batman of our times?
-
Pacific Rim: Apocalypse cancelled. Fucking great time.
-
The Wolverine: Decent enough. Fights are a little more shaky-cam than I'd like, but they get the job done. Strictly a small-stakes affair, which is kind of refreshing after the last couple Marvel movies. Spoiler stuff:
Both of the girls lived! I am genuinely surprised.
Basic plot: dude offers Logan chance to stop being unkillable and age like a normal person. Logan makes no mention that this is supposedly already possible due to X3's cure plot, which is of course as it should be. Movie makes no reference to X3 beyond "Jean's dead" and "Xavier's dead," (and none at all to the previous Wolverine movie), which is fine, I'm willing to acknowledge its existence just that far.
My comics memory is failing me, what significance does "Trask Industries" have in the Marvel world?
So Wolvie's back to boneclaw mode. I guess so he doesn't break the space-time continuum when he goes back in time for Days of Future Past or whatever. Actually I never read Days of Future Past so I'm just guessing based on IMDB's plot synopsis here. I would've assumed dystopian future because all X-futures are dystopian futures.
-
Trask, if I'm not mistaken, is the Sentinels dude.
-
Apparently he's also Tyrion Lannister.
-
Pacific Rim: Apocalypse cancelled. Fucking great time.
Indeed. I found it amusing that it took until Mark V Jaegers were designed for someone to say "maybe we should put the best weapons in the torso" though. I was like "bitch that's half the reason a Hunchback is better than YLW*"
*the other half is that YLW tends to be piloted by a whiny, unlikable tool.
-
The Wolverine: Wow Mariko is pretty. Also pretty good aside from the first major action sequence. Good emotional core, which's been missing from the X-films for a while, nice to see it again.
-
Gundam vs Godzilla: This is gonna make a billion dollars when it releases in Japan.
-
It's pretty old news in Japan, isn't it?
-
It just released in Japan last weekend. No idea why they held off so long on the Japanese and Chinese release. Came out in Korea same weekend as US
-
Supposedly the studio is now pushing for a sequel based on the Chinese box office alone.
-
Yeah, they did ~45 million in China on opening weekend alone. No figures for Japan yet. Runaway hits do 10 mil opening weekend, so we'll see.
More reasons, Pacific Rim's 45 mil opening weekend actually puts it at #4 All Time for opening weekends in China.
-
By "Old news in Japan", I meant "Isn't Japan already pretty inundated with giant robots and godzilla-clones?" I suppose it'll be pretty novel for them to have Western actors in it...
-
By "Old news in Japan", I meant "Isn't Japan already pretty inundated with giant robots and godzilla-clones?" I suppose it'll be pretty novel for them to have Western actors in it...
They don't usually have the $180 million budget of Pacific Rim.
-
The World's End: awesome. I didn't like it quite as much as Hot Fuzz, but it's up there with Shaun of the Dead. Very funny, lots of well managed chaos, and an ending that feels a little clunky but also puts a nice philosophical capstone on the Cornetto trilogy. And the cast is fantastic, of course.
-
The World's End: awesome. I didn't like it quite as much as Hot Fuzz, but it's up there with Shaun of the Dead. Very funny, lots of well managed chaos, and an ending that feels a little clunky but also puts a nice philosophical capstone on the Cornetto trilogy. And the cast is fantastic, of course.
Pretty much this. Not just the ending that feels clunky, though. For each genre they blend in the elements from them miss out on complete examination and development. Love the pubs though.
-
Yeah. Not as good as Hot Fuzz (but then very few things are), possibly better than Shaun of the Dead. Need to watch it again to be sure, so many callbacks in Hot Fuzz you miss the first time through that I'd imagine the same holds true here. Went a bit squiffy at the end but still quite satisfying as a whole.
Absolutely genius use of the Sisters of Mercy.
-
Shakespeare in Love - I have always considered myself a romantic but I tend to find romantic movies to be corny as fuck. That's pretty much how I feel about this one. I love most of the side characters, from the smug nobleman with the villain stache to Mercutio to the rat kid who is the secret villain to the MORALITY police. And Judi Dench is boss. Too bad the movie has a serious case of the overblown sappy romance story that modern movies love(and hell, a love which R&J seems to be satiring, which is a play incorporated in the movie). Incidentally, it feels like Will and Viola have less interaction than even R&J do, since all they do is have sex and make out because that's what relationships consist of?
To summarize, it is fine but I want better romance!
-
The Impossible: Only saw this because mother got it from Netflix and kept bugging me about it, so whatever. Don't really have a strong impression of the movie, either way.
-
City of Bones: Started decently, then got progressively worse. Much like Wild Arms 3!
They do get bonus points for no less than 5 different Ghostbusters references though. Then again, I think the director would probably rather be remaking Ghostbusters than working on this shit movie.
-
Toy Story 2: Watched with my nephews.
Way to guilt trip people about their objects.
I'm sure this movie has done a lot of damage to emotional people now too impacted by this movie to throw away their old chairs or something.
I'm now morbidly curious about the third one, since all signs point to this being an even bigger mega guilt trip.
-
It is, but it's also a much better movie.
-
The 3rd movie is probably my favorite of the 3. I was never a huge fan of the first, to be fair (though it's not bad by any means, mind you, just saying you won't see my raving about it), but whatever.
Big thing the third movie does is handle the whole idea of "Growing Up" in a kind of bitter sweet way, one that many can somewhat relate to, while not being actually emo about it, and you don't really feel bad about any of the characters in question.
It also has the only villain I know of who smells like strawberries which pretty much invalidates all negative arguments you can say about said villain!
-
Shakespeare in Love - I have always considered myself a romantic but I tend to find romantic movies to be corny as fuck. That's pretty much how I feel about this one. I love most of the side characters, from the smug nobleman with the villain stache to Mercutio to the rat kid who is the secret villain to the MORALITY police. And Judi Dench is boss. Too bad the movie has a serious case of the overblown sappy romance story that modern movies love(and hell, a love which R&J seems to be satiring, which is a play incorporated in the movie). Incidentally, it feels like Will and Viola have less interaction than even R&J do, since all they do is have sex and make out because that's what relationships consist of?
To summarize, it is fine but I want better romance!
What kind of romance? I have a humongous list, but it really depends on several different productive aspects. So you like loving-vibing relationships so long as it doesn't inundate the movie with "sappy" scenes? And relationships with "substance"? You know, romance movies pre-1950s weren't much different, and if at all more offensive for taking normative relationships between men and women too seriously.
Let's see...
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Before Sunrise -> Before Sunset -> Before Midnight. Although I would caution that the first two films are incredibly dialogue-driven to the point of exhaustion and a bit dated.
The Adjustment Bureau
The Painted Veil.
I'll suggest more afterwards.
-
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Obliged to second this (haven't seen the others) as it's one of my favorite movies.
-
Adjustment Bureau would be the movie I watched on the plane the year it came out and was baffled why they marketed it as a romance movie with action. When it is really a movie about predestination VS free will and both romance and action are kind of incidental.
Fucking rad movie though, I do need to get around to reading the Dick story. One of the more quality Dick adaptations.
-
Tristan and Isolde!? *flee*~
-
Adjustment Bureau would be the movie I watched on the plane the year it came out and was baffled why they marketed it as a romance movie with action. When it is really a movie about predestination VS free will and both romance and action are kind of incidental.
Fucking rad movie though, I do need to get around to reading the Dick story. One of the more quality Dick adaptations.
So it's a movie about ideas. And does either Hollywood or the general viewing public typically know what to do with those? Of course they marketed it as something else.
-
Well I even oversell the "action" there. It is essentially people running through a bunch of doors.
-
World War Z- As bad as I was expecting. I don't even really blame Pitt, the concept of turning WWZ into a movie was doomed from the start. It's pretty clear from all the dropped plotlines and hints that the script had been rewritten more than once. Also a lot of the violence was just not relevant to the movie (Seriously, did we need the one Israeli soldier's hand cut off? Also the scene with the teeth pulling was awful).
-
Better or worse Teeth scene than Oldboy?
Also a lot of the violence was just not relevant to the movie
Bro, do you even zombie movie?
-
Adjustment Bureau would be the movie I watched on the plane the year it came out and was baffled why they marketed it as a romance movie with action. When it is really a movie about predestination VS free will and both romance and action are kind of incidental.
Fucking rad movie though, I do need to get around to reading the Dick story. One of the more quality Dick adaptations.
It's a movie about a lot of things really, but a substantive and quintessential love story is easy to parse out. Uses that thing called mise en scène to use tropes of how cinematic love stories have appeared, while literalizing the whole meaning of fate and love. It's a good movie, yeah.
-
Well if you want to put it intelligently instead of making jokes I guess that is one way of saying it.
You done A Scanner Darkly yet Dunie? Not romance, but another Phillip K Dick adaptation that is fantastic.
-
(: You so silly.
Scanner's the film that looks cel-shaded or whatever the description was for the art style in Breath of Fire Dragon Quarter? I haven't seen it, actually. I remember wanting to years ago. Let me know this. Is the novel significantly better than the film? I have one book for personal enjoyment, but I need another one. ASD isn't on Netflix it seems. (My current book is Connolly's Viva La Madness)
-
That is indeed the one. Scanner Darkly is a fairly short story (200 pages), so it won't last long, but I haven't read it either (I am terrible really).
No matter how good the book is it won't have Robert Downey Jr in it though, so movie is 10/10 watch instead in my mind.
If you do want some Dick recommendations that are stories better than the movie then I would go with Minority Report because that movie suuuuuuucked. Sopko would also point you towards The Zap Gun and I would be remiss not to give it a nod as well.
-
Better or worse Teeth scene than Oldboy?
Also a lot of the violence was just not relevant to the movie
Bro, do you even zombie movie?
Never seen Oldboy. Character spends a minute pulling out one of his teeth for absolutely no reason on camera. It's one of those scenes that makes me think the movie was veering towards an R rating at first before they went PG-13 for sales reasons.
-
Wait it is an overly violent PG Zombie flick? I am getting conflicted messages here.
Not as good as Oldboy then. You should watch Oldboy.
-
Oldboy isn't a zombie film. Did you just recently watch it?
If he watches Oldboy, he certainly should watch Ichi the Killer in the same day.
-
Oldboy isn't a Zombie movie (watched it years ago and will probably never watch it again), but it is a great movie with a good scene with teeth.
Also a good piece of advice there.
-
Yeah, I try to suppress any inclination to remember Oldboy. I am satisfied having watched it once (maybe 2 years ago) and knowing it was pretty damn good.
-
Skyfall: It's James Bond, so yeah, fun stuff.
-
World War Z can't possibly be worse than the Apocalypse Z movie I downloaded thinking that would be the Brad Pitt zombie movie but it wasn't since I didn't quite remember the name right :P
Also Evil Dead remake and Amityville Asylum :(
-
Probably from these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Asylum
Read an article in Forbes about them; they're making beaucoup bucks surprisingly enough.
-
The World's End: :D
You will probably enjoy if you liked Hot Fuzz (might give it a go if you enjoyed Shaun of the Dead, too). It's action-y goodness packed full of British irreverence. Absolutely LOVED Pegg's character, and while the ending was kind of bizarre I can't say I'm too shocked that it was. Loads of fun to watch. Glad I caught it before it left theaters.
-
World War Z can't possibly be worse than the Apocalypse Z movie I downloaded thinking that would be the Brad Pitt zombie movie but it wasn't since I didn't quite remember the name right :P
Also Evil Dead remake and Amityville Asylum :(
I don't know, World War Z is pretty bad. But in a different way. World War Z is an obvious Frankenstein's Monster of a movie to the point where as Asylum movies are usually bad, but at least they're tonally consistent.
-
Saw Ender's Game (in IMAX but not 3D).
Loved it.
Couldn't disagree more with most of the naysayers. In fact, I have a hard time arguing with them - but mostly because their points seem to have nothing to do with having seen the movie and a lot more to do with it "being a bad action movie" or "something something video games something violence something", i.e., totally missing the boat and judging the race by the breeze.
Anyway, I have a very complicated relationship with the source material. I frankly didn't judge the book as an adaptation so much as an "inspired by" distillation. On that level, I think it absolutely succeeded. You will be disappointed if you go in expecting to see everything in the book represented visually; in fact, there are distinct changes in timing and characterization.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed it as its own thing with similar values and conceits.
So yeah. Fuck you, Rotten Tomatoes 66%.
-
Wreck It Ralph: Finally saw this. Good stuff. Not WOMG AMAZING or anything, but good enough for what it is.
-
Given that it is metadata and Film critics tend to use the full scale a 66% isn't terrible... That is why it still gets the "fresh" icon. Looking at the front page at the moment there is a lot of stuff that is rating really high at the moment that disagree with my statement, but it is also the time of year that a ton of good shit tends to come out for Award baiting purposes.
-
Percy Jackson Sea of Monsters: Fun movie. Considerably better than the first one.
-
Ender's Game: It was okay, I guess. Not good, not bad. It worked though. I was entertained at least! It does stand alone as a movie, but it definitely feels rushed, even apart from the source material. Things move at such a pace that you lack the time to build up empathy with any of the characters, and it also results in very iffy cohesion in many parts. Once they get to Command School, things are kinda alright, but the very end was... not the wrong choice, but poorly done. Together with the accelerated timeline (it's shown that the entire movie once they get to Battle School happens inside a month), it opens up a plot hole a mile wide that the bugs would have to be precognizant in order to install that on the planet, instead of it being done in the weeks/months/years Ender was playing the Mind Game/fighting them.
As an adaptation, most of the streamlining done definitely works. They chose most of the right parts to cut (Locke/Demosthenes), the characters are condensed more or less as they should have been (sans Bonzo for some reason being in Rose the Nose's body).
On the negative, they really suffered from a Tell, Don't Show in terms of Ender's empathy with the enemy. It's harped on constantly but they really don't do a good job of SHOWING it ever, making the last scene even sillier than it already was. Also, the use of certain verbatim lines from the book entirely takes you out of the movie sometimes from how awkward they end up sounding. They did a good job mostly with the isolation aspect, but it should have been played up more. He recovered too fast, too easily, like an afterschool special. If I could add one scene, it'd possibly be playing out the whole part where Dap yells at the rest of the Launchies for not opening their lockers yet, just to twist the knife and underline the staff's attempt to isolate him. Other than that, maybe even one line with Ender explaining to Petra why Bonzo beating him up on him for saving his ass was stupid, just to show the audience his understanding of command. Small bits and pieces, but they would have helped. Gotta rush through. LotR can be 3 hours, but this had to fit under 2 for some reason...
On the nitpicky side, I think the Salamander ambush fight and the two army fight should have been split into two separate scenes (as a part of extending the movie). It was done well enough, but doing them both and showing them on the same day like they are in the book would have played up the unfairness and exhaustion factors. Also, the fact they Million Dollar Baby'd Bonzo was hilarious, as was Bernard ending up in Ender's jeesh. On the one hand, it shows Ender's such a good commander that he can make use of even a terrible soldier like Bernard, also saving the introduction of another character! On the other, it's... just kinda hilarious knowing the source material, which is why this is in the nitpicky section rather than Negative.
If nothing else though, it made me believe an Ender's Game movie was genuinely possible. There are some actual problems with the movie, but most of my complaints are nitpicky at best. They definitely hit the board, but they missed the bullseye.
-
Taken 1 and 2: marathoned these. I expect Taken 3 to be Albania declaring war on Liam Neeson's family.
-
Aliens: Saw it at the Alamo. This is one of the movies that will never, ever get old for me, and watching it in a theater was great. Hopefully they'll get Alien sometime.
-
Saw 12 Years a Slave (btw, these weird theatres with
vodka alcohol are pretty cool).
I love Steve McQueen. I love Paul Dano. I love Benedict Cumberbatch. I am in heads over heels love with Michael Fassbender, I love seeing new actors/resses; I don't -love- this film, but I adore every single aspect about it. I won't deny that I did not project - I can't help not, especially when white people peer over towards me and my company at pretty emotional scenes.
However, I can say that this is a film that is very much of its time. By that I mean despite using Solomon Noethup's incredible book as the fulcrum, finally we have a slave film that grants humanity and interiority to almost every single character, black and white. Steve McQueen is great at that. I've seen all the other slave films (except Django, which I'll see later), but too often is the drama itself the focus of each and every scene. Going to see it again today with a class, this time missing my previous company. . .
-
Thor 2: WHOO HOO! THORGASM!
Loki is more fun in this one than in anything else. Perhaps more predictable but a lot more charming. Take that as you will.
Thor is no longer a douchebag. Whether this makes him more likeable or more boring is up for interpretation but I liked him more and actually found myself invested in the story more than the first movie.
Story is more or less just kinda there. No big twists or surprises, but some really creative action scenes, particularly at the climax. Thor's Mom is also Badass.
Good adrenaline rush movie. Not much time for pondering or caring beyond the romantic scenes, oddly enough, but it works! I like to see superheroes being a little more lighthearted instead of the constant grimdark stuff we'd been getting. It strikes a good balance of fun and focused narrative. I personally like it a hell of a lot more than the first one, despite the first one having a lot more shirtless Chris Hemmsworth, so that should say something.
Warning: NOT AS GOOD AS IRON MAN 3 OR AVENGERS BY A LONG SHOT!
I'd peg it at roughly Iron Man 2 level? Probably a bit better? Opinion could change after some downtime and the adrenaline rush fades.
Current rankings: Avengers >> IM3 > IM1 > XM1stClass > CA1 > XM2 > Wolverine > Thor2~IM2 > Thor1 > XM1~Spider1 > Spider2 >>>>>> Hulk Movies > XMOWolverine > DareDevil > XM3 > SpiderRemake1 > Spider3 > Fan4 Movies
I... think that gets all the Marvel movies since Spiderman? I'm sure Meeple will correct me.
-
You don't have Punisher or Punisher Warzone in there.
-
Putting it at Iron Man 2 level for me is not a good thing though you seem to have a higher opinion of that movie than me.
-
I feel like IM2 was fine, just overshadowed by the fact that all the best things marvel has ever made came out just before it. I feel like Thor 2 is gonna have the same problem due to IM3 being fucking amazing.
-
I dunno. At the time of IM2, there was kind of a lul in Marvel movies, IIRC. It was between IM1 and Incredible Hulk, but before Thor and Captain America (and X-men 1st Class), so it wasn't really being directly compared to anything. It wasn't an awful movie or anything, just kind of shrug worthy.
IM2 just has this issue, which it shares with Spider-Man 3, of having way too much going on for it's own good. There were a few plot threads that could have been dropped in favor of focusing on others (Palladium is the obvious one), and it's kind of hard to ignore seeing as the other Phase 1 movies and IM3 all lack this issue.
-
Saw Thor 2. It was decent. Pretty squarely in the middle of the pack as far as Marvel movies go but an okay way to spend a couple hours. Villains were pretty weaksauce but I can overlook some flaws for setting up that last scene. Post-credits scene went right over my head this time but then I never did read much of the cosmic stuff.
-
Not knowing spoilers (though I saw a vague mention of what it entailed), it sounds like the post Credit Scenes is entirely a tease for Guardians of the Galaxy.
Makes sense I guess; Thor is probably the only one of the current heroes in the Cinematic Universe that really connects with the Cosmic line at all, and Marvel wants this gamble in GotG to succeed. Then again, just saying "This movie is a tie-in to Avengers 2!" would get the job done <_<
-
Looking up who the character actually is, yeah, pretty clear arrow to GotG.
-
I am lazy, could you spoiler text who it is? I am assuming Thanos but am dreaming of Space Thorse.
-
If Beta Ray Bill is in this movie tell me now so I can buy fifty tickets.
-
You know, given how Beta Ray Bill finds ways of getting attention in various things like animated Marvel features (he even had a whole episode dedicated to him in Earth's Mightiest Heroes!), I would not be surprised if they found a way to put him into Thor 3 (which I think is safe to say is being made.)
From what I understand, the after scene credits involve Thanos and Nebula but don't quote me on that. Haven't seen the movie, I hope to fix this in the next week or so.
-
Saw Thor 2.
I liked it.
Thor & Loki have some amazing on-screen chemistry, which makes them fun to watch. This episode felt a little more quippy than it deserved to be, and the villains were completely shallow pastiches of evil, but it had some legitimately funny exchanges and enough action to be entertaining. I can't be objective about Natalie Portman because I love that girl, so, you know, whatevs.
The design of the elements that showed up in the before-credits-but-after-movie teaser were exciting. Having heard what I've heard about that story line, I'm skeptical even Our Lord and Savior Joss Whedon can pull off an entertaining movie, but I'm more than willing to go see it when it comes out.
I'm getting a little Marvel fatigue, though. Holy crap that's a lot of movies in ten years all around one very small collection of material. Blah blah blah about Hollywood's crutch a la adaptations, I think this was a good move and I love what it's done for opening people's eyes to graphic novels as a worthy source of entertainment, but jesus even adaptations can branch out a little more than that.
-
More or less Ashley. Movie lags at the beginning a bit, but ramps up well when it decides it wants to start being awesome. Hiddleston is a delight. The ACTION CLIMAX learned well from Avengers and follows a pretty solid beat of action, action, funny, repeat. It might get a little too irrelevant (the subway scene is ridiculously funny but... maybe a little too silly?).
Mol-mol!
There was a love triangle plot with Sif here, but it's gone now.
Pre-credit tease is an Avengers 2 tease to my understanding. Post-credit tease is a different thing.
-
I am lazy, could you spoiler text who it is? I am assuming Thanos but am dreaming of Space Thorse.
Nah: It is the Collector, someone I had to go to Wikipedia to know what he was about.
I skipped out before genuine post-credits scene but sounds like it wasn't anything big? Also I forgot to note my amusement that Stellan Skarsgard gets to kill the bad guy.
-
Post-credits was just candy feel-good moment. You didn't miss anything big.
-
This Guardians of the Galaxy movie has the making to be really bad....or surprisingly awesome.
...Rocket Raccoon?
I dunno, I'm torn.
~
Anyways, Loki needs his own spin off movie. Hiddleston is just a great actor, and Loki can carry a movie by himself.
I'd watch it!!
-
Rocket Raccoon is awesome and I won't hear anything otherwise! That said, I'm cautiously optimistic about GotG. Don't think they've had any real trailers of it yet outside of a teaser at SDCC or something?
-
Granted, the cast looks great. But I wonder how a movie without any big name Marvel character in it will do as far as ticket sales go?
Ah, you know those types of the movies are the ones that tend to be better constructed now that I think about it. It could be a cult classic!
-
GotG feels like it's partially being made for Marvel to show that they can sell on brand recognition alone, or at least test if they're strong enough for that, but that may just be me. I think we can safely assume it won't be as successful as the Iron Man movies (especially 3), commercially speaking.
...speaking of Iron Man, that's a character who went from borderline obscure (to casual audiences anyway) to...arguably Marvel's 2nd biggest name these days after Spider-Man (Wolverine's the reason I say "arguably")? Who seriously would have seen that coming?
-
Yeah Iron Man was pretty firmly entrenched in Marvel's B-list prior to that movie. I think it's safe to assume they're happy the gamble paid off.
-
B-List but a core of Avengers IP for a hella long time along with Cap. Also had a very critically successful run with Thor. Phase 1 movies were fairly safe picks for their long term goals. Said goals were pretty baller though.
-
Hanna: Cate Blanchett tries on a southern accent. It doesn't really suit her, but fortunately her wardrobe does. Movie is not much concerned with story or really making much in the way of sense, but it's fun enough for its run time. Power Waif vs CIA, Chemical Brothers accompanying. Watch once & forget.
Wreck-It Ralph: Aspires to be a Pixar movie, almost succeeds. I enjoyed this. They didn't exploit the setup as thoroughly as they could have; they give you the concept of all these games sharing a neighborhood and then you just spend the latter two thirds of the movie pretty much entirely in Sugar Rush (which does look great, admittedly). So some missed potential there, but still a solid piece of good-natured entertainment. Wait a minute the antagonist was Wash? Did not make that connection during the movie.
The Exterminating Angel: What the christ did I just watch.
The Fantastic Mr. Fox: This was as Wes Andersony as only a Wes Anderson movie can be. So, very charming. Whack-bat makes even less sense than quidditch, though.
-
The Exterminating Angel is borderline pornography if that's the film I'm thinking of. It is...out there, even for a french film.
-
Spanish (by way of Mexico). No idea what you're thinking of.
-
I was thinking of a really, really awful french film on netflix.
-
Bad Teacher: I was expecting this movie to be completely awful. Turned out to be kind of ok. Not anything I'd rave about but it did get me to laugh a few times and wasn't as brainlessly moronic as I was expecting so...success?
Thor Dark World: I think I agree with most that the movie in the first half is only sort of ok. Doesn't really do anything wrong, but it feels like it's trying to get through the plot ASAP so we can get to the action. Not so much rushed as much as doesn't let itself breathe.
The 2nd half, when actual action and stuff happens, of course is fun stuff.
Dunno if I consider it better than the first or not, but it's decent enough. It's not as good as Iron Man 3, no, but then Iron Man 3 felt like it was it's own self contained finale so it had to be great, while THor 2 definitely feels like it was made as a "hold over until Avengers 2", so it being "decent fun" is all it needs to be.
Also, first post credit scene...well, can't say I expected that character. I knew he was going to be in GotG (well, more like was told, forgot, then when I heard I was like "oh, right, they mentioned he's going to be there!"), but still nice to see an unexpected face. It is nice to get an idea of what GotG is going to look like at least.
-
Thor Dark World: I really, really enjoyed this. It's a different feeling than Iron Man/Avengers. I just love the set pieces, costumes, and general artistry of the whole thing. Would have liked some more done with Sif vs. Jane, but that's a minor quibble. Beautiful movie.
I feel the ending has more to do with Thanos than GotG. They're setting up some version of Thanos Quest/Infinity Gauntlet.
-
Said character was confirmed to be appearing in GotG, and that scene was directed by the same guy who is directing GotG, not to mention GotG was confirmed to deal more with Thanos on top of all that; pretty clearly meant to be a precursor to GotG more so than anything else.
That said, speaking of Space stuff...
Doctor Who (96 movie): I watched this because I wanted to kill some time and it was like 2 hours before the 50th Anniversary Special, so said why not? How bad can it be?
...possibly one of the most boring things ever. It can be summed up as "a whole lot of nothing happens." Not to mention I can see why it'd piss hardcore fans off since it makes blatant claims about the Doctor that just spit in the face of the lore ("He's half human!" wait what?), thankfully a number of those things seem to be ignored (though the 8th Doctor is still considered canon.)
Kicker is the movie is only about an hour and a half long, so it's not like they needed to stretch for time or anything, just nothing really happens.
(yes, I am aware the old series was notably different stylistically than the new series, but it seems the movie falls somewhere in between in a bad way)
-
Fans hate the movie primarily because it is just shit. Doctor Who canon is pretty flexible by nature.
-
Well, it's not just shitty, it's boring shit, which is the worst kind of shit. You can't really rage at it because it doesn't do anything wrong enough to piss you off, lacks anything worth mocking, has no "So Bad Its Good" qualities to it, just a complete and utter bore.
Heck, Mandy, 2/3rds of the way into the movie, went "I kind of don't want to finish this..." and told her if she doesn't, she should just leave...and she did.
-
Doctor Who: Day of the Doctor
Hey, I saw it in a theater. IIIIIN THREEEEEE DEEEEEE. So it counts.
Anyway, John Hurt was amazing, the script was mostly great, the fanservice nods got me right in the nerd-heart, just a great special overall. Well, mostly. It goes out of its way to pretend The End Of Time never happened, which took some serious effort to look past and really got in the way of the climax because I had to consciously ignore the giant contradiction with Tennant's finale. But then there was the ending scene and it was awesome, so I mostly forgive it.
(Worst part was the 3D itself. Ugh. I've never worn one of those stupid polarized glasses before and I never will again. Almost left five minutes in, but luckily my stomach settled. The whole thing was still a blurry mess half the time and the fancy effects were never justified.)
-
Watching End of Time again, it actually doesn't contradict the climax that much (in fact, they showed End of Time RIGHT AFTER the 50th Anniversary.) The 10th acknowledges Timelocks exist earlier in the episode, and we can assume he's tried to save Gallifrey before (in fact, in earlier episodes he's stated he tried and knows its impossible), and this is how he knows Gallifrey is Timelocked (despite the ending claim of "we forget this entirely.") End of Time doesn't actually say "Gallifrey is destroyed", just it's sent back into the Timelock. Now, however, the 11th knows how it got Timelocked, and thus possibly can find a way to break the lock later on.
Chances are it'll never be undone, granted, because that's kind of the hook of the new series (last Timelord, yada yada yada.) It works as an explanation given the massive elastic rules Doctor Who works on, or alternatively, "Time can be re-written" is kind of a consistently stated scenario, and the 10th openly states the oddity of the scenario in question and how something external must be letting them do it.
Oh, if we're counting specials like that, might as well mentioned I saw "Time and Space" special the night before, aka "Reinactment of the behind the scenes look to the William Hartnell Era of Doctor Who."
Dunno how much of that was real and how much of that was made up just to make the thing more interesting (obviously, even the real stuff would have some embellishment just to make it more interesting), though from what I understand it was a relatively accurate portrayal of how Hartnell actually felt in the situation. Guess it's kind of neat to see interpretation of what actually happened to get the show off the ground, and somehow I don't think William Hartnell saw Matt Smith, dressed as the 11th Doctor, as he was leaving the set for the last time...just a hunch <_<
-
Day of the Doctor: Counting it on the same logic as Shale.
Yeah, solid all around. Works as a hook for next season. Moffat is just a better single story writer than a full arc writer.
On-screen chemistry was great. Plot was acceptable. Just generally solid. A little bummed Eccleston didn't reprise at all, but, ultimately, it is better. The 9th had and finished his story arc which wouldn't have sat well against this story.
Blows to be the 11th, though. So full of hope, then Christmas Special will happen.
-
Although at the same time, Eccleston's stock footage put in a better performance than the last film he was in!
-
Eh. He was fine in Dark World. He really wasn't given anything to work with there.
-
The stock footage of Eccleston was still better usage of him than Malakith was. The 9th Doctor was just straight up better than "I'm the bad guy, fear my generic motives!" That wasn't his fault because yeah, nothing to work with, but still superior usage nonetheless.
-
So I saw Hunger Games: Catching Fire.
It is kinda slow, but I enjoyed the character back-and-forth where it existed. I also liked the subtle prod at Twilight with the whole "what's your favorite color?" scene. I dunno if that was in the original book, but I'm at the point where I realize all Hunger Games needs to make money is "to be better than Twilight" and it succeeds at that! Katniss isn't the world's best female protagonist like people keep talking about, but she's serviceable and the story is interesting enough, though predictable.
The last hour was action-packed enough that spectacle overtook my critical side and I just enjoyed it, so that's worthy of something. I will continue to give it $10 in two years when the next one comes out I guess.
-
Resident Evil Retribution: Zombie bikers with machine guns. President Wesker, savior of humanity. Oh man, does the badness snowball with this film. I straight up can't wait for the final movie in this series. RE movies keep getting worse somehow, it's amazing.
-
So I saw Hunger Games: Catching Fire.
It is kinda slow, but I enjoyed the character back-and-forth where it existed. I also liked the subtle prod at Twilight with the whole "what's your favorite color?" scene. I dunno if that was in the original book, but I'm at the point where I realize all Hunger Games needs to make money is "to be better than Twilight" and it succeeds at that! Katniss isn't the world's best female protagonist like people keep talking about, but she's serviceable and the story is interesting enough, though predictable.
The last hour was action-packed enough that spectacle overtook my critical side and I just enjoyed it, so that's worthy of something. I will continue to give it $10 in two years when the next one comes out I guess.
$20. They're breaking it into HP-style Part 1 & 2. I found CF to be faster paced than the first, but the first moved really slowly. I'm a Hunger Games fan anyway. #teamkatniss #teampeeta Might I ask what theatre you went to? I went to an iPic @ the Domain here; ritzy place with overpriced food and beer. I've decided that although I love pale ales in soft leather recliners while watching films, this is quite dangerous for my lovehandles....
-
CF was the best Hunger Games book by far (I'd go as far to say the only actually good one), and it easily outdid the first movie as well. The first one didn't quite live up to its reputation and is fairly tame and septic with its brutality, the third is just.... bonkers for many reasons and ends terribly in a way that really showcased the writer's shortcomings, but CF was genuinely entertaining.
Also, can't go wrong with Phillip Seymour Hoffman in anything.
-
Conan the Barbarian (2011): I was in the mood for dumb hack and slash. I wasn't expecting anything quality from this and it somehow still managed to be a disappointment. It's impossible not to compare it to the 80's version (of which I am very fond), which is possibly not fair but does highlight how inept a production this was. It takes forfreakingever for there to be an adult, ass-kicking Conan onscreen. It felt like half an hour for that introduction! The original spent at most half the time and about 20% the dialogue on this and was better for it. Man it's not like Arnold could act either but at least they recognized that and barely had him talk. There's plenty of talking here and it's basically all terrible (three screenwriters and none of them can field a decent one-liner). But mostly I credit the director for the movie's suckage. Almost every fight scene occurs in narrow quarters that don't allow for proper setpiece battles; action sequences are cramped, cluttered, and sometimes too full of rapid-fire cuts (the plague of modern action movies). All the actors look bored. Even Ron Perlman. I mean geez we had a better female lead in the original and that was in the eighties and Sandahl Bergman wasn't even an actress! Also I still have no idea why the final dungeon self-destructed, that's supposed to happen after the villain dies people.
And most criminally, the music is not remotely tuneful. Contemplate this on the tree of woe!
But hey, the credits included a listing for "Topless Wenches," so that's something. You can't have a proper Conan movie without boobs.
~
Pacific Rim: It was okay. Kind of fun as a love letter to Godzilla movies and the like, can't imagine it being much to note without some nostalgia to lean on though.
Speaking of kaiju: Meeple, did I ever toss Big Man Japan at you when I watched it a while back? Meant to recommend that, think I forgot. It's pretty special. I kinda get the impression this is what Christopher Guest would produce were he Japanese. Mockumentary about a professional kaiju fighter. Camera crew follows him around during his ordinary daily life--separated from his wife, daughter thinks he's a bum, hippies throw rocks through his window because his transformation sequence gobbles up too much electricity and scares off the local wildlife--and occasionally MONSTER ATTACK and the producers are enough into the material to have considered the logistics of giant person underwear. Then either the protagonist or the movie itself goes totally insane (I'm still not sure which) and the finale kind of defies verbal description.
I think it's basically just a decent movie that gains a lot from shared fondness for the subject matter, hence recommendation. Effects are a bit squiffy, but given the subject matter that may be appropriate.
-
No, you did not, Cid.
-
so DVD reviews...
2 Guns: Was pretty action packed. I liked the humor being chucked out between Mark and Denzel. It was truly a good film, and I didn't expect a part in the middle of the movie, but it made that part all the more interesting at the end. I really can't say much given the previews don't give it much justice. And the best part (or rotten part) is that this movie was based on a comic book, so YAY! Edit Addition: For Thanksgiving, I had mother watch this movie. She tends to watch movies twice if she likes it. This was one of those movies, though if it was because it was an action movie (which she likes) or if it's because it's Denzel (one of her favorite actors) is up for debate.
Red 2: I almost finished this movie. It's not as good as the first one. I sat through the first movie with no issues. But I like it, but my TV speakers started to break during the movie, so I was going to finish it in the living room. I promptly forgot I still had the Dark Shadows movie in my PS3, so I didn't finish Red 2 yet. But I do have to admit, I love the way everyone was backstabbing each other in the movie. I'll probably have more once I finish the movie.
-
The Hobbit 2: It's fun. The random crap they made up to stretch this out to 3 movies wasn't too bad, actually, if you don't mind awesome-yet-ludicrous set-piece encounters that feel like they were conveniently designed for an action RPG. So sure, it gets a thumbs up. That said, 3 minor nitpicks and 1 problem that is probably unavoidable but a problem nevertheless:
* They're working Sauron in a lot more than I expected. I thought that Gandalf only really figured out Sauron was back and a threat at the beginning of LOTR? Sure, he suspected earlier, but he didn't have any proof for Saruman or whatever.
* They played Smaug more for menace than comedy than I expected. It's been ages since I read the book but Smaug was actually rather entertaining to my recollection, but that aspect was somewhat played down.
* Okay, it was just a throwaway line, but... did somebody seriously mention an election?! In Tolkien's uber-royalist world and viewpoint? wat.
* Just like Hobbit 1, there isn't a damn ending, the movie just stops. As noted above, it isn't clear they can get around this without mauling the story, so it's probably unavoidable, but it definitely feels more like a miniseries episode than a stand-alone movie. (Each of the LOTR movies can stand on their own to a degree, which is not a shock, as they were actually separate books and usually something interesting happened at the end of them even as they set up the next book/movie.)
-
Obligatory statement that Tolkein wanted LOTR to be one book and it was the publisher who decreed otherwise (if memory serves).
-
I would believe Tolkien would want the book to be as unreadable as possible. There is a reason there is editors. Sometimes they even do things for the right reasons.
-
Hobbit 2: This shit was duuuuumb. And lots of fun. 10/10, would watch again, etc, or something.
-
Frozen: It was... pretty cool! (groan)
I'm a bit sour on Disney acquiring Marvel now. The aftercredits scene where Elsa joins the Avengers is just taking things too far. (groan)
Alright enough with the jokes. Overall decent movie but the ending was crap OH YEAH LOVE (SNAP). The scene when Elsa first goes up the mountain was excellent though. You always say why would someone choose to be a villain? But you can really see it happening in that scene, with the right kind of background and motivation that contributed to her situation.
-
Frozen - Great movie, love Elsa in particular~ I have no opinion on the ending.
Hobbit 2 - Better than the first. Just has less walking and more character work.
-
Frozen was solid overall but with some serious weaknesses - the villain reveal, half of the songs, the "LOVE! Okay everything is better" ending. But I liked the performances and the overall arc of the story way more than any of that irritated me.
-
The songs were not the best, definitely.
-
Anchorman 2: Some parts are kind of terrible, others are great. The great outweighs the terrible. It feels like the first half of the movie is too rapid-fire, with jokes that have almost no setup and get no time to breathe, while the second half is more deliberately paced and errs on the side of letting the gags go on too long, but mostly gets it right. Didn't need the satire elements at all.
-
Saw The Secret Life of Walter Mitty on Christmas day.
Not bad. 6/10?
The cinematography was beautiful. The story arc was Idiot Ball all over. A lot of the action was wholly unbelievable. (And yes, the conceit is that he goes off into his "zone" imagining cool things, but I'm talking about the ones he actually ends up doing.) But despite that, I think Ben Stiller managed to be a little bit charming, and Sean Penn (?!) played the perfect gruff, world-worn, still-loves-his-job wilderness photographer. The final punchline was touching.
I was really distracted by Evil Executive's lack of chin, but he played the perfect douchebro acquisitions manager, so I forgive him for his physical weakness. The beard probably helped, although it highlighted his lack of chin to an alarming degree.
I had no idea when this movie was taking place. They had cell phones and computers and internet, but they didn't have Google on their phones. The original story was from the 50s or 60s, and this was decidedly not then. But was it present day with more Idiot Ball? Or was it the 90s? BUT NO ONE HAD PAGERS OR RIDICULOUS SAT PHONES.
Well, whatever. Pretty pictures.
-
Why do people keep writing scripts for Walter Mitty where he actually does things. Why.
(Not that the Danny Kaye version is all bad by any means, but that part of it is still infuriating.)
-
47 Ronin: Keanu Reeves really, really wishes he had made The Last Samurai. This is not it. But it's a pretty movie nonetheless!
-
47 Ronin: Keanu Reeves really, really wishes he had made The Last Samurai. This is not it. But it's a pretty movie nonetheless!
As long as he's still able to have an accent or convey emotions, but not both at the same time, I'm comfortable with it.
-
He doesn't even bother trying an accent. Or emotions. Just says fuck it all I am who I am, an inanimate block of wood. I am comfortable with this.
-
Philip Seymour Hoffman is dead. He was so fucking good in everything.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2014/02/02/philip-seymour-hoffman-dead/5162669/
-
Elysium: I see Neil Blomkamp has yet to run out of social issues to oversimplify for the purpose of exploding via hyperkinetic action sequences. Pretty much what I expected, lands squarely in the "Eh, it was alright," category. Some nice set design but really nothing outstanding, and a lot of what happens just makes no sense. Okay future rich guys, so you build a gated community in space to keep the poor folks out of your healthcares but you evidently have no form of security outside of one dude on the ground with SAMs? Who you then fire for the gross immorality inherent in his obediently murdering whoever the fuck you tell him, and then it's open season so pretty much any hobo in a spaceship can crash on your lawn with basically no interference? You are just the worst rich person gated community in space. Seriously three dudes with grenades take this place apart from the inside. Where's all your droids at? The lategame betrayal is also highly nonsensical. I mean, people in that line of work, I tend to think they know what they are. If they had the personal skills or ambition to be PRINCE OF SPACE they probably would've tried already, it takes more than a computer program.
But man Wikus has seriously been popping the crazy pills. Took me a while to recognize him.
-
The Lego Movie: They got *everything* right. Down to the way the helmets break and the designs get tarnished on the 80s spacemen. Everything is indeed, awesome.
-
Heat- Saw this for the first time yesterday. It's too long, Pacino is chewing scenery like nothing else, and the pacing is as bad as you'd expect from a three hour movie. What a waste of a strong cast.
-
Look at this thread. It isn't full of people talking about how Looper is the best movie of the year.
Go watch Looper. It is the best movie of the year.
There was not 5 minutes in that movie where they didn't do exactly what I hoped they would do with a scene. Holy fucking shit this movie is great. The setting is fantastic, the casting is amazing, the story is great and the dialogue is well written. The tagline and quick run down do absolutely nothing to do justice to this film.
I think the only thing I can really talk about without spoilering stuff (meh to spoilers as per normal but you know, respect for the audience and all that) but most importantly with sufficiently describing what is so great about them.
The setting is a run down near future. It works really well because they keep it vague on the how or why of it, but it is pretty much Future Depression, there is vagrants all up ins and people skip town on trains. Crime is pretty all encompassing and people kill drifters often etcetc. The really cool part is that while there is still nods to technological progression and there being newer inventions, the vast majority get by on fixed up functional modern technology. Cars are repurposed for alternate more efficient cheap power sources, but those expensive bulky metal chassis are reused (cars with solar panel (http://www.shinesolar.net) strapped to them and random tubes is pretty much it for set design). They use some of the more automated tech for heavy work (maintaining a farm), but plenty of simple work is still done by hand.
It honestly reminded me of two films from the last few years in setting. Starting with the sacrilege first, honestly it is a similar approach to tech that Real Steel took. Its lo-fi sci-fi, its cool and simple. No where near as soft and friendly as Real Steel of course (though it does actually head in a bleak direction like I mentioned I would have done after watching Real Steel!). The other one is Children of Men. Both are set in a bleak kind of run down future, but for their own reasons. Children of Men is bleak and run down because people just gave up because everyone is sterile. Definitely going out with a whimper there. Here stuff is more run down, but it is just that they both use conventional functional design for everything. Its cool.
The other great thing about the setting? Well it is a story that involves time travel* so we have a second even more future future that is referenced. We find out fuck all about this. Just some simple bits and pieces. There is Time Travel there. Some stuff happened. People still live and mostly get on as they always do. Tech is higher and tracking people around the world is much much easier. That is about the extent of it.
Watch this movie. It is Inception good and well worth your time and money.
*As opposed to a time travel story where it is the thing that drives the plot, in this it is merely a tool and is kind of set dressing.
I do agree with you.. Looper was the best movie but which movie do like most in 2013? There were plenty so please share your opinion.
-
What the actual fuck, Disney. You need to fire your promotion teams.
Frozen had practically nothing to do with that stupid snowman and reindeer. I get that you're all about the kids, but for christ's sake I didn't even know there were PEOPLE in this movie!
Finally saw it, though. I enjoyed it. I am not sure I'd put it in the same category as The Lion King or Aladdin, but it fits with Princess and the Frog and the "new" classics. I liked "Let It Go" a lot. The beginning was beautiful and heart-breaking. The middle and end parts got a little more eh, but I'm glad the ending (MINOR SPOILER) did not revolve around the love story. (END SPOILER)
-
I do agree with you.. Looper was the best movie but which movie do like most in 2013? There were plenty so please share your opinion.
Genesect and the Legend Awakened easily the best of 2013
-
Lego Movie was a lot of fun. They use the property in some neat, creative ways, the writing is sharp (it's the Clone High guys, that's to be expected) and, most importantly, I will never get tired of Morgan Freeman insulting people. The movie could be 100 minutes of him being a dick to Emmet and I would buy the blu-ray on Day One.
-
Frozen: More or less see Ashley. Though incest jokes proving to be more slightly more accurate than expected surprised me.
-
Lego Movie was a lot of fun. They use the property in some neat, creative ways, the writing is sharp (it's the Clone High guys, that's to be expected) and, most importantly, I will never get tired of Morgan Freeman insulting people. The movie could be 100 minutes of him being a dick to Emmet and I would buy the blu-ray on Day One.
Agreed. I also think a movie centered around Lego Batman would be more compelling than whatever the hell Zack Snyder's going to do.
-
High Anxiety: I got a lot of Mel Brooks movies on Blu-ray in a set and while I saw most of them, this one is one I barely heard anything about, nor have seen...so figured I should fix that!
It's good fun, as you'd expect from Mel Brooks. Not much else to say.
-
Frozen: I liked this one a hell of a lot. Very resonant. I liked its deconstructions of the "Princess story". It is actually the first Disney movie I have unashamedly enjoyed this much since like... Mulan. And considering how much of a turn-off CG animation is to me, this is saying a lot more than you think.
-
Iron Man 3: Finally got around to watching this. I was genuinely surprised by how much I liked it. Fun script, good (if somewhat sparse until the end) action, and I really like where all the main characters end up. It doesn't make much difference for the Marvel movie universe as a whole, but as development for Tony in particular it works really well - certainly a hell of a lot better than IM2. Also Guy Pearce is always great so I didn't mind him taking center stage as the main villain (plus I was spoiled on the big twist by general pop-culture osmosis, so there was no rage at the bait-and-switch. It's actually a clever Evil Plot!).
-
The Wind Rises has some pacing problems, is full of dissonance and barely touches on some of the larger issues that come along with the subject material, but my God it may be the most aesthetically beautiful film I've ever seen. In some ways it is a fantastic sendoff for Hayao Miyazaki since it is very introspective, but I just want him to keep making movies forever.
-
Six String Samurai: I forgot how dumb/amazing this movie was.
-
Taken 2: Well that was lame. It's a stripped-down version of Taken without the globetrotting, or Liam Neeson really hunting anybody down, or much of anything beyond a minimalist retread of the first movie (the daughter gets a few badass moments but then gets thrown onto a shelf before the climax). There are bad guys, they fuck with Liam Neeson, Liam Neeson shoots them all in the most rote way possible. Liam Neeson.
-
He has a specific set of skills that are completely under-utilised in the name of money. Fuck it, daddy is getting paid son. As much as I enjoy him as an actor, it is a step up from doing stunt casting in video games like he was before the while Liam Neeson is a bad ass old man thing was kicked off by Taken.
And hey at least this one is fun compared to the time they tried it with Mel Gibson in Payback.
-
Liam Neeson is more fun than Mel Gibson.
Fuckin' revelation of the millenium.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yFwQAelDrY
That's just not true.
-
Taken 2: Well that was lame. It's a stripped-down version of Taken without the globetrotting, or Liam Neeson really hunting anybody down, or much of anything beyond a minimalist retread of the first movie (the daughter gets a few badass moments but then gets thrown onto a shelf before the climax). There are bad guys, they fuck with Liam Neeson, Liam Neeson shoots them all in the most rote way possible. Liam Neeson.
The scene where Liam Neeson tells his daughter to throw a grenade out the window so he can hear it, all so she can draw circles on a map to locate him is the dumbest thing I saw all of last year.
-
I take it you did not watch Dexter then.
-
Saw Captain America 2. Good times. More of a direct action thriller than a superhero movie (I was genuinely surprised to see normal dudes getting straight up shot so much so early) but works very hard at being an action movie with beeeg plot twists. I appreciate a work of fiction sneaky enough to use obvious plot twists to distract from more important ones. Story felt pretty self-contained in the way of not obviously suffering from contortions to fit future Marvel movie developments (I think Iron Man 2 suffered the most from this) while still dropping bombs that will obviously affect other movies. Feel they didn't necessarily do as much with Cap adjusting to modern world as they could have, but all in all quite satisfying as a piece of entertainment.
Random great stuff:
-Cap's to-do list.
-WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A GAME
-Namedroppin' Dr. Strange? Aw yeah.
-There's a Shield agent named Sitwell. He is completely hairless. (I understand some AD alumni are behind this movie.)
-I'm told there's a wicked visual reference to another movie in the last scene, but I don't like said movie (Pulp Fiction) enough to personally verify.
Spoilery stuff: I'm glad Evil Bucky got to walk away at the end. While suitably menacing as an adversary, the actor himself didn't get a ton to do and it would've felt like a waste having him get unmasked just in time to die again. You get the impression they do have more planned for him, which is nice.
Kinda split on the Hydra reveal. I love the manner in which it was presented, but making today's problems be active agitation from yesterday's villains is kind of a pat way of absolving responsibility for today's problems. I'd be more okay with it if the actively douchy Shield members didn't genuinely know they were really working for Hydra, and their agenda had simply shifted so far in that direction that the difference was imperceptible.
Did not recognize the baddie in the post-credits sequence, but the twins were obvious enough.
-
-There's a Shield agent named Sitwell. He is completely hairless. (I understand some AD alumni are behind this movie.)
First off, the connection never occurred to me, but that is indeed awesome now that you bring it up.
Secondly, he's actually a recurring character kind of like Coulson, only less significant. His first appearance was in Thor, I believe, just being some random guy who popped up to tell Coulson something. He was later used in some of the one-shot shorts (which I have to get around seeing), and made a few cameos in Agents of SHIELD. In fact, latest episode has him saying he's been relocated to some ship, which from my understanding, is a blatant Captain America 2 tie-in where early in the movie, we see he's on said very ship.
...and yes, the fact that you didn't realize he was a recurring character shows just how "significant" he actually is (contrast to Coulson who is pretty memorable, even before Avengers/Agents of SHIELD)
-
Blade Trinity: Even more amazing than I remember it being. Plot that makes no sense: Check. Stilted dialog that ranges from awful to hilarious: check.An excuse for the two young (at the time) supporting characters to run around in revealing clothes: check. Pro wrestler vampire: check!
Basically everything I hoped for, and more. Also rewatched half of bad boys 2 before falling asleep, because Bad Boys 2 is our generation's citizen kane.
-
Captain America- Y'know... I'm honestly pretty okay with Zola being behind most of the 20th century. i just wish it had been more "Haha, the names may have changed, but I think you'll agree that HYDRA has indeed triumphed. Heil HYDRA!!", rather than the SHIELD folk literally being all HEIL HYDRA and shit. I guess they want to have HYDRA's other schemes be the cornerstone of other movies, so maybe have Pierce be in on the Hydra aspects, but have folks like Sitwell and all them just be "no, Fury is naive, we must ensure peace at all cost".
Cap himself I like in this though. I feel like his arc is more split up than some other characters, so his first movie is just establishing his character, while Avengers deals with him questioning if he has a place in the modern world. Then this movie moves on to him debating how he can live up to his own standards and do what he thinks the world needs him to do. Presumably in the next movie we'll believe that a man can fly.
-
A few things about Cap America.
Given how they did everything, and how the comics have treated "it" in other universes, I'm thinking the movie is actually setting up AoS with their main villains. If AoS gets renewed for a second season, I forsee there's going to be more of the character crossovers (maybe even the more "famous" ones) due to the effects of this.
Btb, did anyone watch the after credits? I have a feeling there's at least 2 more Cap movies coming out to deal with these issues.
And yes, I know the "twins" are part of the Avengers storyline, but what Strucker said in the post-credits was that he had other ways to distract the heroes, which hints that there may indeed be more to do with trying to summon something with Loki's staff. Or worse.
-
Given how they did everything, and how the comics have treated "it" in other universes, I'm thinking the movie is actually setting up AoS with their main villains. If AoS gets renewed for a second season, I forsee there's going to be more of the character crossovers (maybe even the more "famous" ones) due to the effects of this.
So we can hold out for some Power Man and Iron Fist on prime time TV in a few years time?
-
CK: yeah, that was exactly my response.
Apparently there was a second post-credits sequence that I didn't stick around for. Doesn't sound like anything huge though. Presumably No Longer Evil Bucky touring the Smithsonian exhibit?
-
I wouldn't be surprised. They had Nick Fury appear in one of the first episodes of AoS. And a minor character from one of the other movies to appear in the episodes. If they are going to keep an inter-connected universe and they want newer fans, they are going to make an effort to bring more characters (C-list and D-list) to the small screen. Hence the mini-series on Netflix we discussed a while back.
And I saw both parts of the post-credits. I ended up awkwardly standing in the hall, waiting for the credits to end, due to the Avengers having 2 post credit endings.It was setting up for him to start to figure out who he was, or who he was before. I think there was a huge arc in the comics after Winter Soldier was freed from Hydra that Captain America went after him, to help his friend. Hence why I said there's at least 2 Captain movies after this at least.
-
Captain America: loved it. Arnim fucking Zola.
-
Captain America
Today I learned that the patriot act was secretly written by Hitler.
-
Captain America 2: Good movie that is less than the sum of its parts. The good guy characters are all great, the Winter Soldier is great, and lots of the scenes are snazzily written & genuinely fun, but the overarching villain plot and its implications... bleh. See CK, basically. They had a sort of daring / gutsy idea (SHIELD is the real villain?!) but defanged it by making lots of SHIELD, not just Robert Redford, *actual* Nazis. Which... retroactively makes all sorts of characters less sympathetic than I suspect they're supposed to be; for starters, Nick Fury needs to be sooooo fired. It kind of reminds me how some people give Harry Potter book 4 crap because the series tries to simultaneously sell the fact that Dumbledore is a badass, yet Book 4 relies upon him not noticing a Death Eater literally under his nose, a fair complaint. But hey, at least that was just 1 spy, and 1 spy who laid low most of the book. Nazi-SHIELD has explicitly NOT laid low and been doing random evil shit this whole time, and is composed of a lot more than 1 dude, so, um, either Fury is complicit and agreed with the assassinations & the like, or even he doesn't know what his own agency is doing. I doubt that either of these implications are intended!
Also, there's a certain amount of "it's a movie" suspension of disbelief I can give to various incidents where the villains get to cheat & have weirdly loyal minions & do stuff with less repercussions than there really should be, but CA2 definitely jumps that rail. The shoot-out in the DC streets is a HUGE incident, and Fury definitely killed or at least wounded some of the fake cops! What happens when they show up at the hospital?! Fine, the Nazi part of SHIELD takes over the investigation, but it's literally impossible to cover this up - I'd buy it more if they somehow blamed the real good guys off a faked confession from their own fake cop or something. And the final showdown sure makes it seem like the Nazis were a huge proportion of SHIELD.
I'd rather they either:
A) We want Cap fighting Nazis, fine. Robert Redford is a Nazi, he can order the Winter Soldier around, but the mooks to beat up during the movie come from scattered Hydra cells who are basically a big distraction and an excuse to launch Project Insight - it's supposed to be a "wipe out Hydra forever" plan. Of course Redford plans to reprogram it to make himself Emperor or something. Cap can fight Nazis most of the movie - who are now more realistically in the shadows, because HORDES OF NAZIS IN A GOV'T AGENCY WAT - and the plot still basically works.
B) We want Cap fighting a morally grey SHIELD. Well... go with the original intent of Project Insight, then! Security is too important to wait for human confirmation, so we're going to power Project Insight with Zola's algorithm because we should trust uploaded Swiss Nazi scientists. Redford is a villain not because he's actually a member of Hydra, but because SHIELD is drifting too far on the security side of security vs. freedom and is willing to trust a computer program to run the world. He doesn't pick a fight with Cap, Cap picks a fight with *him* over it, while Nick Fury is in the middle.
Both of the above options would allow SHIELD's better half to still hold up as the sympathetic force we were supposed to expect from the earlier movies, too....
That said, it was an enjoyable movie, mostly since the good guys are still tons of fun. It'd have been awesome without the over-the-top villain aftertaste.
-
Arnim Zola is happy that you remembered his proper nationality.
Grand Budapest Hotel: Just saw this. Lots of fun once you're past the like three different narrative framing devices and in the actual movie. Wes Anderson somehow just keeps getting more Wes Andersony with each Wes Anderson movie. It's amazing. Goldberg device escape sequence? Goldberg device escape sequence.
Signs I never expected to see in a movie: SKI LODGE FOR CLERICAL USE ONLY
-
Captain America 2: There's some stuff I really liked, mainly the three main characters (Chris Evans is still the best casting choice in a superhero movie since JK Simmons), but on the whole, what a friggin' disappointment. Echoing SnowFire on a lot of basic believability/consistency stuff, but also:
The fact that both the big plot twist and the villains' ultimate scheme are both revealed via infodump is really, really clunky. The fact that Arnim Zola appears in pitch-freaking-perfect comic form, and then gets one scene where he does nothing but deliver the backstory, followed by him exploding and never coming back (no backups? Seriously?) adds insult to narrative injury.
Compounding this is the fact that Pierce isn't really a Cap villain - he's a Nick Fury villain, and to a lesser extent a Black Widow villain. Which is why they're the ones who take him out, so I guess that works, but it leaves Steve with no victory to win other than to punch his best friend a lot and bring down another evil plane (why does Captain America hate planes so much?). I really really really wish they'd had Zola as the active leader of HYDRA, and Pierce as either a well-meaning law-and-order hardliner or a second-in-command. As it is it feels like they wasted Zola both as a character and as an opportunity to give Cap a full-on supervillain to foil.
Also, I have one major problem with the ending, namely that the loyal elements of SHIELD are totally useless. One of the overriding themes of the Cap movies is that Captain America inspires ordinary people to become heroes. Which works great with Falcon, but less so when he gives that rousing speech over the Triskelion PA system that gets tons of people killed without actually helping a damn thing. Cap and Falcon have to be the ones who stop the helicarriers, so in the name of plot contrivance every single good-guy mook who tries to stop HYDRA gets unceremoniously murdered. Steve's inspiring moment makes things worse for everybody and causes meaningless innocent deaths. That shouldn't happen! And the annoying thing is that there are three helicarriers, so it's not like it would have wrecked the climax for SHIELD to ground one on their own. Give the ordinary joes a win and that whole final sequence would go down a lot smoother.
On the whole it was fun, but it's the first Marvel movie in a while that I feel no desire to rewatch; the plot has too many wasted opportunities and the action's good but without any really fun setpiece that would make me want to come back to it. Probably the second-worst in the franchise, ahead of Iron Man 2?
-
Saw a bunch of stuff, too lazy to mention until now. Will be brief!
Great Gatsby: At first, I thought this was really odd and surreal movie...then I realized that was entirely the point since it's from Nick's perspective, so of course crap is going to be blown out of proportions into extremes, so the "Good" becomes "Great", the "nice" becomes "Grand", the "bad" because "awful" etc. and that made it work better because it helped remind us "This is one guy's perspective, it is going to be biased." Certainly made use of the narrative more so than most where it's just one guy talking and we see scenes allegedly exactly as they happen.
Pacific Rim: Believe it or not, I wasn't super hyped about this movie, and honestly, I didn't think it was THAT amazing. The fight scenes were kind of disappointing compared to the kind of stuff I've seen in the Heisei Godzilla and Gamera films, and it doesn't help that the Kaiju designs are just so BORING. They have a bunch of neat Jagers, then kill 2 of them off in one fight scene, just so the main one can look more awesome when it takes down the two things single handedly? Yeah, sorry, that's just cheap; if you make awesome looking robots, MAKE USE OF THEM, don't just make them to job to the uninspired giant monsters.
American Hustle: Well, it kept my attention, but I wouldn't call it WOMG AMAZING!!! like some claimed. Mother claims movie is better on a rewatch when you pick up things you didn't notice the first time which...maybe I can see. It's not bad, but yeah.
Captain America: Winter Soldier: Honestly, I don't agree with the complaints in this topic. I found it fun from start to finish with a good core cast, and a plot twist that was unexpected; the only problem was Agents of SHIELD is too tied into the movie and I couldn't continue watching that until I saw this, DARN YOU CINEMATIC UNIVERSE! I will note that like I have heard, yes, the Winter Soldier is highly underutilized and feels like a needless thread for the movie, only tossed in because "We need a Super Villain who won't get curb stomped by Captain America because climax." The climax did go on a little too long though; I mean, what was there was fun, but the movie was already getting lengthy and they could have cut that down by 10 minutes...actually, when I think about it, if they cut out all the Winter Soldier related stuff and just made it "Cap and Widow vs. the World", the length complaints would have gone.
Frozen: Finally saw this and...well, for the most part, it lived up to it's hype. That's all I'll say about it because I don't think there really needs much else to be said...no, I am not leading up to a pun regarding a certain song either (that last part came to me last minute and went "no, I am totally NOT doing that, screw you!")
-
Everyone should watch the Raid and the Raid 2.
-
Yessssssss just off the strength of The Raid. That had some of the best knife violence I have seen in ages.
You saw Dred right Duck? Similar but different. Way better than a 2000AD property film has any right to be.
-
Yessssssss just off the strength of The Raid. That had some of the best knife violence I have seen in ages.
You saw Dred right Duck? Similar but different. Way better than a 2000AD property film has any right to be.
The Raid 2 has excellent baseball bat and hammer violence. Critics are actually docking it for having too much plot (it's two and a half hours long), which I can see but I thought it was fairly unobtrusive and it at least sets some stakes even if it was done in a dumb and clumsy way. Still, the last hour has action scenes that are unlike anything I've ever seen before, and the impact from the hits and cracking of the bones are just as visceral than the first, if not more. I had never exclaimed aloud while watching a violent action movie before watching this series. It is wonderful. PS - On my first viewing, I watched the first Raid without subtitles and it didn't matter.
I wasn't in love with Dredd, in part because I had watched the Raid just before it and didn't really dig the hyperstylized slow motion stuff. It was kind of cool for the first scene but I was primed with the way action was shot in the Raid, which didn't rely on any tricks like quick cutting or shaky cam but instead shot the action scenes in a really fluid way. The base stories of the two movies is similar as well but I liked the action in the Raid quite a lot more. Apparently, Dredd's 3D was something special but I wasn't able to see it in that format.
-
I can't do 3D (dat vision impairment) but there is distinct sequences that are pretty in 2D that are very clearly made for wow factor in 3D (ie anything on Slow-Mo).
They would definitely hurt each other to watch super close together. Where Raid is about delicious violence, Dredd is really much more about better quiet moments I think. The "I am the law" sequence, the bits with the corrupt judges, when he finds a way outside and runs into the kids on the skate ramp and of course any time a fight has been won and people get thrown off things.
Raid's quiet bits are sometimes intense (like when he hides in between the space in the walls), but pail in comparison to dudes just completely destroying each other.
-
Amazing Spider-Man 2- Well, contrary to the implication of the previews, this is not in fact a Sinister Six storyline. Thank god. (spoiler: they ARE kinda going that direction though.) Otherwise its strengths are as the last movie: Andrew Garfield is a pretty good spidey, and is better here really as he's clearly more straight up superhero than vigilante, and Emma Stone is a delight.
Okay. So... they go through with the Death of Gwen Stacey with only the minor change that the Green Goblin is already Harry Osbourn and he's not dead. I will grant, yes, those are some fine balls you have Sony. But you realize that the main reason I, and probably most of your audience, are on board with this movie is because of Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, and the chemistry between them, and you just killed two of those three reasons, yes?
On the whole, enjoyable. Still would rather have Marvel making these. Although they can keep the cast, they are swell.
-
Amazing Spider-Man 2 - good as long as you don't think about it too much. The fights are well done, the one-liners are snappy, and the main cast all have great chemistry with each other. Reflect on it afterward and you start to realize that nobody's motivations make a whole lot of sense and Peter himself never actually grows as a person, plus there's a while bunch of bloat in the script (amount of mattering Peter's parents do: zero) that could have been used for actual themes. Still, it's a fun popcorn movie.
-
Days of Future Past: It's excellent. The ending had me in tears.
Wait until you see Quicksilver. :)
-
Days of Future Past: Very good. Not perfect, but easily the second best X-Men movie after X2. Suffers from a few moments where it dips a bit too deeply into corny and heavy sentimentality to where it affects the dialogue, but thankfully they're few and far between, overall easier to stomach than the montage part of First Class. As Captain K notes though, the emotional payoff at the end is very well earned. Quicksilver is also possibly the best part of the movie.
-
No. the best part of the movie is
that it retcons X-Men 3 out of existence.
-
Captain K has it. Really this is the truest-to-source X-Men movie just because at long last there are enough of them for massive continuity changes to be made to X-Men history just the way god intended.
I thought it was good but felt it suffered from lack of a strong antagonist (Peter Dinklage was underused). Also had difficulty buying young Xavier's crisis of faith. You can walk or you can keep on helping people, pick one? All this science, I don't understand. And dude Hank you can cure paraplegia now why didn't you tell the world, yah?
Inferior to X2, leagues ahead of X3, dunno where it sits in relation to the others at the moment. Kind of a funny passing-of-the-torch parallel to ST:G--two captains, two professors, one Patrick Stewart! Except backwards in time. Well, if that's the intention (I assume it is). Re: the bumper, Okay, so we're in a desert I wonder what--waitaminute, desert = Egypt = Apocalypse, right? Aw goddammit. Well, I guess it was inevitable someday if these movies went on long enough. Dude seriously hires the lamest henchpeople though. The only X-Men villain that ever struck me as at all compelling in comics context was Magneto anyway (Stryker worked very well in X2, but I don't know him from original comic appearance).
Quicksilver is the most OP temp.
-
Wellll, they already categorically fucked up Phoenix/Dark Phoenix, and this movie is Days of Future Past, so Age of Apocalypse is really the only big time X-story they can adapt. Besides, it's an excuse to have more original cast shenanigans while still having the First Class people as the primary movers.
X-Men: Days of Future Past- cluster nostalgia bomb. Very nice all told.
-
Groundhog Day 2/All You Need is Kill/Edge of Tomorrow: Good movie, I enjoyed the humor injected into the story (I've read the manga already) and Tom Cruise wasn't bad. Ending was too happy, and doesn't even make sense, but whatever.
-
Groundhog Day 2/All You Need is Kill/Edge of Tomorrow: Good movie, I enjoyed the humor injected into the story (I've read the manga already) and Tom Cruise wasn't bad. Ending was too happy, and doesn't even make sense, but whatever.
Indeed. I really liked it. The ending totally agree with you for the most part. It makes sense in terms of he is getting the blood of the Omega on him, and it's been established that's how the power is passed, but the starting point he reverts to is pretty arbitrary and the Mimics staying dead is whatever. Would like to see his trip to the General's office on that run-through though...
I want one of those Mimic This shirts.
-
How to train your dragon:
Good, but there's this moment where all the sudden the number of people riding dragons jumps from one to like six very abruptly.
How to train your dragon 2:
Better. Introduces my favourite character in the series so far. Is really solidly written the whole way through. Does stuff with the story I didn't expect from a "kids movie".
-
I don't know what a kids movie is anymore.
In my theater, there were 0 kids.
0.
Every single person in the audience was between 18 and 35.
(It was a good movie. I liked. And Toothless is the most adorable awesome character ever.)
-
I think that's the problem both of you are having...
How to Train Your Dragon, alongside most of Dreamworks animated movies, are not "Kid's Movies." They intended for General Audience, "For the entire family", "For all ages", those kinds of things. IOWs, they're made in a way that both children and adults can enjoy them equally.
Yes, this is being technical.
-
Honestly, it is a slightly pedantic distinction, even though I use it myself. Also one used erratically by the public at large, making it even weaker. At best, Kid's X vs Family X is used as a rough measure of quality. Kid's stuff sucks, family stuff is good. Which doesn't make it any less weird to be surprised by the evolution of audience or themes.
Ultimately, while it is stuff intended to be appealing to adults watching as well, the core demographic is still children.
-
Djanjo Unchained- Wow. Mind blown. This was powerful. Doesn't cut any corners either, geez the gory. Watch out for your nuts. Also I guess Dr King reeeally didn't want to shake hands >_> Was there some trick to that, like Calvin would have unleashed poison during the handshake or something? Also I didn't think his sister was so bad at first <_< Was a bit disappointed Broomhilda wasn't a bit more assertive or that she didn't join in the fighting too, think something's been getting to me, at least she was trying to get away from the plantation behind the scenes and stuff~ On the other hand I'm not convinced all that death was necessary, but yeah not cutting corners, no compromise here.
-
How to Train Your Dragon 2: Good, but the human designs really weirded me out. Just strange-looking. Dragon designs were cool though! I think I said the same thing about the first movie.
Introduces my favourite character in the series so far.
Obviously Eret, son of Eret! His muscles are so dreamy!
Actually I'm surprised mc liked this movie. The mother abandons her infant son for her political agenda. Astrid lost all of her fieriness from the first movie. And Ruffnut was just used as a sex object and to treat others as sex objects.
-
Divergent: Not bad. I read the books recently and this is a fairly faithful adaptation. Suffers from the source material itself not being that strong. Four was very well cast, Tris not so much.
-
Despicable Me 2: Good beginning, good ending, WTF was going on with the middle. Lots of weird-bordering-on-creepy sideplots going on, especially the date scene. That song at the end makes up for a lot, though.
The Cabin In The Woods: A bunch of fun, whether or not you're especially familiar with the horror tropes it plays on. It's much more gory than suspenseful, and not even that gory - comedy is pretty clearly more important than both. It's also not exactly subtle about how it's satirizing the genre, but then the genre itself isn't exactly a bastion of subtlety to begin with.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy: Was lucky enough that there was a place playing the movie a day early near me so here we are! Anyway, movie is freaking hilarious and a hell of a lot of fun.
Congrats Marvel, you put Rocket Raccoon into a big summer blockbuster, and didn't screw it up. I still find it hard to believe they actually went through with it despite seeing the movie myself!
-
GotG- Great, but not amazing. I think I hyped it too much to myself, but it was still really good. They hit the right balance of levity and seriousness. The characters were good but the interaction felt forced a lot. I think what the movie was missing most was momentum. Plenty hilarious but the action didn't really thrill me much. Either that or Redline set the bar waaaaaay too high for sci-fi action for me.
On the plus side I've been humming Come And Get Your Love since I came out of the theatre. Great use of the classics. Much better balance than Watchmen used.
EDIT: A friend of mine put their finger on it. Ronan is a terrible villain. He really sucks the life and momentum out of every scene he's in. Thanos is in the movie for like 30 seconds and outshines him.
-
I sorta feel like they intentionally made as generic a villain as they could and I'm not sure why. I feel like having him be intentionally bland could have worked if Nebula were used more effectively, or if more focus were on the Nova Corps/The Collector/Yondu, but while all of them have a better presence and are more interesting than Ronan they definitely aren't the focus at all. Maybe they just figured trying to wedge villain development in there with all the main characters having to be introduced was too much, so "fuck it, nationalist zealot with a genocidal grudge is easy to understand" and let it go was their solution? Eh.
The coolest part of the movie was watching it with an audience. It's kinda amazing to see regular folk see a walking raccoon as a main character and just roll with it. Although biggest audience pops were definitely for Groot making "I did good? I did Good!" faces.
-
Thing about Ronan is that, as a villain, he's kind of boring in the comics too. He works better when he's being a hero or anti-hero, but that requires establishing the Kree and establishing a whole situation that makes Ronan into a good guy (basically, it means we'd need Annihilation the Movie, which isn't going to happen.)
I know it was pointed out that, in general, Marvel doesn't focus much on villains in most of their movies. Their movies focus more heavily on the heroes and their side characters, and the villains are mostly there for conflict. Oh sure, we have exceptions like Loki who is great, but I think that was more Tom Hiddleston Hamming it up and thus owning every scene he's in, as well as Hugo Weaving's Red Skull being quite good, but generally, Marvel movies put more focus on the heroes.
It contrasts like every Batman movie ever, where they seem to like to put a lot of emphasis on the villains, and only limited emphasis on Batman (Batman Begins is the main exception here.)
In any event, yeah, Ronan is kind of bland for a villain in this, though his last scene was pretty hilarious due to just how it felt like the movie having self commentary on itself by depicting how much Ronan completely clashes with the movie's tone. Pretty much every reviewer I've seen, no matter how much they praise the movie, seem to agree that if there's a weak link in the movie, it's Ronan.
-
The first part... not really an excuse or an explanation really.
And I dunno. I also kinda liked Obediah Stane. Jeff Bridges acting the smarmy cunt businessman worked. And yes, Ivan Vanko was terrible in IM2... but Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer was fantastic. Plus they did a great job with the Mandarin misdirection in IM3. Thor (and Avengers) works yes because of Hiddleston. Hugo Weaving's Red Skull was good. Gee we're at the majority of Marvel movies now. You can't really make excuses at that point. Because all it means is this time around they were okay with lazy writing for the villain. And damn I'm usually an easy lay for being entertained! I liked IM2 more than most here for crying out loud. (Sidenote: This movie is still better than IM2)
The movie also needed to cut down on the Marvel-speak a bit. And figure out what to do with Gamora. Not sure if it was the writing or just that Saladena was overacting (plus the chemistry between Gamora and Quill was forced and wooden). It feels like Marvel meddling actually tripped this movie up, but I don't read GotG so I can't really confirm that/say it with authority. But these are more just minor quibbles than the full out criticism against Ronan.
-
Dear Mr. Watterson- Interesting, if a bit thin for a 90 minute documentary. Talks about Calvin and Hobbes obviously, and about how the changing nature of media will prevent any other comic from reaching that level of mainstream popularity. It's a love letter from C&H fans to Watterson.
-
Guardians: Decent but *way* overhyped. Probably my least favorite Marvel movie of the past couple of years. Definitely had its moments though, the danceoff was amazing. Rocket and Groot were good in general. Thanos looked and sounded horrible, hope they don't keep him like that when he's a major part of a movie.
Also, how weird was it seeing most of the movie set on Xandar and no mention whatsoever of Nova the hero? Nova Corps was just generic military.
-
For once my opinion on a movie is perfectly in sync with the Captain's. Yeah, it was fun, good but not great? I don't really get where the raves come from, my brother came back all Best Marvel Evar and I'm like whuh? I enjoyed it, but...with caveats. Maybe people just had low expectations that it exceeded (certainly true in my case). Kind of Avengers-- in lacking that movie's established characters and chemistry (hard to hold this against GotG for having to introduce an entire cast, and I am impressed they made the gamble at all) and superior writer/director. It worked well enough for being entertaining while introducing audiences to an unfamiliar quadrant of the Marvel universe. I'm glad no romance got shoehorned in (beyond the obligatory flirting you get with a protagonist liable to hit on anything with tits) because yeah, movie and cast really couldn't have supported it.
Also wasn't really impressed by Thanos's appearance but hey, he was onscreen for like thirty seconds. I'm actually quite fond of the character in original context--sardonic sense of humor, brutishly intellectual, utterly deranged goals, pretty fun combination makes for one of Marvel's better villains. None of which was really apparent here, but with this brief a cameo I'll reserve judgement until a movie requires him to actually do something (and hope they don't screw it up then). Josh Brolin's a weird casting choice, though.
Ronan's bland, that's been covered. Mild bummer due to lingering affection for Lee Pace just because he was in The Fall (god dammit why am I the only person who's watched that movie).
I really really wanted to freeze the screen to read those rap sheets.
-
Peter Quill's got "Known Alias: Space-Lord" on his
-
I definitely noticed he had "Manipulation of a Countess" listed among his infractions. Smooove.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy: typical marvel movie; mixture of serious business and humor. Better than average music. Didn't strike me as more humorous than say, Iron Man. But good marvel movie.
Dragonball Z Battle of the Gods: it was entertaining. Pretty good humor. Don't regret seeing it.
-
Expendables 3: Enjoyable, much much better than the second one. Antonio Banderas steals the show.
-
LA Confidential- Still rules.
Back to the Future 1-3: Rewatched this on my weekend off. Lots of fun, though I had forgotten chunks of each movie due to not seeing them since childhood. The second is likely the weakest movie due to Jennifer but all three are pretty fun.
-
The World's End: awesome. I didn't like it quite as much as Hot Fuzz, but it's up there with Shaun of the Dead. Very funny, lots of well managed chaos, and an ending that feels a little clunky but also puts a nice philosophical capstone on the Cornetto trilogy. And the cast is fantastic, of course.
Yep, what everyone else said. Really falls apart at the end but hey, still lots of fun.
-
Frozen: This may be the filthiest disney movie of all time, or I could just be a filthy mouthed, corrupted shell of a person. That said, it was lots of fun. Great musical stuff and the art direction was fantastic. There are plot holes a mile wide in the story but whatever.
-
Godzilla (2014): Too much Ken Watanabe staring off into space, not enough giant monsters kicking the fuck out of each other.
-
FF7 AC- Plot was as terrible as I was lead to believe. The stuff with Zack and Aeris was good enough (Cloud having survivor's guilt makes too much sense) and I liked the scene with Marlene and Cloud before the big battle in Midgar. Everything else, *flush*. Oh, I suppose Reno and Rude were decent enough, even in a pretty whitewashed comic relief role.
The action was pretty at least! That said, There are too many breaks in it for exposition and new characters we don't care even slightly about (That male kid). The film didn't know if it wanted to be a character piece or action flick and both parts of the film suffered for it.
So yeah, pretty but ultimately pretty bad film.
-
REASONS TO WATCH FF7: AC
1) The fight scenes
2) The remixes of FF7 songs
3) Loz's ringtone
4) If somebody was threatening to murder you for not watching it, or something
. . .
204) The plot and pacing
-
You forgot the Turks' facial expressions.
-
2 Guns- Denzel Washington and Mark Walberg shoot the shit for two hours, and also shoot shit. There is an attempt at a snappy plot, but no more than that. The film is about the two stars doing badass things and playing to typecast (Washington as the world weary veteran, Walberg as the idealistic one). Good popcorn flick.
-
The Maze Runner: Nice visuals and the acting was pretty good from the young cast (other than token female who is there just to be a female). Way too much stuff left unanswered though - if it doesn't get a sequel there's just not enough resolution for this one to stand on its own. Compared to, say, the Hunger Games which works just fine as a standalone.
-
Between Denzel Washington and Keanu Reeves, the Russian mafia is having a very bad year.
-
Interstellar was really, really fantastic. Hard to recommend though. It got ... weird.
-
Big Hero 6: A little slow for the first half of the movie, but it ends strongly. I would prefer the rest of the team get more screentime - it's very Hiro-centric. Baymax fist bump for the win.
-
Maleficent- Fun film. Predictable but hey, Jolie makes it work.
-
The sad thing about that film is that it's easily at its best when Jolie gets to play a fairly straight villain role.
Y'know, in the movie she's the heroine of, because the main conceit is that Maleficent wasn't especially villainous.
-
It's a freaking gorgeous movie and Jolie has fun in the role, in straight-villain and antihero modes. My main complaint is that they didn't go bigger for the ending; the overgrown ruined castle would have been an amazing setpiece with the film's aesthetic sense and production values.
Big Hero 6: So much fun. So much damn fun.
-
Went out and watched The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies today in my yearly pilgrimage to give Peter Jackson money. It's much like the other Hobbit movies -- not great on the level of Fellowship or Return of the King, but it was a fun romp and I didn't regret seeing it.
-
Battle with the Five Armies - See Ciato pretty much. I definitely do think it's the best of the three Hobbit movies, in large part because Thorin is well-acted and fun to watch. Like most of the Peter Jackson movies I would have traded some of the action sequences for more character stuff but so it goes, at least the titular battle doesn't drag like mad the way Helm's Deep did (probably because we are actually invested in the characters involved).
-
Maleficient - An interesting movie, Angelina Jolie is pretty fab but it is a little disjointed at points.
-
Ender's Game: caught this on cable. Never read the book, but found the movie pretty enthralling. The young man playing Ender was quite good.
-
Apparently there is never a time when movies are not on at the parents' place. This is the selection of holiday viewing I hadn't previously seen (so about half of it; everything else was Bond movies or Marvel movies):
Oblivion: Kind of a neat little movie. It's probably the cinematography that won me over here--the movie spends a fair amount of time letting the landscape and future tech speak for it (and someone definitely had fun designing sci-fi gadgets), which is an attitude much more suited to my nature than LOUD NOISES. I appreciate the deliberate approach and it almost feels antiquated in that way (genuine action sequences are infrequent). Probably there's a lot of plot points that fall apart on extensive reflection, but I'm not usually one to have serious problems with logical errors that aren't likely to occur to your brain when a movie's got more important things to do, like look and sound great. And I think a lot of that can pretty easily be handwaved on grounds that Not!GlaDOS didn't need a sustainable plan that could withstand the scrutiny of generations because it was going to move on once it had what it wanted anyway; the clones were obviously mentally modeled on the original models so it's not too much of a stretch conclude maybe this process isn't perfected and that's how some actual memory slipped through. Actually the most glaring one to me is probably just that hey, if you just need water, you do realize Europa's a giant block of ice and it's right down the street, right? Perhaps it's just easier to get in liquid form...after...blowing up a moon to wipe out the indigenous population. Yeah, I dunno. I guess there's no movie in exploiting a probably-lifeless planet instead. And again Kosinski picks quality musical accompaniment for his sci-fi eye candy. I think I like the guy; he's not a great storyteller, but he's solid enough on the fundamentals of film that I'm interested to stick around and see if he improves.
Edge of Tomorrow: Tom Cruise might be kind of crazy and maybe not that good an actor, but he does have a knack for picking intriguing projects. This was pretty fun, if less well suited for my tastes due to the often frenetic pacing. Really tightly edited; the extended sequence of Tom Cruise getting shot in the head is really one of the best training montages. I'm pretty sure other people raved about this already, so I guess I can leave it here? It's a cool movie, if not one I personally feel the inclination to watch repeatedly.
Maleficent: I keep wanting to type that Malefficient because that's how it sounds in my head. Man this was so clearly a vanity project. Still, it got dark pretty early with the drugging and made a reasonably good effort at staying there, at least until the probably inevitable mega-happy ending turned up with jarring suddenness. Mildly diverting movie but somewhat less than the sum of its parts. I should be more engaged by a movie about a fabulous fairy queen, but somehow I mostly couldn't be. The fairy godmother trio also landed squarely in the uncanny valley with the adultish faces disproportionately large on tiny bodies thing. Yeesh. I was obviously happy with the alternate definition of true love, though!
Rush: I was more invested in this than I expected to be with a movie about racing. Like, I thought I was going to just read through the thing but wound up actually watching it after all? Ron Howard movie, it turns out; I usually find that his movies stop some ways short of greatness, but I can't say any of them I've watched were outright bad either. This one is mostly sold by the leads, who each ably embody a different national brand of overconfident douchiness. I am not sure whether I have seen another movie that more deliberately pushes the notion of Frienemies. Also there's shirtless Chris Hemsworth, if you're into that kind of thing. It's worth a watch.
-
X-Men: Days of Future Past - Watched this with some of my extended family. None of us had seen First Class (which was probably a mistake, since the movie made frequent reference to it), but it was decided that the DoFP trailer looked cooler so we watched that instead. Anyway, it was pretty enjoyable. I haven't watched an X-Men movie since the first two and compared to those I certainly missed Patrick Stewant and Ian McKellan who make everything better. But it was still a pretty fun movie; not too actiony like I feared (and much of the action is just Quicksilver/Magneto/Mystique using their powers to be cool, which works for me). The scenes in the sentinel-future were largely boring but I guess they wanted you to feel the threat of the Sentinels, which is fair. Xavier was probably the best character, but that's probably not too surprising, and as always I appreciate the moral ambiguity X-Men brings to the table in the form of Magneto and Mystique.
One thing I did find a bit odd was that part of the theme of the movie was to avoid having Mystique "fall" by taking a life. This is a noble sentiment and one I can get behind, even if grittier realists probably roll their eyes at it some. But... it's a bit of a stark contrast with how Wolverine murders three people near the start of the movie (and he really didn't have to!). There's probably some lesson there about how Wolverine is already kinda "ruined" and maybe I would need to watch the three movies I missed to really appreciate what they were going for there, but since Wolverine is otherwise portrayed as unambiguously good in this movie (moreso than Mystique), the contast was a bit jarring.
-
That is he difference between a woman and Hugh Jackman.
I assume part of it is playing up the way Mystique was played up in First Class where she is pretty great and is a story of her falling. Her story arc is about how she has to hide her "real" self at all times by shape shifting and she won't ever fit in as her real self. It is a pretty amazing use of the mutant allegory which the movies generally aren't great at leveraging (I understand this is similar to early use of the Morlocks in the comics, they are a bunch of mutants with physical altering mutations and live in the sewers. They greatly resent the X-Men in part because they mostly can pass as human).
-
X-men Days of Future Past: Saw it. It wasn't quite what I was expecting, but still decent. One problem though was the Bluray we were watching it on (or maybe it's the player; hard to say) had moments of skipping so we missed some segments of dialog.
I think the logic with Wolverine is that he's already got his hands dirty and there's no erasing that. He's been in multiple wars, so he's doubtless taken many lives. Raven, by contrast, as they said never took a life, so she's still "innocent" which is the difference. Also the whole butterfly effect situation, yada yada yada. Additionally, the other movies do demonstrate that he is kind of a low life, but he's got some sense of morality.
Also possible the guys he killed he remembers killing in the past anyway, and he did try to avoid it, but eh, so it goes.
As far as seeing other X-men movies go? First 2 are worth watching (or re-watching if you want to remind yourself?), as is 1st Class. X3 is bad, and DoFP really comes off as "excuse to delete X-men 3 from the continuity because we did a lot of unrepairable damage otherwise!" to give you an idea of the kind of errors that movie has. Even ignoring the continuity thing, movie is just all over the place with idiot plot syndrome at times, and even things like "we're introducing this plot element and character! ...now it's dropped until the very end because shut up." Origins is pretty much awful after the first 40 minutes which are good but not excuse enough to watch the movie. The Wolverine, by contrast, is "Good but skippable." The movie was clearly made as a fun hold over until DoFP came out, and it succeeds at that, while having some surprisingly good character work at times (though does seem to have this issue of "Oh crap, we went 10 minutes without a fight scene, FIX THAT NOW!" and yeah, the movie does suffer.)
-
First Class is really good, especially if you liked Xavier and Magneto's past selves in DOFP and would like to see them carry a movie with no Wolverine to steal the spotlight.
Coming from the comics, I thought orienting the plot around Mystique's "fall" was a nice way to adapt the original story (where Mystique is still the killer, but as a hardened villain).
-
Well, there is a difference. Wolverine gave his foes a chance to retreat, and only attacked after they shot him, saw it did nothing, and still tried to stop him. Mystique in every confrontation would have been shooting an unarmed man. Two very different things philosophically that would affect them very differently.
-
Into the Woods - Went into this movie not knowing anything about it other than that my friend wanted to watch it. It's alright, but it's far too long, has way too much singing (I'm not a big fan of non-animated musicals -- I think it seems just a little too corny), and is a bit disjointed. It has some pretty good prince satire though. "I was raised to be charming, not sincere!" The guy who played him, Chris Pine, is pretty damn hot.
-
The Imitation Game - I was honestly worried they would shy away from the worst things. They didn't. It is a little dramatised, but pretty good representation.
i cri everye tiem
-
Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Gods: Decided on a whim to watch this because thanks to TFS related stuff, been on a DBZ kick, and it was the most modern notable DBZ thing in a while so why not? I was expecting a typical DBZ movie that basically is just random new guy shows up, stuff happens, Goku wins with cheap ass power up...
...and ok, that's exactly what did happen! Thing is, this didn't feel like "DBZ Mini-Saga condensed into one hour" but a full feature film. It felt most applicable to, say, the Pokemon Movies, in the sense that good or bad, Pokemon Movies very clearly have a much higher budget than the main series and it shows in the animation if nothing else, and sure enough, this movie was the same way.
But really, Beerus best sums up what's good about this movie. It captures the Fun and Lighthearted aspects of Dragon Ball with the over the top action scenes of Dragon Ball Z and surprisingly balances them pretty well. This is what the Buu Saga was clearly trying at, but while the Buu Saga just came off as Bi-polar, this actually felt like they were juggling the comedy and action in a well balanced form, capturing both the early and latter days of the franchise.
So yeah, pleasantly surprised by the movie. It actually makes me interested in Return of F because it sounds like Beerus is returning and it's a legitimate sequel to this movie, suggesting it'll have a lot of the same qualities.
-
The Imitation Game - I was honestly worried they would shy away from the worst things. They didn't. It is a little dramatised, but pretty good representation.
i cri everye tiem
Eh, I was really underwhelmed by this movie. Some of the choices they made were only to create false drama. One of the more egregious examples was having one of the codebreakers have a brother who is in endangered, which was never the case. The weight of the realization behind that scene should be weighty enough if you have an intelligent audience; there isn't any need to manufacture additional fictionalized drama around it. Even the depiction of Turing was a little weird. Cumberbatch plays him as somewhat autistic. He had good friends and was sociable in real life according to all accounts but he is portrayed as machinelike to service this forced comparison to the machine he is creating. There just isn't very much indication for that kind of characterization of Turing other than this weird concept Hollywood has about geniuses.
Also, for a movie that purports to highlight injustices behind Britain's terrible view on homosexuality, it doesn't have the courage of its own convictions to even show anything regarding homosexual relationships. It is implied Alan has is in love with another boy in school and as an adult he is said to be have been caught with a prostitute later on, but there are no depictions of even the barest level of physical affection between dudes. It just struck me as a disservice to the message the movie was trying to make. How can the point about the injustice of Alan Turing's "crime" be made if the movie about him doesn't even dare to portray it?
I actually think the movie was pretty safe and tailored towards garnering Oscar nominations, but I don't think it offers much in terms of historical accuracy and I think it undermines its own message sometimes. It is frustrating because Turing's story is really compelling and needs to be told, but I don't like most of the choices made here.
-
And now I'm going to undermine all of my cinema cred and say that I watched John Wick and thought it was great forwhatitwas. Some Russians dude kill Keanu Reeves's dog and he kills an entire city. The action is shot really well, not like The Raid good but still extremely coherent gunplay that has no shaky cam. The movie doesn't take itself seriously at all and it's ridiculously stupid. It has Keanu acting but it doesn't matter since it also has car-fu.
-
John Wick was indeed an awesome time. You can just summarize it with "Russians kill Keanu Reeve's puppy so he kills everyone" and everybody wants to see it.
I liked that "lol Dafoe missed, worst sniper ever, how convenient" turned into "Actually he was just warning him by shooting the pillow next to him, so the movie is slightly less dumb than we all thought"
Amazingly there are 2 actors from the Wire in this, what the hell?
I've seen a lot of "artier" movies lately, to get some cred back and watch a cool movie I suggest either the Tribe or Mommy, both released this year. The tribe is about a new kid in a school for deaf children only. There's 0 dialogue and it is Ukrainian. It is super hardcore, there is no hope.
Mommy is a more grounded story about a lower class mother, her son with ADHD and a mutual friend. A nice time with broken people. It's also hyper stylized, some people would probably roll eyes at the effects used but I liked them.
Boyhood was also pretty cool.
-
Boyhood was my favorite movie in years, somehow meeting all of the immense hype that it had gotten. The Before series of movies has always been my favorite (Before Midnight was devastating ), and I thought Boyhood would be able to similarly portray the effects of the passage of time. I do wonder whether it will be effective on future generations of viewers since it is very much of a specific time (and to an extent, a certain place). It shows some things about growing up that should always be universal but some things, like the soundtrack, and little moments like the kids going to a Harry Potter midnight book release, are probably only going to resonate with people who grew up in this generation. It's a must-watch, regardless.
Mommy is coming to a local indie theater soon so I'll keep an eye out for it. I kind of feel like I know where it's going but if it's well done I'll catch it.
I also saw the Babadook. I generally don't like horror but this was effective, although I was never as scared as I thought I would be. I am unsure whether it is as good as many people are saying, and I think the metaphor is a little too on the nose, but the movie does do a good job of keeping up a sense of dread and tension. The mom in this is excellent and the kid also did a good job if the point was for him to be an annoying little shit. The fact that he did that job a little too well may have muddled your rooting interests in the film. Also between this and John Wick, this was the second movie in a week that killed a dog
The Guest - A friend described this to me as Drive but really stupid and that is a fairly accurate assessment. I actually felt that the beginning of this was fine when you are watching the clearly off Guest character interact with the family, but it goes way off the rails when has an explanation for what's going on. I didn't find this to be a great movie but it has this weird 80s sensibility and it's kind of goofy. Worth seeing if it's free.
-
Allright I'll grab the Before movies.
I felt the saddest part of Boyhood was at the very end when the main character leaves her mother alone and she's crying because she's like 50 and she's alone and her children have left the nest and she has nothing to look forward to. Still, she was saying some self defeating jokes or something so everybody in the theater was laughing.
I don't think I've ever felt this alienated.
-
talk about cool art movies I haven't watched since I am busy being a corporate sell out and don't have/make time for cinema
I don't think I've ever felt this alienated.
-
I lost a parent a while ago, and that made the parting scene particularly painful. Honestly, that was the most emotionally affecting scene I've seen in a movie in a very long time, because it filled me with this sense of existential unfulfillment but also because it really did reflect my parents' reaction to a milestone I was unaware of when I (the youngest) left for school. Like Mason, I didn't have any sense that my departure could so starkly reflect a major life change for my parents, and I only had this realization after I was gone for a few years and gained a sense of maturity and empathy. A friend who I saw the movie with who is in a very different time in her life just wept after seeing it, and I can't say very many people in my theater were laughing at it.
The scene directly after that affected me in a different way. I knew coming in that Boyhood tracked Ellar Coltrane for twelve years and since he started off at six, it would have to end up with him starting college. When he drives to college, I got a strange emotional reaction that is hard to describe but it derives from this metaknowledge that the movie was going to end soon, that the very notion of Boyhood as a movie and a universal concept was coming to a close and soon I wouldn't be able to see any more of this particular story, which is an incredible feeling to get from a piece of fiction. I've heard people being underwhelmed by the movie for various reasons (like Mason not being a particularly interesting character or the movie being largely plotless) but I feel like it's something everyone should still see.
-
I'm sorry for your loss, I wasn't as emotionally involved in Boyhood (I really don't care about my entire youth) but I can understand it. I also urge anyone to go watch it. You're probably going to like Mommy. It evoked kind of similar feelings to me, though there was much less identification.
Grefter, movies take a lot less time than videogames. Boyhood is like 3 hours and Mommy 2. Super easy to watch and you get instant max cred.
BTW I saw the Palme d'Or and thought "Meh, not that great, it's too slow and they ripped the climax of the movie from Dostoevsky" and I felt like the most smug asshole for just being able to think that. It was great.
-
Is that Winter Sleep? I did hear from a friend that it was really laborious but the Palme d'Or isn't always a guarantee of greatness (now I also feel like a smug asshole).
-
Yeah, Uncle Boonmee looks pretty boring for example.
Winter's Sleep had an interesting point but it's too slow. I'll sum it up real fast:
The main character is an old rich douchebag who inherited a fortune from his parents and lives in a place that allows the coolest panoramic shots. He's renting apartments but is ruthless about it, stealing poor people's things when they can't pay the rent in the winter. The "uncle" in the poor family is desperately trying to reach him all the time but the douchebag ignores it and even literally mocks him because he smells.
His super hot wife married him early, she doesn't have diplomas or experience and she's frustrated because she doesn't do much in her life but fundraising for charities. Douche doesn't want her to have her own life, so he goes all Patriarchic Sea Lion on her about her charities and basically ruins everything for fun. She fucking hates him, but she feels she's trapped with him; if she left him, she'd have to start from nothing and she's a 30 years old Turkish woman, so she'd really struggle.
Husband leaves for Istanbul for a while, Wife gets a lot of money to give to the poor family living in the house her husband's renting. She learns that the kid has pneumonia. Like a Dostoevsky character, the father at the family gets mad and dramatically throws all her money in the fireplace in front of her.
Husband goes back.
Lots of hate.
The end.
The husband sounds like a comic book villain here but he's really believable.
-
That is he difference between a woman and Hugh Jackman.
I assume part of it is playing up the way Mystique was played up in First Class where she is pretty great and is a story of her falling. Her story arc is about how she has to hide her "real" self at all times by shape shifting and she won't ever fit in as her real self. It is a pretty amazing use of the mutant allegory which the movies generally aren't great at leveraging (I understand this is similar to early use of the Morlocks in the comics, they are a bunch of mutants with physical altering mutations and live in the sewers. They greatly resent the X-Men in part because they mostly can pass as human).
Most of the comics aren't great at leveraging it, either. It feels like racist apologia most of the time because the primary representatives of mutants are:
1. A person who could enslave literally the entire world if not for personal scruples (Charles Xavier)
2. An immortal killing machine who basically cannot be stopped (Wolverine)
3. Someone who creates massive damage simply by the act of looking at things (Cyclops)
When these are your primary examples it seems like the people worried about them have legit reasons to be concerned. That's why making it a civil rights analogy fails.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy- A ton of fun. It made me care about a cast of characters I largely didn't know about beforehand. Pratt and Saldana in particular had fantastic chemistry, and Batista did an outstanding job with what could've been a very bland part.
-
I've seen all of Dolan's movie now and I like them all.
Nolan&Dolan are my favourite directors.
I've looked at some interviews and he seems to come across as an asshole. Personnally I just think media will latch on to anything controversial and that's why anyone appearing in any interview has to appear as this friendly mask of themselves with no feelings.
- I killed my mother is a very adolescent movie about one 16 year old guy hating his mother. The movie that probably hit the closest to home for me, out of like every movie.
- Heartbeats is about young hipsters with broken hearts. There isn't much going on but you get some powerful A Softer Worldish moments.
- Laurence Anyways is the most mature work (the two main characters are 35ish) Dolan tries everything to not have it be remembered as the film about Transgendered people but it's what's going to happen. I went in without knowing that and had a great time. Very moving, with amazing acting from the two mains.
- Tom at the Farm is an horror / psychological thriller film in which escape is always possible, with an interesting culture clash between the city and the country. Highly engrossing. I don't know what the whole deal with America was though.
- Mommy's still probably overall the best I think.
-
I caught up with a bunch of stuff from last year. There are still some things I want to catch up on (the Princess Kaguya movie from Ghibli, namely), and there are some major things I want to see like Selma and some other major things I have zero interest in (American Sniper), but that should wrap up the major 2014 releases.
Force Majeure: This was really interesting. Without going into it in too much detail, this explores the fallout of what happens when something hugely unexpected happens and you have a split second to react, and your instinctual reaction is one that is revelatory of your character. This goes through the seemingly irreparable damage that can result from that instinct and it has a lot to ponder over with regard to how dudes react to expectations of masculinity. The tantalizing question here is how you don't really know how you would react to something extraordinary (and thus, you never really know yourself) until you're put into that situation. It is one thing to be able to talk about what you would do but it is another completely to have to do it. I'm puzzling a bit over the ending, but overall this movie was really solid. Also ski rave.
Birdman: Uh... people I know say that they left this feeling invigorated but that was definitely not how I felt. This movie is kind of empty but at the same time it's incredibly loud (not just in terms of volume). I really hate when people use the word "pretentious" to describe something but that's exactly what this felt like. Every single aspect of the movie is calling attention to itself: the ever crescendoing jazz drumming soundtrack, the cinematography that never stops, the ACTORS DECLARING THAT THEY'RE ACTING (Calculon would fit in well here), the diatribe against strawmen critics (M Knight Shyamalan does the same thing! Birdman falls short of actually killing the critic though). It never stops, and I'm not sure to what end this cacophony is being deployed. It does have things to say regarding the need for approval and recognition we all have but that's juxtaposed with this weird deification of actors and artists that smacks of pandering to Oscar types.
It also made me realize that I really do not like Alejandro Inarritu. The same pomposity and inability to be subtle plagues this movie as well as Babel and 21 Grams.
Snowpiercer: GREFTER THIS MOVIE WAS MADE FOR YOU. It's a classist future steamtrain simulator with axfights. The classroom scene is really great and the propaganda song by the teacher is fantastic. It's by a Korean director (same guy who did The Host, Memories of Murder, and Mother) who apparently doesn't know that what he's doing is bonkers in American standards, and it is ridiculous. It has some laughable parts BABIES TASTE BEST and it kind of flops as a satire, but it is wildly entertaining, if kind of stupid. It also has Tilda Swinton in what I think is her best role of all time
Nightcrawler: I don't have nearly as much to say about this. Ethics in journalism. It's kind of fun to see Gyllenhaal go nuts and he basically looks like a cartoon character at times. I don't think it was brilliant but it was definitely worth a watch for his performance.
-
I missed seeing Force Majeure by 20 minutes.
It was renamed Snow Therapy in France. Jesus Christ.
Carnage: I am not very impressed. It is about adults trying to resolve their children's problems and ending up being as immature or worse. The movie slowly builds up humour and then reaches a plateau and then ends pretty early. Big director and big actors got big paychecks.
-
I missed seeing Force Majeure by 20 minutes.
It was renamed Snow Therapy in France. Jesus Christ.
Carnage: I am not very impressed. It is about adults trying to resolve their children's problems and ending up being as immature or worse. The movie slowly builds up humour and then reaches a plateau and then ends pretty early. Big director and big actors got big paychecks.
wait why
Carnage at least has projectile vomit.
-
Movies with English-but-very-understandable names sell more to younger demographics, and marketing is terrible.
Movies with "complicated" English titles got changed to super understandable dumb titles.
The Hangover was changed to Very Bad Trip then a bunch of Z movies with titles changed to "Very Bad X" got released.
Same thing with that Jennifer Lawrence movie that got turned into "Happiness Therapy" so now they're adding Therapy as a suffix to other movies.
Since international markets are becoming bigger and bigger and China/India are going to want even simpler names, expect titles like "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" to disappear and get replaced by "Sad Memory Killer" because, at one point, why not have a simple title instead of having a complicated one and changing it?
-
So, for the movies I watched recently:
Snowpiercer = Coldtrain
Nightcrawler = Late Reporter
John Wick = Dog Revenge
Birdman = Wank wank wank
American Sniper = American Sniper
?
-
I missed seeing Force Majeure by 20 minutes.
It was renamed Snow Therapy in France. Jesus Christ.
Um. Um. Isn't Force Majeure already, like, French? Is the meaning of it somehow obscure or something? It's a term in, like, every contract in the UK and US for the past 300 years.
-
American Sniper = The Best Little Sniperhouse in Texas
-
American Sniper = American Sniper Therapy
FTFY
-
Hahahah oh man.
Black Swan = Very Bad Black Chicken Therapy
Um. Um. Isn't Force Majeure already, like, French? Is the meaning of it somehow obscure or something? It's a term in, like, every contract in the UK and US for the past 300 years.
Yeah.
But this title makes the movie sound French-made and a lot of people here avoid French movies in general. (like me)
-
Yeah.
But this title makes the movie sound French-made and a lot of people here avoid French movies in general. (like me)
There's a cautionary tale about cultural appropriation in here somewhere...
-
Birth of a Nation
I...genuinely don't know how to react to this movie. On the one hand, basically invented modern cinematography, and largely holds up today. On the other hand, ridiculously over-the-top racist.
In some sense, it's interesting to watch just to see what kind of tricks movies use to get people emotionally involved, because it's easier to realize you're being tricked by cinematography when you're watching a movie with outrageous political goals (lots and lots of damsel in distress tropes! "The southern white women are in danger, rally the KKK!" Lots of ominous music for northerners, with lighting that casts shadows over their eyes. The black militia is constantly firing rifles into the air at all hours of the day. The KKK is depicted riding on majestic horses, never firing guns into the air. The southerners are shown gaining allies in unexpected places, the enemies are just a mob which already existed or came from elsewhere. "[strike]Han[/strike] Northerners shot first").
-
What exactly made you watch that, met?
-
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kinolorber/pioneers-of-african-american-cinema?ref=HappeningNewsletterFeb1115
just leavin' this here
-
Kingsman: Absolutely fucking great. It's Men in Black 1 crossed with 1970s James Bond. Just the right measure of campiness to where it can still take itself seriously. There's a scene in there that I can't spoil, but pretty much every DLer will greatly appreciate it.
-
Seventh Son: Extremely meh. Disappointing since the trailer was so good. The "witches" are hyped up so much and amount to so little. They have no personalities and so little screentime that they might as well just be minions. The whole thing comes off as an episode of Power Rangers. Curious if the books are any better since the concept of the Spook itself is interesting.
-
Thor 2: Basically what I expected from reviews - a fun but mostly episodic adventure of Thor fighting generic bad guys, comparable to a pretty good arc of the comics. Tom Hiddleston as Loki is of course the best reason to watch, followed by Thor hitting things with a hammer in entertaining ways, and then the Warriors Three being great. The biggest problem is that it takes forever to get to a point where I care what happens, largely because Jane is such a waste of space in this one. That's more the script's fault than Natalie Portman's (Why turn her into a McGuffin girl? Why?) but she doesn't exactly make the most of the opportunities she's given, and the setup for the actual plot gets compressed way down in order to give her time to do....er....stuff. Meanwhile Darcy is ten times more interesting and actually gets to do science stuff despite Jane being the certified Comics Scientist. Weird decisionmaking all around.
-
She did have a few moments I quite liked ("Is that an image tech tech" "No it's a healing image" "Does it technobabble" "... ... yes" *smugface*) but they were few and far between, definitely. But really Thor is come for Tom Hiddleston, stay for hammerin' shit, so hey.
-
Now I can be snobby about hating Academy Award winning Birdman. Has anyone else seen it? Am I just on crazy pills for disliking it?
-
The Academy Award winner for best actor in a leading role. (http://www.usmagazine.com/uploads/assets/articles/82503-eddie-redmayne-flaunts-rock-hard-abs-in-jupiter-ascending-stills/1422576942_eddie-redmayne-zoom.jpg)
-
I'm surprised that wasn't his Norbit.
-
I approve of the cape sans shirt personally
-
Now I can be snobby about hating Academy Award winning Birdman. Has anyone else seen it? Am I just on crazy pills for disliking it?
The movie sounds like Hollywood auto-fellatio to me, so I'm not surprised it won an Oscar. Not touching it myself.
-
It's only getting released tomorrow here, i'm going to see it. I got my fair share of meta this week with Sils Maria (pretty sweet) . So I'm not too excited (and i'm pretty sure Boyhood should have won) but hey at least there's Emma Stone ? She's cool.
I saw the grand budapest hotel and it was lovely. Peak Wes Anderson. It was also full of excess with its art direction and use of like 20 super famous actors for super small roles
-
Grand Budapest Hotel is the best thing he's done since Royal Tenenbaums. Was happy to see it grabbed all the art Oscars, however little I tend to normally care about that sort of thing (the awards in general).
Isn't Best Picture usually something everyone regrets almost immediately anyway?
-
Grand Budapest is super Wes Anderson-y, but there are dark and deeply sad undertones that make it among my favorites of his. It's definitely his most visually beautiful, and Fiennes was practically made for it in retrospect. I wouldn't have necessarily expected Ralph Fiennes to work because he hadn't appeared in very many comedies beforehand, but his timing is great.
One stray thought of mine is who exactly would work in a Wes Anderson film and why, since there are ones that fit and ones that don't. Bruce Willis very much does not fit in, for example, but someone like Bill Murray really does. Then there are those who work in some but not others. Edward Norton as the scoutmaster in Moonrise Kingdom is great, but he's also weirdly out of place in Grand Budapest (he's unaccented, which is jarring). I also found Adrien Brody to be terrible in Grand Budapest and sort of blah in Darjeeling, but I can't dissociate his performance from my general dislike of him. George Clooney has a way of talking that really fits Anderson's style but I don't know if his Clooney-ness would be too obtrusive in live action.
-
Royal Tenenbaums.
Only Anderson movie with a lesbian scene
Grand Budapest is super Wes Anderson-y, but there are dark and deeply sad undertones that make it among my favorites of his. It's definitely his most visually beautiful, and Fiennes was practically made for it in retrospect. I wouldn't have necessarily expected Ralph Fiennes to work because he hadn't appeared in very many comedies beforehand, but his timing is great.
One stray thought of mine is who exactly would work in a Wes Anderson film and why, since there are ones that fit and ones that don't. Bruce Willis very much does not fit in, for example, but someone like Bill Murray really does. Then there are those who work in some but not others. Edward Norton as the scoutmaster in Moonrise Kingdom is great, but he's also weirdly out of place in Grand Budapest (he's unaccented, which is jarring). I also found Adrien Brody to be terrible in Grand Budapest and sort of blah in Darjeeling, but I can't dissociate his performance from my general dislike of him. George Clooney has a way of talking that really fits Anderson's style but I don't know if his Clooney-ness would be too obtrusive in live action.
Why Adrien Brody?
As far as I'm concerned, to fit in an Anderson movie I think you just need to be credible as someone at least a little melancholic, and who doesn't want to be in the middle of the room attracting all the attention. Not Willis, Cruise, Downey Jr, Elba.
The only character I found jarring in Grand Budapest Hotel was Dafoe, but that's only because of his character, and that made for a pretty shocking plot twist. (Goldblum in the museum)
I should probably rewatch Darjeeling now, it's his only movie I watched getting nothing out of it. Rushmore and Zissou were my favourite.
-
I can't really explain why I dislike Brody. I think a lot of the Pianist's success is because of Polanski and not necessarily Brody (though he's good there) and he hasn't really added to anything else he's been in. In Grand Budapest, he really can't do crass vulgarity the way Fiennes can without sounding horrible, although the contrast there may be the point? I don't know. For all that, I dislike Jason Schwartzman even more, mostly because of his extremely punchable face, so I don't love Rushmore as much as everybody else.
The only thing that sticks to me about Darjeeling other than the very abrupt tonal shift in the middle is when one of the brothers says "if we weren't brothers, would we be friends in real life," which I struggle with in terms of whether I think it's middle school philosophy vs something that I actually thought about my own siblings last week. A lot goes on in the movie but it doesn't have the strong focus of his later films, so not very much else stood out to me.
-
I can't really explain why I dislike Brody. I think a lot of the Pianist's success is because of Polanski and not necessarily Brody (though he's good there) and he hasn't really added to anything else he's been in. In Grand Budapest, he really can't do crass vulgarity the way Fiennes can without sounding horrible, although the contrast there may be the point? I don't know. For all that, I dislike Jason Schwartzman even more, mostly because of his extremely punchable face, so I don't love Rushmore as much as everybody else.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the contrast is the point. You're supposed to hate Brody's character in the movie, and he fills it well. He's a prick, who despite the blood and trappings of high society still can't hide the fact he has not one cultured and civilized bone in his body. Design or accident, Brody just works here.
-
It's only getting released tomorrow here, i'm going to see it.
Growing Wings Therapy?
-
Royal Tenenbaums.
Only Anderson movie with a lesbian scene
I can only assure you that for once, that is pure coincidence. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go save my family from the wreckage of a destroyed sinking battleship.
I should probably give Steve Zissou a second watch. I wasn't much struck by it at the time.
-
Royal Tenenbaums.
Only Anderson movie with a lesbian scene
I can only assure you that for once, that is pure coincidence. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go save my family from the wreckage of a destroyed sinking battleship.
I should probably give Steve Zissou a second watch. I wasn't much struck by it at the time.
I quite liked it. Life Aquatic at least has one standout scene but it's hard to separate how much of that is the Sigur Ros song. The scene has a sad wistfulness that is also present in The Grand Budapest Hotel.
-
So, on the topic of translations of movie titles, I walked past a poster for Boyhood yesterday. The Japanese title is, 6歳から大人までの僕, or "Me from age 6 to adulthood" which just does not have the same ring to it at all.
Incidentally, Fifty Shades of Grey just kept the English title.
-
Here I was hoping for "49 Daddy Lashes"
-
The Spy Who Loved Me - Pretty decent movie that hardcore drags from about 70% to 90% in. It is campy and 70's and has ridiculous music. One weird thing about the movie is that Roger Moore looks kind of old (because he was like 50) and I'm definitely not sure how well that works for the Bond feel.
Next Bond film is Moonraker. I am ready to up my camp value to max.
This poster is amazing: http://writandseal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/moonraker01.jpg
-
70s Bond is best Bond. Also go see Kingsman already.
-
70s Bond is best Bond. Also go see Kingsman already.
I may actually try to go see it. I usually don't go to the theater, but I had fun the last times I went and decided I might go more often. Just gotta talk others into coming. :D
-
There are like five good Bond movies. Yeah I said it.
-
To be honest I've watched all but like four of the movies and tend to think of myself as a fan but I can't say I really disagree. (I like about seven of 'em, I realised.)
-
There are like five good Bond movies. Yeah I said it.
Well now I'm curious which ones you consider qualify. I've probably seen about 50% of them but the only ones I've really liked enough to own were the Daniel Craig ones.
I'm pretty comfortable never watching any of the Roger Moore movies again.
-
Oh, if the criterion is whether they're worth owning, only Casino Royale and Skyfall really apply (and I own both).
-
Hyping Quantum of Solace above every non-Craig film is crazy talk. That movie was a mess, and is the sole reason why I haven't yet seen Skyfall, which admittedly sounds pretty great.
-
Quantum of Solace is pretty bad. As I recall, the villain wanted to monopolize the water utility? So nefarious! (although water companies in real life are pretty evil)
Skyfall is definitely worth a watch. The plotting isn't always logical but that's just Bond, and Javier Bardem has great screen presence. It's shot beautifully. Everything in Shanghai basically looks like it could be a cut from Blade Runner.
-
Bond's generally better when it's at least somewhat over-the-top; I don't watch them for any sort of remotely realistic takes on espionage or world affairs. I actually thought the QoS villain managed to have some presence despite this, but he's a far cry from the scenery-chewing supervillains of some of the other films. (I also didn't care for the Casino Royale villain, but fortunately Casino Royale is a far better film on every other front.) One of the reasons I want to see Skyfall is it sounds like they address this. And also brought Q back (both of these points speaking to recapturing some of the silly humour which Bond was known for).
-
Realism and a lack of scenery chewing are definitely not things that happen in Skyfall.
-
Eh, the Daniel Craig Bond movies are all very serious, Skyfall is no exception. I don't see that turning back any time soon (and this certainly won't change if Idris Elba is the next Bond) but as Captain K says, Kingsman apparently approximates Roger Moore era Bond movies.
-
It's probably not news that my tolerance for camp is low (at least in movies; music is a whole 'nother discussion) so the Serious Business attitude of the newer Bond movies is definitely more in tune with my sensibilities.
Biggest problem for me with Quantum of Solace is just shakycam fights. I don't understand the attraction of certain directors for visually incoherent action sequences. Contrary to initial impressions, I actually approve of the villain. This is 100% casting: he's just this tiny, oily eurotrash goblin, but he has no difficulty brazenly talking trash to brutal dictators. There's a slimy kind of self-confidence there that works. This doesn't necessarily defend his actual plan, and the spontaneously combusting hotel in the middle of nowhere makes zero sense on any economic, scientific, or conceptual level. Quantum of Solace is definitely not in the same league as Casino Royale or Skyfall, but I can enjoy it on about the same nonsense level as the earlier Bond movies (just with a lead actor I like more).
Realism and a lack of scenery chewing are definitely not things that happen in Skyfall.
This. Javier Bardem's villain is an obvious graduate from the Christopher Nolan School of Overly Elaborate Villain Schemes. (The exploding train in particular is a hugely glaring instance of "Why would you even think you would need to do exactly this at exactly that time for exactly that reason?") His entire plan could probably have been compressed and simplified with superior effectiveness. Ultimately I don't care too much because it's such a great performance, but this is one of those nagging details that keeps the movie a notch below Casino Royale for me. Gourry is also correct in his recommendation: visually, Skyfall is an extraordinarily well composed movie.
-
Quantum of Solace's action was pretty terrible, which was weird coming off of Casino Royale which had no shaky cam IIRC. Skyfall's action is also very coherent. Thankfully, I think action is moving away from this trend, and there are excellent recent examples of action being done coherently (The Raid movies, John Wick).
Quantum of Solace at the very least had the opera scene which was done fairly well.
I'll also mention that Skyfall's opening sequence was fucking gorgeous as well. The lyrics are completely nonsensical but I think most Bond theme songs are.
Have fun with Moonraker, Ciato! As I recall, that is the one with space Nazis and Jaws is basically Wile E Coyote.
-
Bond songs and opening sequences don't have to make sense. They usually suffer when they try to. The more attention you pay to them the more painful they can get. I love many covers of Man With The Golden Gun but it is a weird lyrical slurry of murder and dicks. Lie I think the only one I like in isolation is The World is Not Enough (because Garbage are amazing) and it is frankly better without the context of the movie even though it REALLY does fit with it.
Quantum of Solace's biggest failure I think is them trying to setup Spectre or something like it well before they had the rights or the ability to do anything with it. If movies had kept coming out every year or so and we had something between it and Skyfall that actually picked up that thread it MIGHT have been okay, but I think it really would have needed the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings treatment and filmed two movies at once so you could dump the sequel out like 6 months later and use them as a double feature or something. I think the shaky cam is a direct response to people likening Casino Royale to Bourne films. It is CORRECT that people did like it a bit more because it brought it more down to earth like Bourne movies are, but it is wrong to have taken that on board as "we should do shitty shaky cam like Bourne films do" because that is literally the worst part about that series.
Skyfall really is pushing the razor edge on what you can get away with ignoring realism and having a huge character while still being SRS BSNS. It might have honestly pushed it just a bit past where you get away with (compared to Nolan Batmangs) with just how quickly people started to talk about how ridiculous it was. Most people just shrug it off as a Bond movie, but I know some people came out disliking it for it.
-
Out of morbid curiosity (and because it was free), I watched the new Ninja Turtles movie. Honestly, it could have been salvaged if it wasn't so ugly. It was just stupid enough to be cute if the aesthetic looked 'cute' instead of 'most hideous artstyle in the known universe, even worse than Akira Toriyama and Lyefeld collaborating'.
Still, the whole thing was just -really- awful. Terrible acting, terrible casting, terrible characterization, terrible plot, and terrible pacing! At least they weren't aliens.
I immediately found a good movie to cleanse my mind: I watched the new Xmen, which this topic has already raved about and I generally agree wholeheartedly - it was really fun and it even retconned X3!
-
Serious James Bond is not very appealing to me. If I wanted Bourne I would watch Bourne (and I have never done so). Daniel Craig is also ugly.
-
Out of morbid curiosity (and because it was free), I watched the new Ninja Turtles movie. Honestly, it could have been salvaged if it wasn't so ugly. It was just stupid enough to be cute if the aesthetic looked 'cute' instead of 'most hideous artstyle in the known universe, even worse than Akira Toriyama and Lyefeld collaborating'.
Still, the whole thing was just -really- awful. Terrible acting, terrible casting, terrible characterization, terrible plot, and terrible pacing! At least they weren't aliens.
Regarding the aliens thing, that was a misconception of Michael Bay's statement. He mentioned alien origins, but not that they were alien themselves, which is actually a completely fair thing to say since the original TMNT (as in the 80s comic), the Ooze's origins were alien, so it may have been a "we're bringing them back to roots!" thing. It sounds like if they did do that, though, because everything I've heard of the movie sounds like it's literally Amazing Spider-Man, only it did...well...one of these:
(https://iheartyuna.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/burn.jpg)
Yes, I know that's not being 100% fair to FF7 at all, but it gets the point across is all.
Only with Spider-Man related things being replaced with Ninja Turtles related things, but also with way worse...well...everything.
The rest of your statement...yeah, that sounds about accurate to what I've heard.
-
Imitation Game: Apparently I am smarter than Alan Turing.
Or the movie decided to have a kinda nonsensical plot twist for the sake of making the story flow more naturally.
But I think it's the former.
-
Without having seen the movie, I'll just guess it's the latter instead. History is rarely quite as dramatic at just the right moments as Hollywood screenwriting requires it to be. Usually it's more interesting too.
-
Probably both.
-
Imitation Game is very guilty of Hollywood convenience. The made up part with the brother on one of the ships was particularly galling but that's the least of my problems with the film.
Song of the Sea - This is by the same person who did Secret of the Kells. Both are beautiful movies with great art design and direction, and almost every frame of Song of the Sea could be a desktop background. The underwater shots and the light wisps are particular highlights. Unfortunately, like Secret of the Kells, it doesn't have a ton beyond that. The story is very straight ahead, which would be fine since it is a basic fairy tale, but somehow even at 94 minutes it seems like it could have lost like 15 without losing anything substantial. Also the dialogue is so unmemorable that I feel it may have been better told wordlessly. It does touch on grief in a way that is rarely done in a kid's movie. I did like it and I hold out for this director since he has excellent aesthetic sense. If his ability to tell a story ever matches the visuals, he'll be someone to watch out for.
-
Without having seen the movie, I'll just guess it's the latter instead. History is rarely quite as dramatic at just the right moments as Hollywood screenwriting requires it to be. Usually it's more interesting too.
NO
To specify, early on they read a nazi weather report that ends with "Heil Hitler" and I thought "Well, if a lot of messages end with Heil Hitler, that should make codebreaking with the Turing machine quite a lot easier"
And then 30 minutes into the movie later (a few months irl) Sherlock goes all "OH SHIT GUYS! They end messages with "Heil Hitler!" We can use this!!".
This guy is supposed to be the finest codebreaker in Great Britain?
Also they had been using crossword puzzles for reference since the beginning of the movie, and using letters from other words to help guess words is Crossword Puzzle Lifehack 101. I actually thought this was the only reason they talked about crossword puzzles so damn much
-
The Dissolve has a good article on some of the traps that a lot of biopics about geniuses fall into, and one thing that sticks out is that most movies don't know how to portray breakthroughs without just straight up telling you what happened or making something really contrived like in the Imitation Game, which ends up with dumb movies about smart people. The examples used are in a Jackson Pollack biopic where a character just says "you've done it, Pollack! You've cracked it wide open!"
I actually can't think of an example where this is done well. Interstellar has a character literally yelling "eureka" and tossing papers in the air after she figures something out (I know this isn't a biopic but the point is the same). A Beautiful Mind makes up the shit about game theory in terms of picking up women at a bar, although it does a better job of showing Nash's inner life than most biopics. In Theory of Everything, it's just kind of a given that Hawking is a genius but this is something that they tell you by showing him writing down scary looking equations and that he got a high score on a super hard test.
Maybe it's a bit easier with musicians since there can be fully articulated performances (although almost every music biopic is the same as well, Walk Hard does a good job pointing that out). Amadeus has a scene where Mozart composes a song on the fly with Salieri transcribing that does fairly well, but otherwise, genius is pretty much told and not shown.
-
I decided to go rent a bunch of old movies. Yeah, I know, I'm old-fashioned, actually renting movies, but whatever.
I watched Spaceballs first. It's very silly and reminds me of a bit less funny Robin Hood: Men in Tights. But that isn't really an insult to the movie -- I'm a fangirl of RH:MiT. Rick Moranis was pretty much the perfect person to cast as Dark Helmet.
I'm probably going to watch X-Men next! I have never watched those movies for whatever reason.
-
Skip X3! It was so hated that it was rendered non-canon.
-
Skip Origins as well. Alternatively, watch Origins until the 2nd major Time Jump happens about 40 minutes in, and then stop. The movie looks like it has a shot of not sucking there!
The only reason to watch X3 is to add some context to the dreams in The Wolverine, though honestly, those are probably some of the weaker parts of the movie anyway as it comes off as "forcefully trying to remind us this is in the X-men canonical timeline!" In truth, the entire movie is kind of completely skippable; it's not bad, just very clearly came off something to give us between First Class and Days of Future Past (both superior movies.)
But yeah, X1, X2, 1st Class, and Days of Future Past are all varying degrees of good, The Wolverine is alright, but nothing special, X3 and Origins suck.
-
I find Spaceballs a lot less funny outside the context of being a kid in the eighties, but Rick Moranis is definitely great in it. The movie is really at its best when knocking Star Wars for merchandising, merchandising, merchandising, though. "What's happening now is happening now." Prerelease movie leaks, Mel Brooks definitely prescient by accident there.
X2 is excellent, X1 and 1st Class are good, DoFP less good but still decent. Wolverine's okay, I appreciated having a small, personal and non-epic story outside the main series, but it's a cut below the best of them. Origins is definitely skippable and X3 was rendered non-canon for damn good reasons.
-
Pretty much agree that Rick Moranis, the many merchandising jokes ("Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money"), and the "what is happening now is happening now" sequence are some of the best parts of the movie. I find it quite enjoyable but there are certainly some less effective/misfire parts (e.g. the entire scene at the diner near the end).
-
I find a lot of Mel Brooks's humor hasn't aged well (Including spaceballs) but it's still a lot of fun.
-
Mel Brooks is weird in that his older stuff has aged a lot better than his more recent stuff. Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, and the Producers are all still great. Later on, his hit to miss ratio is worse and some of his jokes that don't work are incredibly painful.
-
It makes sense in a way. Blazing Saddles is kinda the last western, or was for many a year, Young Frankenstein is a sendup of a style of movie that was old even when Brooks made it, and The Producers isn't really a parody of anything (although it is distressingly prescient.) The movies that hold up best are the ones for genres/movies that weren't really being made anymore, divorcing them from their specific sendups. Spaceballs by comparison can be pretty funny but some scenes, like the aforementioned Diner scene, are inherently dated because they're referencing a specific movie and it's obvious what movie it is. Given those same franchises are still around and changed as time went on, it makes the scene parodies seem tacky.
-
Nobody is mentioning High Anxiety. You all suck.
-
Nobody is mentioning High Anxiety. You all suck.
Clearly a case of... uh... peepee envy.
-
Everything I hear about this year's Oscar-bait biopics makes me want to read biographies while burning Hollywood to ash.
-
As someone who likes one of Mel Brooks's newest films more than any of the others, I will have to respectfully disagree with Gourry's assessment. :)
Anyway, watched X-Men. It's a solid movie with great action scenes and Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan being awesome. Magento is pretty badass in general and loves to show off his powers. The X-men have pretty good chemistry, particularly Rogue and Wolverine.
Also watched Little Mermaid. Awesome movie with great songs and a quick pace. Sebastian remains the awesomest. :) And the villain actually kicks a doggie. Wow.
-
I think History of the World is the dividing line between the Brooks I like and the Brooks that stops working for me.
-
Lego Movie - My parents recommended that I watch this (apparently it was the first time they actually agreed on a movie in a long time), so I did. It's pretty good, the villain is deliciously effective and the story is cute. I enjoyed the plot twist at the end.
Everything is cool when you're part of a team~~~
-
Everything is Awesome totally got robbed at the Oscars.
-
Everything is Awesome totally got robbed at the Oscars.
Even bigger travesty is how Lego Movie didn't even get a nomination for best animated feature. If it didn't win...well, ok, sounds like it had legitimate competition in How to Train Your Dragon 2 and Big Hero 6 (didn't see either, so really don't know), but to not get nommed is just a huge "what the hell?" It really does prove that the Oscars are run by people who really are out of the loop of everything if you ask me.
Again, if it got nommed and didn't win, whatever, it happens. But for a movie like it to not get even a nomination? Well, now you just proved I have even less reason to take your award ceremony seriously!
-
I was somewhat less impressed by the movie. It was decent fun, certainly (the villain and his Big Brother-esque society is pretty great in general, and there are some very funny moments), and I think there were several plot threads they toyed with at the end which could have been a lot of fun, but ultimately it wasn't anything too impressive. Certainly it's not on the level of Wreck-It Ralph or Frozen, as far as random kids movies I've seen recently go, and while I haven't seen a single other animated film from this past year I can't say it being snubbed for a nomination strikes me as any sort of great crime.
-
There was no fucking way Everything Is Awesome was going to win best song after that performance of Glory by John Legend and Common at the Oscar show that put everyone in tears.
-
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone - Watched the Canadian version so this is the title. I enjoyed it, very faithful to the book in a pretty cool way. I wouldn't call it film of the year but it's well-acted and I liked the casting of the kids.
We then had to trudge through the rain to return all of these movies. Got soaked~
-
I rewatched both Captain America movies recently. The first is still my favorite comic book movie, just a really fun, earnest action/war story carried perfectly by Evans in the title role. The second...I had mixed feelings about it when I saw it in the theater but on a second viewing I think I flat-out hate it? It's so overstuffed and thematically confused that none of the plot threads ever gets a chance to actually pick up steam (when they make sense at all), it retcons a large part of the previous films' premise without so much as a half-hearted attempt to make the HYDRA thing fit, the entire climax is just awful, and Evans has little to do other than alternately look confused and punch people. His big inspirational speech at the end could have recaptured some of what made The First Avenger work, but it falls completely flat because the writers had to have a big The Heroes Save The World Against Impossible Odds fight, which means none of the rank-and-file are allowed to actually accomplish anything after Cap inspires them. So instead they courageously stand up to the villains and get massacred, which is not what I'd call a classic Captain America moment.
The first fifteen minutes is still great, though.
-
It Follows - A lot of were insanely hyped about this. The basic premise is that this thing follows you but can only walk, but it never rests and if it gets you, you're killed. One way you can pass this on is to have sex with someone (a little similar to the basic idea behind some other horror movies also this is herpes). I'm a bit mixed on this. One basic thing about horror is that it's important that there is internal consistency for the world rules, and this film does that fairly well. Additionally, the basic concept of something tirelessly pursuing you is unsettling but probably this was done better in Terminator.
I think one issue is that I just didn't find it very scary. It spaces things out such that something will happen and then there are long droughts where nothing really happens. These are probably meant to act as respites from the "monster" wherein the characters are still fearful and paranoid. These moments are probably supposed to build tension but I thought it killed the pacing. There are some jump scares that are slightly cheap and the monster is creepy in that it can look like anyone, so it does occasionally appear as people the characters know (or naked old people). I can't properly articulate why the horror aspects didn't work. Directorially it does a lot of things right. I think a bit part of it is that I didn't care about the characters. The kids are kinda Scooby-Dooey and also they are kids so they are really stupid and come up with crazy plans that have no reason to work (the ending plan is egregiously stupid).
I'm not sure how much of it is the possible that that I'm just not that into horror. Between this and the Babadook, these are two critically acclaimed horror movies, both of which have been propped up as among the best in the genre recently, that I just have not really connected to. Both movies have fairly interesting premises but I just didn't think they were executed very well. One thing is that these are very much arthouse horror, but I've liked things like this before (The Orphanage, but not because it was at all scary).
spiolzars:
So there is some thematic depth there. I guess I interpreted sex in this case as the end of innocence and as the beginning of an awareness of mortality. "Passing it on" is a temporary respite from death, and there are some moral questions about whether to pass it on. The girl goes up to possibly proposition three dudebrahs at the beach and there's a cut of her in tears in the next scene. She could be crying because she went through with it and resigned these brahs to death for self preservation or she may have been so morally conflicted that she couldn't go through with it and was overwhelmed with her current situation. The ending suggests that the main girl and Paul, who both have it, are going to stick it through together even though she clearly doesn't love him, which could speak to a lot of things about dealing with trauma. Some people have said that the monster represents sexual trauma since it appears as characters' parents but I don't think this makes much sense.
What We Do In The Shadows - The idea for this movie was probably thought up when the creators were really drunk, saw some incomprehensible scribbles on a bar napkin the next morning, and then decided to go through with it anyway. This is about vampires who live in a flat together, doing weirdly mundane things and it has a line about sandwiches that I laughed at for a good half minute. Funniest movie I have seen all year.
-
I watched Grownups 2 because of the Worst Idea of All Time and I gravely regret it. The answer to the question "what can change the nature of a man" is Grownups 2. Life has no meaning and it is a harsh, cold, uncaring universe. This did give context to what they're referencing in the podcast but just a single watch was soul draining since everything about it is so cynical. I can now understand why Guy and Tim are so destitute and nihilistic after these viewings but it is an interesting study on learned helplessness.
And apparently Adam Sandler's The Cobbler is even worse.
-
I'm shocked to realize there's even a Grownups 1 to start with.
-
I rewatched Babel and the sanctimony and general shittiness of Birdman is no mistake.
-
Did you watch Sex and the city 2?
I saw American Sniper, uuuuuh
I guess I was expecting dome nuance in this jingoistic propaganda but it never happened.
Dude kills children and shit without ever feeling remorse, and is never shown thinking about geopolitical issues or anything. Goes through some family issues but in the end he solves everything because he's too badass for post traumatic disorders. He even beats the final boss, who's an enemy sniper seen throughout the movie and i'm not even making this up. He is a hero and we're all sheeps. Also literally every Irakian in the movie is screaming and untrustworthy.
-
Eh I thought American Sniper was pretty decent throughout. But yeah the final boss thing is super Hollywood ending. If the book is like that also, then fail.
-
Dude kills children and shit without ever feeling remorse, and is never shown thinking about geopolitical issues or anything. Goes through some family issues but in the end he solves everything because he's too badass for post traumatic disorders.
I'm generally in line with some of the criticisms of the movie. The jingotastic Hollywood ending is laughable. But I do feel there's another way to look at the movie, even if it may be unintentional.
War is shitty. . It puts people in situations where they can be forced to do awful things which may or may not destroy them. It crushes basic humanity sometimes. The movie does show this, and it's hard to argue it doesn't regardless of the spin it puts on it. War can be necessary, but you damn well better think long and hard about it before engaging.
Instead of kneejerking by judging the movie by it's jingotastic Hollywood ending, I think the better way to approach the criticism would be to judo the whole situation. "Look at what this pointless war did to this man. Look at what it turned him, and others, into and made them do. We need to be more careful about engaging in warfare, lest we do this to more young men and women."
It's a movie that calls for reflection on the nature of war and what it does to people, despite itself. One side misses that because hey, jingoism is effective. Seth Rogen's comparison to the movie they're showing in Inglorious Basterds is apt, at least for the end. Glorifying war is dumb. But I guess the people who would pick up on my point above are the people who would already be likely to be cautious about war. People naturally gravitate to the message closer to them.
So maybe in the end it works for all parties in different ways?
-
I don't think the movie works that way, since it is completely uninterested in talking about the war: why, who, how to prevent it, etc.
War is just something that happens, deal with it.
I came away from the movie feeling like Bradley Cooper went through hardships but ultimately conquered them and came out the better for it. Like say, Frodo?
Early in the movie Bradley Cooper's father tells us the apalling metaphor about sheep, wolves and shephards. I felt that the movie then started embracing the metaphor, by showing us the "full of hardships, fulfilling, necessary" life of the shephard (Bradley) and the pure evil of the wolves (Irak as a whole, really)
The demonization was really the most problematic part there. I didn't want to see both sides (The movie is showing the viewpoint of the american sniper) but surely Bradley had to have more encounters than: Dudes to Shoot/ Woman to Shoot/ Children to shoot/ Final boss With No Lines to shoot, Seemingly Nice But Actually Untrustworthy Traitorous People / Screaming Ugly Super Pissed People.
Or at least they could have been painted in a better light than nazis in a WWII movie.
There are also some informants, they get ridiculously gruesome deaths to establish bad guys as really really bad, and there doesn't seem to be any sympathy for them. They're painted in an unfavourable light, get crushed by the system, and fingers are pointed at no one but Bradley for failing to protect them! I don't even think Bradley included them when he talked about being sad for not being able to protect everyone, but YMMV.
-
I came away from the movie feeling like Bradley Cooper went through hardships but ultimately conquered them and came out the better for it. Like say, Frodo?
Not to really harp on a random comment, but as much as I shit all over the series I really don't think that's an accurate interpretation (of the incredibly boring and long) ending to LotR... A big part of it is that everyone changes from the events of the book (That is like literally 100% of the point of Scotty and Pippen or whatever they are called). Even the stuff with Bilbo in LotR is showing how he ultimately was changed by his earlier adventures.
-
I don't think I disagreed with any of that Gref?
I meant that this is a classic tale of a dude who goes through some traumatic shit, changes ultimately for the better, and gets a happy ending. Bradley didn't deviate from the classic hero formula you often see in fiction. I used Frodo but could have used like Harry Potter instead.
Juste like these stories, American Sniper isn't really actually that interested in how the conflict could have been avoided (maybe by hugging Sauron...) It isn't about avoiding the trauma of the war at all, but about living through it, overcoming it and becoming a Real Hero (and maybe a Real Human Being)
All this is fine in fiction but less so when talking about a real war veteran in Irak who killed real dudes/women/children. Because the movie treats the opponent like its character does: They are threats, they cannot be trusted, life will ultimately be better for you if you don't care about killing them (or you might end up like Bradley's loser brother instead of having a happy ending)
Oh yeah, this and Imitation Game are two movies that end on a relatively positive note, followed by text "PLOT TWIST!! He died one hour later. LOL. Roll credits"
In Imitation game, I felt the death wasn't shown because the movie didn't want to dwelve too much on Turing's homosexual relationship or the kafkaesque bureaucracy as Turing's enemy (It's way easier to have nazis and Tywin Lannister as the enemy for the entire movie) It lacked courage.
In American Sniper, I felt the death wasn't shown in order to not get in the way of Bradley's character arc (because the movie is all about him): Bradley has kind of an aimless life -> 9/11 happens, Bradley enrolls -> War and trauma -> Overcoming trauma -> Happy ending. You cannot add "Brutal death at home, and not even in a terrorist attack" to that
-
I do agree with Grefter, for what it's worth: Frodo does change, certainly, but I'm not sure it's for the better, and I certainly wouldn't say he has a happy ending (he spends the last chapter suffering from nightmares and unable to enjoy the comforts of the Shire which he loved so much at the start, before leaving behind his friends to travel with the elves to another plane of existence). I think the other three hobbits get the stereotypical hero's ending (they all get married and become rulers, like FF4!) but not Frodo.
That said I obviously don't want to dwell on this too much because it's not the point at all (and I am enjoying reading the rest of the discussion).
-
From the general critical response, it seems that like Soppy says, American Sniper has this kind of Rorschach quality where viewers take the message they want based on biases they have going in (I knew a lot of people who were rah rah Chris Kyle but I also live in the south). Eastwood has said that he meant it to be antiwar but he may have not communicated that well enough since I do know a lot of people have taken the jingoistic side of it to heart. I'm interested in checking it out. I didn't read much about it so I could go into my viewing fairly fresh, but I suspect I'll agree with Fen in the end.
-
Duke of Burgundy - This is the most heartfelt, beautiful movie that involves a scene with one woman peeing in another woman's mouth.
Ex Machina - I did not love this. In a lot of ways it seems daring but it is really conventional at the end of the day. It's about a bro programmer (Nathan/Oscar Isaac) who owns what is the equivalent of future google who makes a fully functional artificial intelligence that he puts in a female shell. One of his employees (Caleb/Domhnall Gleeson) wins a contest, and he is enlisted to essentially run a Turing test on the AI (Ava) to determine whether she can pass as human. It brings up a lot of philosophical questions about consciousness (including thought experiments straight out of textbooks), although it doesn't go particularly deep into these questions. That's what I thought it would be about and I would really appreciate a movie that was solely dedicated to examining this (it's becoming more of a thing nowadays with this, Her and Chappie within the past year). Instead it plays more like a thriller or even a horror movie. You're questioning the motive of each character and it really sets up for some twists and turns, and the movie is really good at making things tense. Still, I think the best parts of the movie involve Caleb just talking with Ava, with both of them developing a rapport and probing each other with questions, leaving you wondering about what Ava is capable of. There is a really nice moment when Ava, who is a shell, asks Caleb to close his eyes, and she moves to her room and picks out some clothes, and she is really deliberative with how she wants to present herself to him. It's strangely touching, although a part of that is propelled by the score.
I'm a bit mixed on the ending, but I found out that this was the same guy who wrote Sunshine, so I should have expected third act problems.
So the character dynamics here really seem like they will turn into something really interesting. Ava can shut down the power of the facility at will, and she uses those opportunities to tell Caleb that Nathan is not to be trusted. It is stated very clearly from the beginning that essentially what Nathan is doing is playing at God, and as such, there is something unsettling about him (a feminist reading of the film could have a field day with what's going on here). You also don't really know much about Ava and her motives and capabilities but that is the main mystery of the story. Still, the major problem I had is that while the movie seems like it will be labyrinthine and full of twists, it really isn't. Caleb and Nathan's motivations and plans are what they say they are and nothing more (they each even take turns at explaining what their plans are). In some ways, it's like a weird noir film with no twists. Ava is a femme fatale who gets a patsy (Caleb) to free herself from an abusive monster (Nathan). The patsy and the monster are really transparent and do everything you expect them to do, and that is a very disappointing part of the film. Caleb is manipulable but he is chosen to be based on his search history, but there really isn't anything more to him. There is a subplot where he thinks he may also be an AI but that would have made for an even more terribly generic plotline. Nathan's a bro and a weirdly creepy monster. That's all.
The ending also becomes really dumb. Nathan is supposed to be very intelligent but has a completely moronic security system, which is compounded by his penchant of getting blind drunk and he keeps his keycard (the only way you can get around) in his sweats. Then Caleb and Ava launch their plans and another lady AI (a Japanese serving girl who is also clearly an AI from the start) goes stabbin' Nathan with her stabbin' knife and the whole problem with it devolving into a corny slasher movie is echoed here was it is in Sunshine. By the end I didn't really care anymore, but the movie does do something a little ballsy/cruel by having Ava leave Caleb trapped forever in the compound. It's kind of senseless but perhaps she is just incredibly utilitarian and had no further use for him. A helicopter comes and she convinces the pilot to take her back (I guess that's her passing the Turing test), and she goes to a crowded intersection, which was her dream. It doesn't end with the implication of omg skynet. She does seem genuinely curious rather than malicious since she's experiencing the world for the first time.
So not the movie I wanted it to be. Not a disaster and probably worth watching but still problematic.
Clouds of Sils Maria - I felt really detached to this. It touches on a lot of things about performance and the culture of acting that Birdman does, but with more talking and less screaming. Like Birdman, the actors are part of this play where you're told but not shown of its quality, but this does a point of dealing with aging and personal evolution. The relationships in the play mirror the relationship between Juliette Binoche (who is fantastic as usual) and her personal assistant (Kristen Stewart). People are heaping a lot of praise on Stewart's performance, and she does feel a little more natural than her other movies, but I still think she has a weird problem with properly displaying affect sometimes, which is problematic. There are some good moments of camaraderie with Binoche that are noteworthy, so there is some talent there.
Something big happens about a half hour before the movie ends (Kristen Stewart disappears that really makes the movie feel empty afterwards, and I guess that was the point. There are good performances and there is a lot of obvious parallel structure going on but I'm not sure to what end. I don't know if I 100% got this one.
As an aside, Chloe Grace Moretz gets to play an actress in this movie who is the worst which is appropriate because Chloe Grace Moretz is the worst. There are some actors who I really have this visceral dislike for and she is one of them, and I think it's particularly from Kick Ass, where I find her endlessly irritating. Everything else she is in is pretty terrible and she's not so great in them. One exception is Hugo but she barely has a role in it.
It's not a generalized dislike of young actresses since I do quite like Hailee Steinfeld (although I think she will be wasted in bratty teenage roles until she grows older), Mia Wasikowska, and Saoirse Ronan. Then again, I have the same dislike for Shailene Woodley (although that is mostly due to her idiotic views on feminism) and Jennifer Lawrence (who I just find really overrated). I dunno. What I do know is Chloe Moretz is terrible.
-
Avengers, Age of
Adeline Ultron: Not as good as the first one, but quite solid nonetheless. Ultron's dialogue is great. Hawkeye gets some love.
-
Avengers: Age of Ultron: It's more of the first movie, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it!
I think a nice strength this movie has is that it isn't as padded down as you think. It knows people just want to see Super Heroes vs. Army of Robots, and gets to the point.
Ultron is a fantastic villain. Vision...well, I'll just say I really liked how they handled the "team trusts him stupidly fast" because it actually makes sense without it coming off as "naive for the sake of the plot, because we need a good guy!" Quicksilver didn't do anything as impressive as in DoFP, but I think he was overall better handled if only because he served a consistent purpose, not just "we need him for this one scene so we can hold onto the license!" Scarlet Witch felt under-utilized by contrast, though I can see them doing a lot more with her later; her bad ass moment was done for a pure trailer shot, naturally (talking about the scene where she walks out of the door.)
If there's a flaw, it's how the movie has to take a temporary moment to set up for other movies; feels like a necessary evil considering all the movies coming out and this is a transition film, but still distracting. Things like "THIS ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE WE NEED TO SET UP THOR: RAGNAROK!" or Wakanda having any sort of plot...yeah. I also kind of wish Sam Wilson did more in this movie than appear for a one scene nod for "hey, remember this guy?" kind of like Pepper Pots was in the first movie (only her being a one scene wonder made sense.) There's a good opportunity to bring him back as Falcon especially since they show him at the end wearing the Falcon Wings, now with the red color scheme, and yes, I am asking for another super hero in a movie that already has a crap ton but isn't that the whole point of this!?
Also, I totally agree with the assessment that the movie's emphasis on splitting up the big fight and civilians feels like a jab at Man of Steel. It does seem like the movie is trying to say "See DC? This is what super heroes are! They save people as well as kick ass, CIVILIANS COUNT TOO!"
Speaking of DC, I'm not sure how they can pretend to one up a movie like this with Batman v Superman, and the trailer isn't doing it any favors. I guess they're idea is going to be a heavier emphasis on plot and thematics rather than just "awesome action!" but considering they plan on having like all the Justice League members in there as cameos, and the GRIM DARK Trailer and all that...uphill battle is the best way to put it.
-
Avenger 2: Fun. Hawkeye in particular shined and I liked Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch.
-
Avengers 2 - The power went out in the movie theater about twenty minutes before the end. Just as well. I think I'm beginning or continuing to burn out on these movies. Even in this one, the action was incomprehensible at times and the Marvel villain problem isn't really solved here. Ultron does have a personality and is quippy but his plan and motivations didn't make any sense. One problem is simply knowing the entirety of Marvel's next phase, so it never seems like anyone important will be down and out for long, although it really does feel like it's setting up for one character to be offed. Also, the pacing is kind of weird since the movie seems slightly overstuffed yet underdeveloped at the same time. Product placement was hilariously egregious in this too (HULK SMASH, oh it's okay guys he has Beats headphones).
I think the happiest I was in the movie was seeing Linda Cardenelli/Lindsay from Freaks & Geeks in it. I've always really liked her.
-
Avengers 2: Presentation Frend Hawkeye with Super Power: Emotionally Well Adjusted
saw this 100% to rub it in my friends who care way mores' faces because it's not gonna be out for months in japan
don't regret it. Super hero movie. Quippy. Got what I paid for. Movies kinda blow ass anyway (sorry duckbro)
-
Eh I do a lot of things out of spite but if you don't like movies you could have saved yourself over two hours if you just recounted to your friends the events of Avengers 1 and you would basically be right and they never would have known the difference.
-
Eh. I'm looking forward to Avengers 2 when it hits Japan but it's not a huge deal. Honestly I like the marvel cartoons more than the movies at this point but I've always been more a fan of TV serialization than movies. Still, as far as movies go, having huge overarching continuity porn is certainly the way to catch my attention.
Sad to hear it wasn't groundbreaking but then comics movies don't really need to be?
-
porn is certainly the way to catch my attention.
-
The sky is blue. Fish can swim. The Princess is in another castle.
-
Eh I mean I did ENJOY Avengers 2. Don't get me wrong. Was it the same thing as Avengers 1? Yeah but nobody expected much else. Quippy comic book movie. Did I derive more enjoyment from it than I can guess I'd derive from tripe like Birdman or #artproject Boyhood? I'd say yes. Movies as art just doesn't really work with me all that much but as far as an excuse to watch explosions and people being quippy at each other yeah it does that fine enough.
Mostly, though, the spite. Mmmmmm delicious spite
-
It's not like I can't enjoy these types of movies but Avengers 2 has very little that recommends it and I have basically forgotten everything about it after just two days. I don't even think it works that well even as disposable entertainment since that kind of thing was done a lot better by Avengers 1 and Guardians. There's something weirdly joyless about Avengers 2 and again, that may be due to my general burnout with the whole superhero rollout plan and how they're just basically laying more groundwork but doing a poor job of actually doing anything interesting with it.
-
Eh I mean I did ENJOY Avengers 2. Don't get me wrong. Was it the same thing as Avengers 1? Yeah but nobody expected much else. Quippy comic book movie. Did I derive more enjoyment from it than I can guess I'd derive from tripe like Birdman or #artproject Boyhood? I'd say yes. Movies as art just doesn't really work with me all that much but as far as an excuse to watch explosions and people being quippy at each other yeah it does that fine enough.
Honestly, this is my thought about Movies and similar mediums (Video Games come to mind.) The primary purpose of these things is entertainment, and should be judged by that first above all else. The artistic merits can be cool to discuss and analyze, but in the end, a boring movie is still a boring movie, and thus qualifies as crap to me. I don't want to sit through 2+ hours of nothing just because "it was shot really well!" or any of that.
Not saying there's an objective way to measure a movie, since everyone finds entertainment in different areas, and to some people, they would find the technical aspects appealing. It's just when people go "this is mindless entertainment" and try to put the movie down as a result...well, mindless entertainment is still entertainment. If you enjoyed the time you spent on the movie, be it because it made you think hard about something, or because it was just stupid dumb fun with explosions, isn't that what matters?
-
Meeple and I have agreed so I retract all my previous commentary and admit to being wrong.
-
Gods above I agree with zenny and meeple.
-
I'll always have Fen.
I do find this to be a weird dichotomy that's being drawn.
-
Not so much, I've always found you two to be different sides to a single coin.
-
I don't think there's anything wrong watching a movie for mindless entertainment. Hell, just within this thread alone I've talked about James Bond movies, which have basically nothing of value to say about the world or the human condition, but I find them (the better ones, at least) reasonably fun.
But when a movie has nothing going for it besides entertainment, well... it's kinda reductive to say this, but it's not going to offer much to anyone who isn't entertained by it. I can't really get upset by someone saying all James Bond movies suck, because, well, if you aren't entertained by them, they kinda do. Similarly, I haven't watched Avengers because I'm not a big fan of comic-book style action or plot (more specifically, it sounds like X-Men minus most of the things I actually like about X-Men; I guess it keeps the quippy dialog at least but that's not really enough).
Since entertainment is so subjective, I do think it would be nice if movies aimed to be something besides "mindless entertainment" in terms of being thought-provoking or having a message. But there's clearly a market for movies which (almost proudly?) do not... and that's okay. But you shouldn't be surprised when some people (be they critics or simply folks for whom the movie's entertainment value fell short) have negative things to say about such things.
-
Wait, who are the two sides of the same coin?
There are some good mindless movies (John Wick, Expendables. The Raid?) I don't like superhermo movies though.
Superhero movies are often too predictable, and too disconnected from reality for the violence to really be visceral and immersive, and tend to always have dialogue being half super srs melodrama about the woes of being a super mutant / half constant Buffy snark between characters, because moods need to change all the time (no time to mourn that dead uncle)
Also, they're doing these completely overblown super high budget movies out of super camp comic book characters created in the middle of the last century and it shows.
I rewatched Batman Rises recently and was very bored (it got really really dumb later on) even though I remembered it as once of the best.
Zenny I guarantee you that LISA is 10000% more arthouse hipster BS than Boyhood. (I say this as someone who likes both and as a fine amateur of arthouse hipster BS)
-
Oddly, I felt Expendables was pretty bad. I went in expecting a bit of a simple, fun action movie with cheesy one-liners and such, and instead got something that was just dull. By the end of the movie, when the climax hit, I just found myself unable to care. Felt like movie was trying way too hard to be bad ass and fell flat on it's face at every step.
The sequel actually addressed most of my issues, recognizing that being "serious bad ass" is not the angle to take, instead going with "corny, over the top cheese...and explosions..." is the better angle to take. Add in legitimate one-liners and hey, actual action movie!
As a side note, The Dark Knight Rises I'd argue is not "one of the better ones" in the genre, and honestly, the entire Christopher Nolan trilogy aren't good indicators of the genre as a whole (not for quality purposes, but stylistically, they're very different.)
-
Re entertainment:
I find books and games to be a much worse offender here but movies do it too. I consume entertainment to be entertained. If a game/movie/book doesn't do that, it has completely failed to me. The Great Gatsby was a miserable read and I enjoyed none of it. The same goes for a game like MMXCM (Or even something like Torment).
It is a different issue from people finding superhero movies boring/overdone but eh.
-
Yeah, if you don't like a genre because you don't enjoy the movies, nothing anyone can do about that. Tastes, opinions, etc. That seems to be Elfboy's point stating that nothing wrong with "mindless entertainment", but if you fail at that, the movie has absolutely nothing going for it outside of maybe some visuals or something (which in most cases isn't enough to carry a movie.) A thoughtful but boring movie will at least have you think about it after the fact, so there's that, though don't expect me to call it a "good movie" because if it's not delivered in an entertaining way, then you wasted my time on something I probably could have mulled over reading a well written article on the same thing. Matrix comes to mind for a movie that was entertaining and had some thought provoking aspects; not saying it's a super deep movie or anything, but it certainly tries harder than most action movies.
As far as Games/Books being a bigger offender? I can see that, but if only because they're both much larger time investments. A movie you sit and watch for a few hours tops. Video Games and Books take way longer to read, and in most cases, are done over the course of multiple sessions, especially modern games. Shovel Knight is one of the shorter games released in the past decade, and that still took over 4 hours, longer than any of the LotR movies and those are considered "long." Video games have the added problem of costing way more than other mediums, so that further adds it in.
I guess by extension, a TV Series is more comparable to Books and Video Games for that same reason. You do them over multiple sessions, or you binge watch them and there goes your entire day.
Not the only reason but I definitely feel the time investment aspect plays a role here. Just my take on it.
-
Zenny I guarantee you that LISA is 10000% more arthouse hipster BS than Boyhood. (I say this as someone who likes both and as a fine amateur of arthouse hipster BS)
Oh, no question at all. But somehow I have the attention span for one but not the other.
-
Man you are crazy dismissive of stuff that doesn't fit your definition of "entertaining" and are prepared to sacrifice an awful lot at that altar.
I don't consider a lot of Kubrick to be particularly entertaining. They are massively engaging and beautiful technical masterpieces. I didn't come out of The Shining high fiving all my bros, but I sure have enjoyed the fact that 30 years later there is people talking about how it was Kubrick admitting to help in fake the moon landing (this is a real thing that exists).
I guess I could be misinterpreting "entertainment" to mean more than just "thing I like" but to me it is a specific type of thing where I come out feeling like something held my attention in the moment (usually positive emotionally I suppose? But I want room for horror/suspense/thrillers also).
Something that engages me more during the movie might pull me out of the movie, but it is a 90 minute thing that will give me way more than that base 90 minute time investment. That rates pretty high up there for me in terms of things I am glad to have done.
As with all things there is going to be a disconnect based on what you are going into a movie for (I wouldn't watch Jack Reacher to learn something about cinematography just like I wouldn't watch Seventh Seal to fill in some time while I wait for Pizza to be delivered).
It is fun when the two schools of this collide (Nolan being the really modern example, but I would argue that historically that is where George Lucas was originally seated). Success on either side varies, but it is always interesting. I find that without the "art house" element you often don't get the dissection of what makes the "popcorn" side of movies work (unless it is like Catwoman bad).
-
I was going to type pretty much what Grefter typed when I was done with gaming for the day but it looks like he saved me the effort. Seriously guys? There are lots of different reasons to watch movies. How many different emotions are you familiar with? I find a lot of the preceding arguments pretty absurd so I'm mostly just going to leave it.
Speaking of, yeah, I saw Avengers 2. It was okay. I walked out feeling a lot like I did after Days of Future Past. I can understand some of Gourry's misgivings here because it did often feel like its disparate parts didn't quite add up in an entirely satisfactory manner. I don't really feel like the movie added anything of consequence to any of the established characterization. Romance subplot didn't do anything for me, but then romance subplots basically never do*. I guess getting the band together is always going to be more fun than keeping the band together, because at least there's novel interactions in that scenario? So it's probably a good thing the movie made it clear at the end that they'd be shaking the team roster up for the next one. I did like Ultron, but there wasn't enough going on there. The voice-acting sells just the right mix of wounded dignity and humor so that I actually wanted more of him, but the movie just didn't have enough time for it. We go from naive and impressionable new lifeform to genocidal killbot in literally less than a minute. So "overstuffed" is a pretty apt adjective for this production, there's just too many big names vying for face time for everyone to make an impression beyond being the expected quip-delivery mechanism. As for one development late in the movie, I was all like, "They aren't going to do the whole someone has to run back to save the adorable moppet from dire peril, are they?" But of course they did. It seems a pretty impersonal way to kill a character, getting gunned down from afar while protecting a nameless NPC? I could see the argument that protecting innocent bystanders is actually what superheroes are all about and there's no more apt manner for one to die, but I doubt the movie had that specific statement on its mind.
(*At least not when either participant is male.)
So basically it feels like what most of the Marvel sequels have so far, to me: a diluted version of its more engaging predecessor. Not bad, because at worst there's always a fundamental level of competence at work (it takes a commendable degree of professionalism to say lines like "You know I've always supported your avenging" with a straight face), but not really inspired in any way either. Was it entertaining? I guess it was, there were lots of flashing lights on the screen. But I'll be damned if I can say what it was about, in the same way you had a clear character arc in Thor or Iron Man. Even an action movie needs you to give a damn about why people are doing things in order to succeed.
Is there anything after the full credit roll in this one? I left after "Fine, I'll do it myself."
-
size=1pt tiny text that you can't read without copy pasting or quoting. <3 <3 <3 Fenrir forever he is the best.
Post Dark Knight Rising and Man of Steel, that is ACTUALLY a pretty damn good statement to make though.
-
Given that the Hulk rampage in South Africa got a similar focus on civilians, I can't see it as anything but a direct knock on the Distinguished Competition, yeah.
-
Is there anything after the full credit roll in this one? I left after "Fine, I'll do it myself."
The manager at the theater said the credits are 17 minutes long and there's nothing at the end. After "Fine, I'll do it myself" of course.
-
Is there anything after the full credit roll in this one? I left after "Fine, I'll do it myself."
The manager at the theater said the credits are 17 minutes long and there's nothing at the end. After "Fine, I'll do it myself" of course.
There's nothing at the end of the full credit roll. I'm also not convinced by that 17 minutes long number? I certainly don't recall sitting there that long.
-
Can confirm. I turned on and checked my phone while waiting to see if there was a second stinger. Was not 17 minutes long. That said, there's also no second stinger. Can't say I really blame them, they couldn't have topped the Shawarma scene.
-
Avengers 2 was fun.
It wasn't great, and they did way too much with Hawkeye and his secret base storyline.
No one cares. Just do super hero things. Alos, the Hulk Widow love scene was silly.
Iron Man is a good guy right? Because he didn't feel like one in this film. Not sure why they are always trying to portray Cap as the asshole in these films. I guess RD Jr. is just more charismatic, which is true.
-
Fucking go watch Mad Mad Fury Road right goddamn now. That movie is four hours of insane crammed into 150 minutes of movie.
-
Fucking go watch Mad Mad Fury Road right goddamn now. That movie is four hours of insane crammed into 150 minutes of movie.
I pretty much lost it when the bad guy's war party was led by an RV stacked with scaffolding on top to accommodate a full heavy metal band including timpani troupe and a dude playing a double-necked guitar that was also a flamethrower. Why in hell has George Miller been stuck in Happy Feet purgatory for ten years? I don't know whether anyone else can pump this much energy into an action movie and stock even casual shots of background characters you barely even have time to look at with such vivid lunacy.
When you talk about top-notch popcorn entertainment, this is the shit that I have in mind. There is almost no moment of this movie in which something crazy is not happening. There's an army of Billy Corgans. Charlize Theron has a robot hand made out of car parts. There are lethal biker grannies. Every absurd thing is treated completely serious and it's amazing. As a huge fan of The Road Warrior, I am very satisfied.
EDIT: IMDB informs me that the villain is actually the same actor that played Toecutter in the original Mad Max. This is hilarious because I was sitting there thinking, "If Toecutter survived and started a cult, this is about what it would look like." This is also not the only great callback to the older movies.
-
There's actually a half-second flashback to Toecutter's death scene during one of Max's psychotic breaks, so that explains why they did that. Pretty cool.
-
Fucking go watch Mad Mad Fury Road right goddamn now. That movie is four hours of insane crammed into 150 minutes of movie.
You convinced me to go see this, it'd best be good. E: Okay, it was fun. I hadn't ever seen the original film, but I still enjoyed that.
-
I can confirm that this rocks
-
It might be the best action movie I know.
Watch it in 2d if you can (I couldn't) because 3d ruins the blue skies
-
Okay, it was fun. I hadn't ever seen the original film, but I still enjoyed that.
The first movie is weird because it's actually really low-key compared to everything else. I like to attribute it to the lack of a narrative framing device. All the other movies are stories told as a legend, as is the case with Road Warrior and Thunderdome, which both involve him becoming a semi-mythical figure to a group of people who have only oral tradition, or they're how Max sees the world (Fury Road) because he is, you know, clinically insane.
-
I liked Ex Machina
edit: saw Nightcrawler, liked that as well
-
Mad Max was fucking great. Relentless as hell but that was a movie that has a post apocalyptic berserker cult of goth boys who drive chopped VW Beetles with V8 engines who go to war to the sound of war drums and a blind goth in a red onesie playing a double neck guitar that doubles as a flame thrower.
I need to start Wasteland 2 this weekend.
-
Mad Max was fucking great. Relentless as hell but that was a movie that has a post apocalyptic berserker cult of goth boys who drive chopped VW Beetles with V8 engines who go to war to the sound of war drums and a blind goth in a red onesie playing a double neck guitar that doubles as a flame thrower.
I need to start Wasteland 2 this weekend.
They're releasing a revamped version some time in the next couple of months. It's going to have perks and traits in addition to a bunch of other game mechanic changes so the old save files are going to be incompatible. Depending on whether you think you can get through a playthrough in that time you might hold off.
Also the flamethrower guitar is real and it really plays and it really shoots fire when you hit the whammy bar.
-
You know, that guitar was awesome in the context of the movie but if you talk about it to people who haven't seen it it just sounds cheap and lolrandom. I discovered that today
Anyway i'm going to see it a second time tuesday. Yay
-
I saw it again yesterday. This might happen again next weekend. Can't remember the last time I liked something enough to see it multiple times in the theater (outside of see something alone -> see it again later when the family wants to go situations, which is just comic book movies since I'm pretty sure that's all they see anymore).
-
You know, that guitar was awesome in the context of the movie but if you talk about it to people who haven't seen it it just sounds cheap and lolrandom. I discovered that today
It's not even the context of the movie, you just have to mention that there's a whole war band to get the warband excited. You know, like a battle hymn you can hear over a bunch of car engines going at maximum speed.
-
Mad Max: This was entertaining/10
Tomorrowland: Not entertaining/10
-
What did you not like about Tomorrowland? I haven't seen it, but I was curious.
-
It didn't entertain me.
-
What did you not like about Tomorrowland? I haven't seen it, but I was curious.
It's basically Rand For Kids.
-
Mad Max: Fury Road - Pretty much as good as advertised. I love the biker gang of grannies.
-
Was out and about on a Saturday and got the urge to go to a theatre. The only thing playing that looked interesting was Maze Runner. Apparently it's another movie franchise based on a YA novel series.
I have literally never heard of the books nor movie until today but it wasn't bad. It has Dylan OBrien who is hot and I know him from trashy tv shows so that made it worthwhile. The movie is about Abercrombie models who are placed in a huge Maze and had their memories wiped. Apparently Dylan is the latest arrival to the center of the Maze which is basically an acre of forest where the boys have been subsisting for three years. From there Dylan proceeds to break all the rules and figure out the mystery behind it all!
The plot hits its beats predictably but everything flows without plotholes. The ending is basically a cliffhanger but I honestly have no desire to see more. I can certainly see it being engaging but I feel like a movie franchise was a bad choice. Feels more like a TV serial.
Overall competent but forgettable. As in I am typing this now because I'm liable to forget it exists before I get home.
-
After watching the Mad Max series in full for the first time in like twenty years, I'm prepared to call Fury Road the best of the lot by a fairly substantial margin.
Also it took me a couple viewings to notice that the guy who falls out of the Citadel at the beginning of the movie yells "Witness!" as he falls. I love this movie.
-
I went to the theater to watch it again with another group of friends. Worth it.
I like how exhausted everybody is after seeing this movie
-
Dune - had the first 20 minutes playing while I ate dinner. My sister apparently hasn't seen it.
"Why is it suddenly Minecraft?"
Also love that the entire plot of the movie is literal stated out loud by the Emperor and the Navigator in the first five minutes and the movie still doesn't make sense.
-
I like that they condensed the middle... what, five hundred pages of Dune into one montage?
-
Dune's romance subplot in particular is hilariously perfunctory. "Paul and Chani's love grew" relayed to us through voiceover narration. That's all you get folks.
(I actually like Dune for other reasons so this is just good-natured ribbing as opposed to when, say, The Last Airbender attempted to get away with the exact same thing and had no such goodwill to earn it a free pass.)
I went to the theater to watch it again with another group of friends. Worth it.
I like how exhausted everybody is after seeing this movie
Is it called Therapy Road in France. That would almost be appropriate.
-
(I actually like Dune for other reasons so this is just good-natured ribbing as opposed to when, say, The Last Airbender attempted to get away with the exact same thing and had no such goodwill to earn it a free pass.)
You can get away with skipping a lot of things if the things you do show are really weird and memorable.
-
The score: Paint by numbers thriller. It was an entertaining popcorn film with a strong cast. It was however hilarious to see how totally out of date all the technology from 2001 was, though.
-
Spy: Hilarious. I was smiling throughout.
-
Huh. No one, really?
Jurassic World: High highs, low lows, overall an entertaining popcorn flick.
-
Mad Max: This was entertaining/10
-
Jurassic World:
Unfortunately it's not Mad Max: Fury Road.
It has the usual blockbuster movie curse: It starts off pretty strong, and becomes too stupid towards the end, when plausability is sacrificed for spectacle because you're not supposed to be thinking too much at this point
-
Mad Max: Fury Road. Fortunately, was Mad Max: Fury Road.
-
Fury Road was great. Act surprised.
-
Yeah it'll be difficult for blockbusters to live in a post Mad Max world
The ending of Jurassic World was terrible and the more I think about it, the stupider it gets. So let's recap.
There's a giant evil T-rex mutant thing walking around and attacking everything. To retaliate, the humans decide to send the 4 pet raptors that the main character had trained.
Plot twist : The Mutant T-rex is part raptor, so he has a nice little chat with the raptors and they all agree on destroying all humans.
Okay.
So raptors start destroying shit, then the main character comes around and is all "HEY RAPTORS IT'S ME, YOUR BEST FRIEND". Raptors change their mind AGAIN and immediately decide to have a heroic sacrifice and so they all attack the Super Dinosaur. Good lord. They are dinosaurs, not Kain, what is this shit. Three of them die immediately.
4 raptors are not enough raptors to kill the Final Boss, so the main girl goes to free a regular T-rex, and have it chase her around to lure it towards the bigger badder Rex. This plan is bad enough on its own, but you should also note that she's wearing high heels.
Despite all odds, this plan works, and the two big dinosaurs fight. (It's impossible to tell which is which unless you look at their arms) Regular T-rex and raptors somehow improbably team up to kill the Z-Rex (they nearly high five themselves). The fight is close, but the Z-Rex ends up getting eaten by a giant whale dinosaur which jumps out of its nearby pond to eat it. HOW CONVENIENT. Wait, why didn't the whale dinosaur attempt to do that before to eat some tasty humans?
The Final Boss is dead so the background music stops being stressful, and the humans leave whatever hole they were in. There is still a velociraptor and a T-rex walking around but no big deal.
Yeah guys that T-Rex is our pal now so I don't see why we should fear him.
In short they attempted to humanize the dinosaurs which was a terrible idea. The T-Rex thought process was :
- There's a tasty human, let's slowly run after her
- There's a big dinosaur that wants to kill me, let's fight!
- That big dinosaur's dead and this little velociraptor fellow helped me beat him. We're pals <3
- There are some humans around, but I don't really feel like killing any of them despite being really hungry
- I get to be in the final shot of the movie, cool
It should have been:
- Tasty human wearing high heels, lol *slurps*
- What the fuck is this big mutant dinosaur's problem, I am going to annihilate his face
- That big dinosaur's dead and I'm still hungry. Oh there's a velociraptor here. *slurps*
- Oh man there are also some other humans still around. This is an amazing day. *slurps*
- Eat everything
So yeah the dinosaur in the movie wasn't actually a regular T-rex, it was Dinosaur Comics T-Rex. At the end, I was half expecting the t-rex to draw a tiny heart in the air with his tiny arms while looking at the humans then ride off to the sunset. (To be fair, this would have been adorable and would have redeemed the whole movie)
-
I just realised that the mutant T-Rex is female so that they can reuse the "Clever girl" Line.
Yeahhhhh not gonna go see it.
-
The movie seemed very fanservicy but I barely remember Jurassic Park so I can't comment on it.
There are basically two really good scenes (The attack on the gyrosphere and the attack of the avians) + an enjoyable first part in which you get to see the theme park. Nothing else is really incredible and the ending leaves too much of a sour taste
I liked seeing Omar Sy as the French Dude
-
Jurassic World
Good review. Thank you for curing my curiosity about whether it might be worth seeing.
-
Lady T-Rexes? I'm SO there.
-
"Enhanced" Lady T-Rexes? I'm SO there.
-
Inside Out was classic Pixar. Awesome movie.
It is about feels, so there were plenty of feels to be had. I imagine if you're a parent you'll bawl.
Also, it's strange to see places you live and work represented in fiction.
-
Priscilla, Queen of the Desert - I watched this yesterday. Definitely a good one, both funny and serious in pretty cool ways. :) Also a pretty appropriate day to watch it!
-
Did you watch it because it was appropriate or did you end up watching it and coincidentally it was appropriate ?
-
We had rented it a couple days previous so it was a happy coincidence.
Priscilla, Queen of the Desert - Yep, I liked this. Quite funny and charming, and its message on tolerance was delivered in ways which are heartwarming.
Inception - So I'm five years late to the party but this movie was amazing, I have virtually nothing bad to say about it and lots of good things, starting with its stellar cast and the fact that Cobb is a pretty amazing character.
-
Look at these Candians. Doing all this Grefter Approved activities weeks before I land.
Also post about how late you are to the party for Inception right after Priscilla? You do realise what only watching Priscilla now did right? It meant you missed out on associating Agent Smith with drag acts when the Matrices trilogy were coming out. that was a deliberate joke don't correct the poor grammar plz
-
The differing comments are a reflection of the fact that it felt like almost everyone I've talked to has seen Inception while Priscilla is relatively more obscure. I agree that I definitely missed out on that, as well as the mental image of Elrond breaking up the Council of the One Ring with an Abba drag queen dance number.
-
The differing comments are a reflection of the fact that it felt like almost everyone I've talked to has seen Inception while Priscilla is relatively more obscure.
That is literally every body else's problem. Priscilla is fucking amazing and everyone should see it.
So what's up next? Watch Looper? Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper.
Looper is pretty good.
-
Clearly we must rent that while you visit.
Also Moonraker.
-
The differing comments are a reflection of the fact that it felt like almost everyone I've talked to has seen Inception while Priscilla is relatively more obscure.
So what's up next? Watch Looper? Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper. Watch Looper.
Looper is pretty good.
-
X-Men 2 - Better than the first and a generally fun and action packed movie. I really enjoy Jean Grey and Professor Xavier in particular, and I think this movie even more than the first sheds light on why Magneto is such a Grade A douche.
Inception - Fab. Leo Dicap + Tom Hardy + Joseph Gordon-Levitt is pretty much eat your heart out. More seriously, it's very intense and thought-provoking, and I really liked the interaction between Cobb and Ariadne. I also enjoyed the characterization of the son and felt very sorrow for him. His dad's a dick and people are basically using his brain as a playtoy. Poor bastard. Also, this movie has a lot of casting overlap with the Batman series, huh, between JGL, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, and Michael Caine.
-
Nolan reuses a lot of the same actors (nothing wrong with that so long as they're good ones, of course). Hell, I think Michael Caine's been in everything but his first couple movies?
-
My friend pointed out to me that Talia and Mal are the same as well.
Brave - Cute movie but not one of the all-time greats for animated movies. Great music, though.
-
Last movie of the five movie set!
Aliens - Pretty awesome and very action-packed in its second half. Burke is the worst and deserved his fate. The movie does come off as very 80's in a way -- lots of people smoking, the military equipment, etc, but it's fun anyway. Bonus points to the movie for avoiding having Ellen be right about everything (mostly referring to her impression of the android).
-
If you are not listening to Ripley, you are doing it wrong.
The first two Alien movies are great for different reasons (first is essentially horror, second more straight-up action flick). Oh I'm sorry, I said that wrong: the only two Alien movies are great for different reasons.
-
The second one has far far better quotes.
That's it, man. Game over, man. Game over, what the fuck are we supposed to now, huh, what are we gonna do?
-
If you are not listening to Ripley, you are doing it wrong.
The first two Alien movies are great for different reasons (first is essentially horror, second more straight-up action flick). Oh I'm sorry, I said that wrong: the only two Alien movies are great for different reasons.
I just read that the upcoming fifth movie is apparently going to retcon 3 and 4. I was amused. (I haven't actually seen either, but they didn't sound very appealing.)
Brave was pretty good but not great. The relationship between Merida and Elinor was great and there are some excellent scenes involving them. Other characters were mostly a waste of time and not as funny as the movie wanted them to be (except the triplets who were very fun but obviously minor) and the Final Boss* added very little to the film. I think Frozen > Wreck-It Ralph > Brave > Up > Lego Movie > Kung Fu Panda for recentish animated kids movies I've watched in full. I'm probably forgetting one.
Aliens and X2 I have seen before, but not in forever so it was fun to watch them again. I definitely am a fan of both (Aliens moreso).
*Thanks to Fenrir for this term.
-
People should watch Inside Out. Pixar had slipped a bit but Inside Out is emotionally resonant without being cloying, something I think the studio does quite well. There also isn't a villain so there isn't the Final Boss syndrome. It keeps itself grounded within the confines of its concept and should have something that speaks to everyone who sees it. I might even say it was entertaining.
-
I just read that the upcoming fifth movie is apparently going to retcon 3 and 4. I was amused. (I haven't actually seen either, but they didn't sound very appealing.)
Technically there's already a fifth. It was also declared unworthy by the fans. Aliens manages to be neck for neck with Terminator in that department.
People should watch Inside Out. Pixar had slipped a bit but Inside Out is emotionally resonant without being cloying, something I think the studio does quite well. There also isn't a villain so there isn't the Final Boss syndrome. It keeps itself grounded within the confines of its concept and should have something that speaks to everyone who sees it. I might even say it was entertaining.
Butbutbut Syndrome was such a good final boss!
-
I just read that the upcoming fifth movie is apparently going to retcon 3 and 4. I was amused. (I haven't actually seen either, but they didn't sound very appealing.)
Technically there's already a fifth. It was also declared unworthy by the fans. Aliens manages to be neck for neck with Terminator in that department.
Oh, right, Prometheus exists. Lol.
-
I had no plans for today and my wife's out of town, so I finally watched Avengers 2. It was better than I was expecting, especially after it got decidedly worse reviews than the first one. Don't get me wrong, it definitely is worse than the first one, but not so much that it isn't a good movie. Whedon's gift for balancing a cast of thousands is on full display, the action setpieces are a lot of fun, Spader and Bettany are great, and I was actually glad I'd had [SPOILARZ] spoiled for me because it made the head-fakes leading up to it hilarious. The big weakness by comparison is that the first movie felt like a culmination of the entire MCU up to that point, while this one is riding exactly no buildup at all. There's nothing set up in the earlier movies that pays off here -- if anything it just repeats the payoff from Winter Soldier, but with better writing and Tony Stark. I'd rank it right around Iron Man 3 (which I liked a lot more than most Internet nerds) but for very different reasons.
-
Inside Out: Was decent. Didn't "wow" me at all, but nothing particularly wrong with it. The depiction of depression is scarily accurate. Joy and Sadness are gone, and all you have left is Anger, Fear, and (self) Disgust.
-
I had no plans for today and my wife's out of town, so I finally watched Avengers 2. It was better than I was expecting, especially after it got decidedly worse reviews than the first one. Don't get me wrong, it definitely is worse than the first one, but not so much that it isn't a good movie. Whedon's gift for balancing a cast of thousands is on full display, the action setpieces are a lot of fun, Spader and Bettany are great, and I was actually glad I'd had [SPOILARZ] spoiled for me because it made the head-fakes leading up to it hilarious. The big weakness by comparison is that the first movie felt like a culmination of the entire MCU up to that point, while this one is riding exactly no buildup at all. There's nothing set up in the earlier movies that pays off here -- if anything it just repeats the payoff from Winter Soldier, but with better writing and Tony Stark. I'd rank it right around Iron Man 3 (which I liked a lot more than most Internet nerds) but for very different reasons.
From the reviews I've read (as well as reaction of others who were scratching their heads at the score difference), a lot of them are whining about things that...were all problems in the first movie too (or should I say, "equally present" in the first one; problems is a bit of a strong word.) It strikes me as the situation is the first movie was a completely new and untried thing that hype factor and all had people super excited, to the point where even the critics were raving about it. Fast Forward to now, the Super Hero Movie fatigue kicks in with Avengers 2 being essentially "more of the first movie" and now they're calling strengths of the first movie flaws in the second, even though there really isn't a big difference.
I do completely agree that one thing worth considering is that the first movie was something they were clearly building up to since Iron Man 1, while the 2nd movie is more like "well, we kind of have to make a sequel." Phase 2 as a whole is all aftermath from the first movie, meaning little time to set up for the second, and while AoS did try to fill the niche a little bit (Baron Strucker stuff is a direct follow up to things that happened late in AoS, where they basically discover his location, and get the message to the Avengers), it wasn't enough. It really does feel like a "we need something big in between Avengers 1 and Infinity War" so they just tossed Ultron in because going Loki -> Thanos is too fast, Loki -> Ultron -> Thanos? More fitting progression!
-
And what shared-universe stuff they did include is foreshadowing for future movies rather than linking this one to what came before, which is not a good way to do things.
-
The Last Stand: A mix of hilariously bad/over the top action stuff, complete with Arnold Schwarzenegger being Too Old For This Shit. Corvette car ad part of the movie was annoyingly transparent/badly done, but still far less annoying than any time Johnny Knoxsville spoke or appeared on camera.
-
Avengers 2: You're all nuts this movie is awesome and I cried like baby at the end while balancing the sheer feeling of badassery that was giving me goosebumps from the iMax screen. The bad reviews this got just makes me lose faith in humanity's ability to be happy.
-
Ant Man- Was good. Just plain, goofy, likable fun. So basically Paul Rudd: The Movie. The connecting bits to the rest of the MCU are great.
-
Godzilla 2014: Finally saw this.
This movie is too serious, grim dark, focuses on destruction, tries evoke imagery of real life destruction, and isn't campy at all! This is an outrage! Godzilla has never been like this, it's always been about silly campy fun!
...except, you know, Godzilla: King of the Monsters, aka Gojira, aka the ORIGINAL GODZILLA MOVIE MADE IN 1954. Which is to say, no, this is actually very appropriate; it's a movie that goes back to the roots of the franchise, and I mean all the way back. There are even subtle nods of this like referencing Hiroshima, the event that actually inspired the original movie, showing some scenes that were clear homages to the original (like humans actually watching the tail drag by), and it's also the first movie since 1954 to focus on the aftermath, having actual scenes of nothing but wide scale destruction. Basically, it feels just like the original movie updated to 1954, albeit a little more 9/11 inspired than Atomic Bomb, but if you're using a disaster to inspire your movie, you need something audiences can relate to. Also the destruction feels appropriate beyond "blow things up because awesome!"; I say this as someone who enjoyed Man of Steel on that "turn your brain off level", but movie was definitely destruction for sake of destruction. Plotwise, there's no reason Superman couldn't have diverted the fight with Zod to a less populated area.
This movie? They're giant monsters, they don't think, they just act in instinct. When several hundred feet tall monsters fight, destruction is inevitable. That said, Godzilla caused less destruction than Superman, so I think we know who is the savior we can trust! More seriously, I like how they handled the "Godzilla Threshold" in this movie, albeit from the other angle than most, aka why relying on a giant monster to destroy other monsters is not ideal. It's also nice to see the movie acknowledge "the military really can't do crap about giant monster."
Godzilla's design is pretty good in this; its different from before, but still resembling the original enough that it's convincingly him. He does look a bit chubby, but I guess that helps sell the "this guy is a freaking tank." MUTOs I'm less than fond of; they're just kind of boring in design. I mean, at least they're legitimate opponents so we had a major monster smack down, and having two helps establish that yes, he's clearly way stronger than they are individually, not compromising the whole "King of the Monsters" deal. I do like the EMP touch, giving the monsters an actual power that completely screws with humans and forces them to have to come up with other ideas.
So yeah, I liked this movie. Slow moving but then if you've ever watched any of the Godzilla movies (...besides Final Wars), that's kind of how they work, and shows that yes, things can be enjoyable with a slow build up and huge pay off, not just relying on instant gratification. The sequel is suppose to have Rodan, Mothra and King Ghidorah in it...
I have conflicted opinions on that. On one hand, feels like they're jumping the gun immediately. Anyone of them individually would be hyped, but going in with all 3 at once? Feels rushing things.
ON THE OTHERHAND, holy shit! A modern remake of Ghidorah: The Three Headed Monster, which was basically the Kaiju Avengers before the Avengers were a thing! HELL YES!!!
-
Mad Max Fury Road:
I don't think this movie was for me. Everyone has been hyping it so much and I had a few moments I enjoyed but I seriously don't get the 'best movie of the last ten years' hype while people are shitting all over Avengers 2...
-
"Shitting on" is a rather dramatic revision of "Eh, it was okay," which was definitely my response at least regarding Avengers 2. I don't know where else you're canvassing opinions on the movie, so I'm just going on DL postings which seemed generally positive aside from like Gourry and myself being largely unimpressed. And even that is a far cry from calling it terrible. For me, it was just too much of a sequel, one so inevitable and unavoidable that that there was no way in the world it could fail to pull in swimming pools full of money, and perhaps consequently no one involved in it looked to me all that invested in making it more than just another Marvel sequel. I'm not easily impressed and almost impossible to sincerely move, so even when something tragic did happen I could only note distantly that it happened to the character that the overall Marvel plan could most easily consider expendable. I wouldn't call it a bad movie, because there's such a fundamental level of professionalism inherent to the Marvel movie machine at this point that they are almost incapable of producing something that doesn't maintain at least a fundamentally acceptable degree of watchability. But I have to admit that I'm a little amazed at someone being amazed about it. It had all the expected hallmarks of a blockbuster but I just couldn't find a heart to it all.
On the other hand, I could go on at length about all the things visually, aurally, and thematically about Fury Road that worked exactly 100% perfectly for me but there's not much point if you just flat out didn't enjoy it. It probably suffices for me to say that I just can't think of anything else like it (quite in spite of it also being a sequel; I rewatched the original trilogy recently and would easily call Fury Road a superior production to any of them).
-
While I haven't seen Avengers 2 myself I pretty much agree with Cid. (And I'd also be totally down for reading your thoughts about Fury Road was great if you're ever in the mood to write about it!)
-
I actively don't think much of Avengers 2. I don't hate it or anything but it really is something that completely left my mind as soon as I left the theater. This is in fairly stark contrast to Avengers 1, which had a lot of standout scenes and a very charismatic villain. There isn't much new being explored or much meaningful character development in Avengers 2, and I found the action to be really uninspiring, incomprehensible, or kind of boring (again, in contrast with Avengers 1 and other Marvel films). I think a big part of my apathy is that I had seen basically this exact movie in the past but done better. My thing is that the Marvel machine can make hundreds of movies of this quality and they're going to be really inconsequential seeming to me if no progression is being made, and that's what it felt like for me. Avengers 2 doesn't set anything very interesting up, it doesn't do anything new, it doesn't develop character relationships well (Hulk x Black Widow makes little sense and is really ineffective), and it does a poor job of having particularly meaningful stakes (knowing about Phase 3 really takes the sails out of most of the tension this movie has). Ultron has some presence but not much about him or the plan make sense. I didn't have an emotional reaction towards the end, because of what Cid said (it's a really calculated move in the grander scheme of things), plus the nothing characterization.
There are things to like (party scenes were good) and I don't begrudge anyone's enjoyment of it, but it never came together even as a piece of pure entertainment for me.
I echo Cid, Fury Road is unlike anything I've seen recently. I think it hits on everything it sets out to do extremely well and it's incredibly visually striking. It was also pretty excellent even if you only want to be entertained.
-
Both get entertained/10 from me but I would like to point out that DJ's opinion is terrible mostly by virtue of him being the one to have it.
-
I think I prefer Avengers 2 more than Fury Road myself, though I'll happily admit that some of that is due to Avengers 2 getting a lot of antihype while Fury Road was getting all the hype. The expectations led to different subjective experiences where one was better than the other.
I'll also disagree entirely about the Black Widow/Hulk thing, I actually felt it worked fairly well, and didn't actually come out of nowhere. Heck, it added a fair bit to the feeling that not only is time passing between these tent poles, but that the characters have lives outside of the movies. Sometimes it feels like a character is stuck in stasis between flicks, and it's nice to avoid that.
-
It is also playing on Hulk stuff from Avengers 1. She is there to recruit him etc. it is minor, but there. It is very Whedon.
-
Not that this is a movie, but I watched a steampunk version of Comedy of Errors last night. Shenanigans were had, and the setting/weirdness worked pretty well for the ludicrousness of the play. There was great acting as always, particularly by Antipholus of Ephesus who moonwalked during the play. Bonus points for having the servants be cyborgs as well. :)
-
The costuming was pretty great, very little "Glue a cog on it" and the female costuming in general was A+ and makes me want to replay Arcanum.
Good cast and good production like Bard is pretty consistently.
-
Frankly I found Ant-man better than Avengers 2.
-
Sorry, my initial posting about Fury Road was mostly reactionary. Upon further reflection, I -do- appreciate a lot of the uniqueness of the movie visually and I really liked the choice of making the main character Charlize Theron. And the Flaming Guitar Guy DID speak to that inner 13-year-old boy inside me.
There just... wasn't a lot about the movie that moved me in the moment. And for as much as I can appreciate what the visual presentation was going for in that grotesque uncomfortable style... it mostly just made me plain uncomfortable and grossed out instead of engaged.
It's just not a movie that was made for me, whereas Avengers hits all the right chords, and has Whedon-ness, which is always ALWAYS something that works for me. Helps that I also really like the Agents of SHIELD show, so I got the actual build up that didn't happen in the movies. You can call it a flaw, but I'm MUCH more of a series guy than a one-shot movie guy, so Avengers was just ALWAYS going to be more in my wheelhouse.
Both get entertained/10 from me but I would like to point out that DJ's opinion is terrible mostly by virtue of him being the one to have it.
Also accurate, feel free to disregard my opinion as terrible, though I feel it's always worthwhile to hear a dissenting opinion that's at least -trying- to explain its reasoning.
-
Both get entertained/10 from me but I would like to point out that DJ's opinion is terrible mostly by virtue of him being the one to have it.
Also accurate
Highlighted the important parts you're welcome
-
You're always so thoughtful, Zenny. It's why we love you. :)
-
While fury road was a fun movie, it's basically a 2 hr car chase.
That might no be for everyone.
-
One really neat thing about Fury Road is the consistency of it all. Action movies tend to be kinda bad at remembering who was where and how the world looked from moment to moment. Fury Road is really good at it. That's a level of craft you can appreciate even if the movie isn't your thing.
-
I'm not trying to be snarky, but is that actually a compliment? "The Movie remembered what its characters are doing from place to place! What craft!"
I mean, you made the argument that action movies in general are bad at it, but that's not a common complaint that I'd just accept at face value. Please elaborate?
-
Ant-man was a summer superhero action blockbuster and nothing more. Paul Rudd is so adorable you can't help but love him and his bumbling, weird character.
I physically cringed at some of the dialogue, so there is that.
-
My feeling is that the movie could very very easily have been terrible if any of the major roles had been miscast. Few actors not named Michael Douglas could have pulled off the mix of snark, contempt, and seething anger demanded by the script. The audience has to both a) want to see Paul Rudd get punched in the face and laugh at it but also b) want him to be with his daughter. The little girl has to be the most ADORABLE LITTLE GIRL EVER. That this all, in fact, works is nothing short of a magic trick.
It's not the BEST movie, by any stretch, but it maintains Marvel's batting average which is all I really wanted from it. I will say that the larger MCU references went about... 2/5 for "really help the movie work", 2/5 for "well that was kinda neat" and 1/5 on "that was just gratuitous", so on the whole thumbs up there.
-
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes: I saw Rise and came out pleasantly surprised with it, so figured Dawn could actually be worth watching.
And well, it was! I wouldn't great it fantastic or anything, but found it enjoyable enough and never quite delved into stupid or preachy territory. Well it did, in the sense of "there's no good race or bad race, just good/bad individuals!" which is a theme they seem to be doing a decent job being subtle with until Caesar basically spells it out for you at what is basically the start of the 3rd act. Nonetheless, they did a decent job showing the perspectives of both sides and why neither is right nor wrong, just kind of conflicting and the movie seems to recognize that you know it's going the route of "despite the efforts to be friends, everything will end in catastrophe because of one jerk"; I suppose I give the movie props on keeping you guessing which side is going to be the one to crack first since they set it up that it could have gone either way.
For the record, I did see the original Planet of the Apes, and about 10 minuets of the sequel until I went "meh" though I do know the basic plot of the sequels. I know the 2nd movie basically ends in a "What the hell just happened?" kind of way, leading to the follow up 3 movies pretty much doing their best to both put that event in context and hopefully erase it, and that the explanation for why the Apes are smart is convoluted and ridiculous. I never saw the Tim Burton remake...and sounds like I never should.
-
I managed to see all of the original Apes movies except for the first. Some channel was marathoning the series one Christmas and no one could get my uncle to change the channel once he found it. So we saw everything from midway through the second movie on, and I would characterize them as only getting more strained and ridiculous in their plots but maybe worth making an MST3K afternoon out of if you've got those kinds of friends.
The Burton remake was just dumb, though.
-
Well, my father's opinion was the 2nd one is good until a point, where it just sort of train-wrecks because they basically wanted a shock ending or something to outdo the first movie (which is one of the all time great plot twists in cinema of course), which leaves with a huge puzzled reaction more than anything, 3rd movie is good because it basically goes in the complete opposite direction and tries something new, and 4th and 5th movies sound like...well...proto-versions of Rise and Dawn in a sense. Can't comment cause I have't seen them, of course.
Getting more ridiculous seems like something that inevitably would happen when you consider the original concept. The first movie was a simple idea with a big plot twist ending, and really should have ended there...except "This was popular make more!" has always been a thing so I guess they just kept making it, and well, with the premise as it is, hard to tell a lot of stories, especially since the 2nd one sounds like it goes off the deep-end in it's 11th hour.
EDIT: Of course, I'd be wrong to not acknowledge the greatest thing to ever come out of the Planet of the Apes franchise (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n8BPv43vhE)
-
Fuck Ant-man
-
Fuck Ant-man
Is it just another Marvel thing or is it actually actively bad?
-
Fuck ants, guys. Fuck ants. I'm taking a break from EOU.
Fuck Ant-man
More of a "not the right movie to watch after playing EOU" case of bad timing. Either that or he was suggesting someone appropriate for Zenny's tiny genitalia to be useful for.
-
R A C I S M
-
appropriate for Zenny's tiny genitalia
FINALLY
-
Yeah
And yeah I actually haven't seen Ant-Man (and don't really plan to anyway)
-
Get the Gringo: A lot of fun. Mel Gibson did a fantastic job in the movie, and it was really well shot and paced.
-
Men in Black 3: Didn't know what to expect going in given I've heard reviews ranging from "it's a fun romp" to "it's a total waste of time."
Overall? I had fun. At an 1:40 minutes, it doesn't overstay it's welcome, kept me entertained, and that's really all I wanted out of the movie. That said, I have no real desire to see it again since it's very much a "once and done" kind of movie, but hey, it was fun for what it was. Not as good as the original, but better than the 2nd.
-
Dragon Ball Z Resurrection F: Fun times, if a much more conventional movie than Battle of Gods. Overall I agree with the assessment that the ending was a let down and cop out. They're building up this idea throughout that would have made for a different ending solution to the ending namely Goku and Vegita as a team are way stronger individually, and both combined defeat Frieza but instead just went with the typical ending. Otherwise, fun action, more Beerus and Whiis is always a riot, and Jaco was a far funnier addition than expected.
I guess one other thing that bugs me is "where the hell was Buu during this fight?" Seriously, they account for all the other potential warrior, and even mention Buu twice in a way that'd highly suggest he should have been there, but nope! Would have made a lot more sense than Master Roshi, that's for sure.
-
Frankly I found Ant-man better than Avengers 1.
Well not quite but damn this movie is *fun*. The cast is great, the dialogue works (certainly less cringe-worthy than Avengers 2), and I could frankly watch an entire movie with no superheroes and just Michael Pena.
-
Despicable Me 2: Saw it. Too much wasted time with Minions doing stupid worthless nonsense like partying, and took away from having actual plot, gags, etc. I have nothing against Minions, and there are even times they have been used outright great and add to the movie, but there were too many filler segments of them that gave a "get on with it!" moment.
To the movie's credit? I liked how they mostly sidestepped the issue of "the girls want a mother :(" by making it kind of just a side thing that got brought up in passing. In fact, outside of Agnes just being completely unmotivated to do her Mother's Day part because she has no mother, it never really came up. It establishes pretty early that Gru and the girls are pretty happy as a family, and there's nothing they really want, per se, and I appreciate them avoiding that cliched "single parent" scenario by showing that while it's not the greatest of things, kids can be overall happy with one parent.
In any event, overall worse than the original movie.
-
I half-watched the first Despicable Me when it was playing in a class I was subbing for (between bouts of assisting the minority of students who were actually studying for an exam; it was the end of the school year) and remember being much more interested in Gru and the kids than I was the minions. I think the minions may be the kind of characters who only work for children.
-
Pretty much. The Minions are fine in short doses, and they can be used in clever ways that are funny, but generally, the good parts of both movies were centered around Gru and the girls. Makes sense really since they're actual characters with qualities and traits, while minions are a one note gag of "incompetent little guys who exist to be the butt end of jokes." The stuff the 2nd movie does with those characters is generally fine, just there's less of it in favor of more minions in what I believe is a similar run time.
And yeah, agree they're probably meant to be for the kids, which basically means the movie Minions would be something aimed specifically for kids, contrast to the movies they spun off from which feel more general audience.
-
I fell asleep during fantastic four.
-
God I hope Fant4stic bombs financially as well as critically so that perhaps one day Marvel will get the rights back and we can see a GOOD movie of my favorite superhero team.
-
Even with it bombing currently Fox is still going ahead with a sequel.
-
Please tell me you're trolling...
-
God forbid they let the rights revert even though it's cost them money every single time.
That or they operate under the delusion that if they hold on tight enough they might get a sweet partnership like Sony got for Spider-Man. Not knowing that somewhat like the X-Men, the Fantastic Four are in many ways better off doing their own thing rather than being part of a larger universe. But to do that justice you have to NOT MAKE IT A SUPER HERO MOVIE.
Like I don't think I even want a MCU Fantastic Four movie. I just want Doctor DOOM in the MCU.
-
All it has to do is become one of the highest grossing movies of all time to offset the first one's cost and the eventual cost of the second one. I totally believe they can reap 800 million dollars and beat out nearly every movie in the MCU with a sequel to a movie panned by everyone ever.
-
20th Century Fox hates Marvel enough at this point that they'll take the loss every time they expire. They let Daredevil expire and Marvel made something great out of it; nobody there wants to be the next Guy Who Let Those Rights To The Good Thing Go
-
Honestly, a F4 Netflix series would probably be pretty awesome. Terrible effects aside, the F4 are just begging for a sitcom-esque setup.
-
Now I'm imagining the hundreds of ways that can get cosmically screwed up.
-
"Reed dear, can you go talk to our next-door neighbor Mr. Doom? I keep finding pieces of his robots in the yard."
"Johnny would you take out the trash?"
"FLAME ON! Okay, I took it out!"
"It's clobberin time!"
"Well I guess that counts as a strike, Ben. But did you have to take out the wall of the bowling alley?"
-
Add a laugh track and it'd totally work. :P
-
Like I don't think I even want a MCU Fantastic Four movie. I just want Doctor DOOM in the MCU.
^This, basically!
Ant-Man: Finally saw this. It's fun and good stuff! Love the way they played with size and perspective. My one gripe is yeah, the forced MCU references got a bit jarring. Having Agent Carter or saying stuff like "we should call the Avengers"? Sure, fine, but the one scene mid-movie felt forced and "SAME UNIVERSE SEE!?" I get they're trying to establish where he is on the totem, per se, but there had to be other ways to establish that.
-
Jurassic World: hey this was much better than expected! A solid above average action horror type flick. There are a few problems but upon just watching it, it was pretty intense and engaging. Probably the only part that I particularly noticed as being kinda bad was how heavy handed its message was. I get it, tampering with nature EVEN MORE than it took to just un-extinct dinosaurs is BAD! But damn if it didn't make for a great villain presence. Serial Killer Dinosaur is a great premise. Glad JP finally got a worthwhile sequel.
-
Sure, fine, but the one scene mid-movie felt forced and "SAME UNIVERSE SEE!?" I get they're trying to establish where he is on the totem, per se, but there had to be other ways to establish that.
I actually liked that they gave Falcon some solo face time. It makes him not being in the big fight at the end of AoU make more sense from a production standpoint.
-
Seeking a Friend for the end of the world- Strange film. It's a story about the end of the world that focuses around two very different people falling for each other. It worked for me, in large part because Steve Carrel and Kiera Knightley had really great chemistry together. That was not expected.
-
Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation - I don't have much of a history with this series, but this was really well made. For instance, the opera scene is particularly well directed, including all of the spy stuff you could possibly want as well as questions and turns in character intentions and you don't really have a sense of what's going to happen. I have not seen Rebecca Ferguson in anything before, but she is kind of a badass and she holds her own as Tom Cruise's equal, which is refreshing. If anything, Simon Pegg's character is the one who is damselized. He and Cruise work really well together (almost making Cruise seem human, which is a feat). The movie is over two hours long but it felt really well paced, with no one set piece overstaying its welcome. The plot itself is mostly fine but does a good job of making the stakes personal rather than about saving the world, and I tend to like those kinds of stories more.
*Tom Cruise's spine must have shattered into a billion pieces after bouncing in a car a billion times but Cruise just jumps out and does a Cruise run (you know the one) to a motorcycle.
*This movie has the line "Ethan Hunt is the living manifestation of destiny" which is absurd and I couldn't stop giggling. .
*Villain is kind of weird, I guess he's set up to be Hunt's foil and an equal but you don't really get that impression. The dude's voice is kind of weird, and I wonder if that's his actual voice or something put on.
*There's at least one Tom Cruise is short joke.
*Cruise's final plans to deal with the big bad was pretty well done, I thought.
*Tom Cruise himself is such a weird dude but he does do this style of action film very well, and I don't begrudge him doing these while he can (dude's like 50?). It makes me wonder what his post action career is going to be like.
People talk up Ghost Protocol, which was pretty good, but this amps up the stakes a lot more effectively and has a stronger supporting cast and villain (I don't even remember who Ghost Protocol's villain was).
The Gift - I don't know exactly what to feel about this. It's fairly well made, and I was surprised that Joel Edgerton was the director on it. It's pretty well acted and does a good job of creating tension and playing with your expectations (Jason Bateman has to be a nice guy, right?). However, it didn't really come together for me in the end since it does a lot of exposition. Like, everything is explained, leaving little about character motivation to the imagination.
The plot becomes very Oldboy-esque in the end. I did like how it plays on your sympathies and expectations, since the "stranger comes in and terrorizes a family unit" thing has been done so many times, and in the end it kind of still is that, but not quite in the way that you expect coming in. Bateman's character is pretty much unredeemable, and maybe that's kind of the point in a morality play like this, but he reverts to stereotypical bully behavior for no good reason (ACCEPT MY APOLOGY). Maybe he's just at a boiling point or something, but I think it works a little better if he does try to apologize in earnest and still gets what is coming to him. As is, he's completely irredeemable and I guess that is set up so we don't feel that bad when his life is completely fucked in the end? Your sympathies aren't really with Gordo either, since he's just an odd, creepy presence, and what he (might) have done is completely monstrous.
*Bateman is the shittiest at security, leaving physical files in a drawer where the key is in another compartment of the drawer.
*Bateman's reaction to meeting Gordo is really undersized given what he did to him. This makes some of the earlier scenes a little weird, like why would he even accept a dinner party invitation from him?
*Rebecca Hall does a pretty decent job and is pretty much the only sympathetic character but then is thrown aside in the last act. "I'm pregnant and have no more role but to be a pawn in this scheme!"
*The two jump scares are admittedly effective but really cheap. The shower scenes are Hitchcockian, playing on the expectation that nothing good can come of when a woman showers
-
Mr. Holmes: pretty good movie about Ian McKellen being oooooold Sherlock Holmes. Went in expecting a detective movie, and it's not, really. It's a movie about being a detective. Specifically about being Sherlock Holmes. And more specifically Sherlock Holmes living in the shadow of a fictional version of himself. Great acting all around, but it unfolded in a very orthodox movie plot kind of way that was a bit unsatisfying.
-
Mission Impossible Rogue Nation: I found it pretty good and standard. Well done, forgettable.
I did like the last one more. And John Wick / Mad Max, obviously.
I feel a rise in prominence of the main female character in these movies and that is pretty refreshing. Holywood is learning, only having a standard James Bond Girl would have made Mission Impossible feel outdated?
On the other hand, the token black guy did absolutely jack shit during the entire movie, just like in Jurassic World. He did survive though.
-
Yeah, I'm kind of the opposite. I thought Ghost Protocol was good but ultimately forgettable, and that was with Brad Bird who I generally like. There are just more setpieces that are memorable, although some things in Rogue Nation are so stock and generic that it's annoying (everything to do with Alec Baldwin's side arc was really boring).
Rogue Nation still doesn't approach Mad Max (god Mad Max is so good) or John Wick, but there was a level of competence that just isn't there in a lot of Hollywood action films right now. It's just a solid film, and that's nice after this summer sucked so badly movie-wise.
Jack Reacher, which is the same director plus Tom Cruise, is similarly competent although it was more forgettable other than the opening scene and also Werner Herzog forcing a guy to chew his fingers off.
-
I only saw the last MI once at release, but I definitely remember four cool things: That opening segment with the Lost guy dying immediately, The tower climbing and fights, the sandstorm stuff, and the garage fight.
Rogue Protocol I'm already forgetting! The underwater segment was cool but Tom Cruise got superdumb.
-
Just remember any time he's on screen: Tom Cruise owns slaves that the Church of Scientology gave him.
-
I am lightheaded from the wisdom tooth painkillers so I watched MAD MAX FURY ROAD again with some friends and I love it so much. There are few moments in cinema that make me so excited that I scream but introduction of the war party and the Doof Warrior is one of them. The movie is just so well shot, beautifully edited, and the action is so coherent and each action scene is incredibly well considered and choreographed, which sadly is a rarity nowadays. What I noticed this time around was the sound design, which usually just passes over me. The whole thing is just a spectacle that is completely unlike anything else that is out there, and the pacing is pretty much perfect.
I would be really happy if people started naming their daughters Furiosa instead of Bella/Katniss/whatever YA bullshit that is out there.
-
I would be really happy if people started naming their daughters Furiosa instead of Bella/Katniss/whatever YA bullshit that is out there.
While I agree that is a one way ticket to being called Furry-Osa on the playground
-
Eh, that takes a better understanding of fetishes than catpiss or an abuse victim does.
-
Not if Obeme removes the Constitution so he can be president forever and he makes us all get jobs at the socialized gay marriage factory performing abortions, then they'll teach kids about furries in school and force them to have ritual sex as a tribute to Satan.
-
^true, I heard it on Fox news
-
The Departed- Pretty excellent. This was pretty paint by the numbers until a certain falling death about 2/3rds of the way through, and then it kicked into overdrive. I get why it won a bunch of awards when it came out.
-
Another Martin Scorsese film!
The Wolf of Wall Street- Guh. The Departed sucked me in and left me hooked; the wolf of wall street just left me with a sour taste in my mouth. It suffered from two different problems. The first problem (and the smaller of the two) is that the film was way the fuck too long, it needed to be an hour shorter. The second is that the main character is so completely revolting on a moral level that you can't help but hope the film ends with him ODing or getting shanked in prison. That is a pretty impressive feat, since it's based on a fucking autobiography.
-
The Wolf of Wall Street- Guh. The Departed sucked me in and left me hooked; the wolf of wall street just left me with a sour taste in my mouth. It suffered from two different problems. The first problem (and the smaller of the two) is that the film was way the fuck too long, it needed to be an hour shorter. The second is that the main character is so completely revolting on a moral level that you can't help but hope the film ends with him ODing or getting shanked in prison. That is a pretty impressive feat, since it's based on a fucking autobiography.
Well, looks like it had the intended effect on you, in contrast with a lot of people who looked at that depiction of Jordan Belfort and thought everything was glorious.
Phoenix - This is kind of an okay movie for most of the runtime that has a very strong ending. I don't know how to judge it. It starts off slowly and there is exposition that isn't entirely necessary and doesn't necessary build towards the end, but it comes together so beautifully in the final scene. It's one of the few things in movies that left my mouth agape at the end. Nina Hoss is a really brilliant actress, pretty perfectly conveying the consequences of what her character had gone through she is a survivor of a concentration camp and clearly has PTSD. She slowly learns to become herself, so to speak, and it makes me interested in other collaborations between her and this director. With some judicious cuts I think it could have been great, but I quite liked it, although I don't know what to do sometimes about films whose quality is made primarily by the ending.
-
Wait, there are people who think Wolf of Wall Street was GLORIFYING him? I thought the whole point was that you're suppose to hate his success such that when everything explodes in his face at the end, you can't help but smile.
I guess the tone might imply otherwise, but that's the movie trying to be entertaining, and not just dull "let's put this guy down!"
-
There is people that think Fight Club is about how cool fights are.
-
There is people that think Fight Club is about how cool fights are.
maybe they shouldna made the fights so cool. ever think of that?
-
How many fights do you see in Fight Club?
-
Depends on if we count "I'm kicking my ass, YA MIND" doesn't it?
-
Depends on if we count "I'm kicking my ass, YA MIND" doesn't it?
I dunno. If we counted that, then we have to count the similar scene in Liar, Liar.
-
Well, looks like it had the intended effect on you, in contrast with a lot of people who looked at that depiction of Jordan Belfort and thought everything was glorious.
It was more than that. I've seen plenty of movies and shows with revolting main characters (Breaking bad!) that were great, this film fell very short of that. The main didn't feel charismatic at all to me, he felt like just another everyday thief. I thought the film was at it's best when it showed him for the loser that he was.
-
Finally saw Inside Out. Had to just be a terrible pirate because it is impossible to find in this country because apparently animated movies are for kids and kids can't read subtitles so suck it gaijin.
I bawled. Like constantly. From about the fifteen minute mark to the end. Just bawlfest. The metaphors are a bit on the nose but fuck it the feels are real.
Definitely my favorite Pixar thing since Wall-E.
-
I rewatched 12 monkeys for the first time in 10 years or so. It has aged a lot (Cinematography is very 90's with lots of smoke and unnatural colors) but it is way better than I remembered. I watched it while feeling catatonic from a bad cold and all the imagery and disgressions about insanity completely fucked me up.
Gilliam sure likes having a ton of random shit happening in the background just to make every scene look busy and kafkaesque.
-
Twelve Monkeys really does hold up, although I agree that it's very much tied to its era. Gilliam has a great visual mind but at the same time is getting progressively worse with age. His last few have been very bad, although he's been sporadically productive.
-
I remember liking it more than I expected too when I rewatched it after a long absence a couple years ago. Have not personally seen any of his movies more recent than Fear and Loathing, though (and glancing at IMDB there is at least one since that I'd not even remotely heard of). I am also really due a rewatch of Baron Munchausen.
I used Brazil as my model for Hell when my D&D group got there earlier this year.
-
Yeah I feel that Gilliam has Tim Burton syndrome. In fact I couldn't tell them apart before.
I cannot imagine a movie less pleasant to rewatch than Brazil (not that it's a bad thing)
-
I own Brazil because it's a good movie but find that I can't watch it more frequently than like every five years or so. So I'm set on this one until 2020.
I don't think Burton's done anything worth caring about after Nightmare Before Christmas/Ed Wood (not sure which was later, they came out around the same time). Big Fish was...okayish I guess? He sort of traded making characteristically Tim Burton movies for making characteristically Hollywood blockbusters, with generally meh results.
Got Fury Road on video. Being able to freeze-frame here is educational. You know, I don't think I entirely realized just how completely the cast of this movie embodies the post-apocalyptic scrounger mentality? The protagonist party keeps every piece of random junk that comes into their orbit, and almost all of it winds up saving someone's life eventually: max's surgical tubing, Nux's chain, the damn car door that was attached to Nux when they met him. The war rig's gas pedal is one of those metal slidey scale things they use to measure your foot when you buy shoes. The war party brought along one of those tractor trailers specifically designed to haul cars in bulk just so they could bring back whatever wrecks occur during the mission (you can see the chassis of a spiky car on it in one shot). Absolutely nothing is allowed to go to waste. Other random stuff you can more easily spot with pause capability: Max's brand includes vital information such as "genitals intact" and is definitely worth freezing to read in full; Max's psychotic break immediately before he rejoins the group for the grand finale includes a microsecond shot of the dude who shoots him later; one of the Doof Warrior's guitar necks is a six-string, the other is a bass; the People Eater is wearing a nipple chain, because apparently someone thought this dude needed to be even more gross.
Pretty sure I have not seen this kind of obsessive attention to visual detail outside of Wes Anderson movies. Probably should not be a huge surprise considering Fury Road was percolating in some form of preproduction since the late nineties. Wow.
-
I dunno, I feel that Tim Burton's new movies are very Tim Burton, he's just lost his touch and is always retreading the same ground. It happens.
Big Fish was super great though!
-
Harry Potter and the Chamber of the Secrets - Pretty decent if fillerish movie. Surprisingly funny at times.
Spirited Away - I never thought I would say this about a kid's movie, but I think it was a little too dark. I was expecting something a little closer to stock fantasy kid's movie, but it is absolutely out there. It is very beautifully animated and has a really nice soundtrack, though.
-
Matt Damon, Potato Farmer: Quite good! I assume that we develop magical cosmic ray blocking technology in the near future.
-
Shush
-
Interstellar: Did no one else here watch this? Didn't see any reviews at a glance in this topic. It's a Nolan film, so it was pretty good. There were some pretty bad issues with the plot, but the central character work was good enough to make up for it. Less good than Inception but definitely worth the time.
-
Inception felt like Christopher Nolan sat down and said "They say my movies are unemotional and driven by events and not human feeling and thought? I WILL FUCKING SHOW THEM ALL."
-
I walked in halfway through the family watching Interstellar so didn't really know what the heck was happening, but the plot seemed to boil down "love is the secret to time travel?" That said, I was really happy to see a space station employing centrifugal force for gravity in a modern science fiction movie.
-
The Martian: Was amazing.
-
Invictus: I never like long ending sequences because they drag on and there's no real struggle. invictus is a 2 hours long ending sequence to Mandela's wikipedia page,
The latest Woody Allen: pretty good Woody Allen.
I found the last twist pretty implausible and disappointing, like they had given up on one character entirely. It doesn't really ruin the movie though.
-
The Look of Silence: Uh, holy shit. I don't know if anyone here has seen the Act of Killing, but this is its companion piece. Where the Act of Killing examines the deflections and self deceptions that the perpetrators of genocide (in Indonesia, killing communists en masse) use just to be able to live with themselves, the Look of Silence involves victims who have to live in a world surrounded by these deceptions. The victims are not willing to talk about it and sometimes deny that it ever happened, where the killers are often in positions of prominence. The striking thing is that the killers and the survivors (those who weren't labeled as communist but had parents or children killed) often live in the same community and the survivors will know, say, the mayor of a village who took part in the killings. There are a lot of gut punches here, and I don't know anyone who has more bravery than Adi Rukun, who is extremely direct in his questioning of the killers, often to the point where he was probably risking his life by asking these questions. I still haven't gathered my thoughts on it, but this and the Act of Killing are probably the two best documentaries I've ever seen.
Sicario: I didn't especially like this and I have a hard time pinpointing why. It is pretty well directed, especially one particular scene with a procession of feds driving to a confrontation at the Mexican border. The performances are also fairly good as well (especially Benicio del Toro), but there's a weird sense that you don't know what the fuck is going on most of the time, and this is shared by Emily Blunt's character, who is basically an audience surrogate with nothing to do. I know that's part of the point but it feels really unsatisfying to be subjected to. Maybe that is also part of the point. A big element of this is control and how a lot of people affected by the cartels lack control or agency over their situation and this point is made really bluntly by certain scenes, especially the ending. I feel like I got the point but didn't really enjoy sitting through it. I also didn't find many of the situations as tense as some made them out to be and a long sequence looks exactly like a CoD Modern Warfare mission. The portrayal was probably accurate as far as I know but it for some reason felt weird or cheap or something because it recalled certain in game sequences.
There's actually quite a bit I want to see right now. The next few months should be good movie-wise.
-
Her: This hit too close to home, like one of the worst sides of my personality appearing on screen for two hours.
It's a really great movie that suffers from Too Many Hot Women around the main character syndrome. That's the least believable thing about this movie. They even tried to make Amy Adams less attractive and it didn't work at all
-
Are you talking about listless melancholy post-breakup? If so, yeah I got that too.
-
Yeah. I´d develop but i would be as solipstic as Phoenix's character. Which ... is pretty bad?
In the movie he theorized about things I exactly said like two days ago? The bit about the best of our lives being behind us? Unsettling.
-
Is that the thing about feeling everything you're ever going to feel? Yep, connected with that too.
There are entire portions of the movie I related to (the last message from Theo to his ex-wife really encapsulates things that I have felt) which is kind of funny because I think a lot in Her is made up of thinly veiled references to Spike Jonze's relationship with Sofia Coppola. She made Lost in Translation which also sort of about their marriage and her feelings of detachment while in it, so it's interesting that these two are airing things out by directing million dollar movies. Oh, rich kids!
-
:(
Yes I connected to all of that too.
He even fucking plays indie videogames damnit.
I'd sure hate to be Lars Van Tier's girlfriend that inspired Antichrist
-
The Lobster:
Yeah... I don't get it
-
that movie looks really goddamn weird
-
Yeah. At first seems like a movie vaguely about interpersonal relationships and the pressure of society, among other things, but then it radically changes halfway through and I was all "Fuck it, I do not want to get what this metaphor means anymore"
Being John Malkovich is weird, but the actions of the characters are understandable. Here the characters are a symbol of a broader concept more than relatable humans. The movie has a few funny/touching moments but it doesn't make much sense as a whole if you don't get its messages and its messages are real obtuse
Here I'll spoil my favourite part of the movie :
Lea Seydoux is holding a man and his wife hostage. She talks to the man.
Lea Seydoux: How much do you love your wife?
Man: She's my treasure. I love her more than anything in the world.
Lea Seydoux: How much do you love her , on a scale from 1 to 15?
Man: ................14?
-
The Martian - As far as I can tell, it gets a lot of science right other than a few implausible or overly convenient things at the end, but the human psychology aspect is really weird. Matt Damon's character is really static for the shit he has to go through and seems unflappable other than a few scenes. He comes out barely scathed despite having no interaction for months where a real person probably would have long gone insane (maybe it's an alternate universe Interstellar prequel). He also shows like two moments of frustration, one of which is played for laughs. This is what some people call competency porn where people unquestioningly get everything they set out to do done and avoid the human propensities for breaking down psychologically or shitty decision making. The movie is really light and is fairly well paced, but the pacing is actually a bit of an issue since it doesn't feel like that much time passes.
Also the greatest science fiction in this is that NASA has money and the world cares about it.
I also am wracking my brain trying to think what Ridley Scott does uniquely as a director. He has done several movies I have enjoyed but I feel like it's more to do with whether I enjoy the story he's telling rather than any directorial flourishes or decisions made. Like, he's competent and he's able to make movies in very disparate genres which speaks to his versatility, but you don't look at a shot or a composition or an acting choice or anything else he does that makes you think "yeah, that was totally Ridley Scott."
The rest of the movie release schedule looks kind of lean this year and I don't give a shit about Star Wars so I am happy to give Fury Road all of the awards.
-
Being able to pick good scripts is a notable skill as a director. His brother definitely had a more distinct style.
-
He's had a weird career. He started with two of the best movies of all time and then otherwise has been hit or miss (or maybe not miss, I don't know if he's done anything truly horrible but he's done a lot that is really unmemorable). His highs also aren't as high as they used to be. I think my favorite of his movies in the past 15 years is Matchstick Men?
Tony Scott will always have Man on Fire.
-
Yeah the martian is: Astronauts rule, science rules, emotions are for the weak
At the end he even gives a speech about lol feelings so yeah.
Matt Damon is being typecast as the competency porn protag, with this and Jason Bourne (these are the only two competency porn movies I can think of)
-
Most movies with Tom Cruise are competency porn, which the exception of Edge of Tomorrow/Live Die Repeat which is basically about how Tom Cruise becomes a typical Tom Cruise character. Bourne is also a good example. People also point to the Sherlock show on BBC.
I guess the other thing is that science is a lot about failure and process. The Martian does a lot of voiceover detailing a problem or overexposition-y dialogue from sciency sciencers having a-ha moments, but often it just presents a problem and seconds later they have a solution without going into process. Apparently the book is better about it but there isn't a lot of struggling or showing how people actually solve these problems.
for example
NASA: DO THIS IN TWO DAYS
DUDE: HOW THE FUCK AM I GOING TO DO THIS IN TWO DAYS
NASA: YOU WILL FIND A WAY
DUDE: OKAY I WILL DO IT IN TWO DAYS
-
Oh that's true about Tom Cruise.
I don't think the Sherlock example works as he's still shown as completely unfit for society
-
He's had a weird career. He started with two of the best movies of all time and then otherwise has been hit or miss (or maybe not miss, I don't know if he's done anything truly horrible but he's done a lot that is really unmemorable). His highs also aren't as high as they used to be. I think my favorite of his movies in the past 15 years is Matchstick Men?
I tend to think it was a fluke that Ridley Scott made one of my favorite movies (Bladerunner), because everything else I've seen that he made after that has hovered in the vicinity of competent, entertaining, but not really a big deal (2000 a slow Oscar year, huh Gladiator?) Martian pretty much case in point. Nice Marsscapes, nice letting science actually save the day repeatedly* (even if this sometimes happens in very convenient ways), and I actually found Damon pretty endearing when the character was trying to stay in good humor and experimenting with things, but the story didn't really hit on any themes that resonate with me personally so I've no real interest in seeing it again. The classroom epilogue was also totally unnecessary.
(*It irks me a little that all our space movies are now about disasters happening in space, though.)
-
http://collider.com/prometheus-2-alien-creators-ridley-scott/
Is this a question that anybody cares about?
Scott's early career may have been a complete fluke or he now has severe dementia and doesn't know what a good idea is. Maybe both are true.
-
Weyland-Yutani. surprise!
-
I didn't expect much from Spectre and was still disappointed.
The anti mass surveillance message though? Pretty topical and appropriate!
-
It's weird that Bond can't keep momentum from movie to movie in the Craig era (good, incomprehensibly bad, good, utter shit) but it sounded like this had script problems for a while.
-
Watched Interstellar last night. It's a good movie, very emotional and I think that the core two characters (Cooper and Blunt) are quite likeable. Dr. Mann is amazing and I loved most of the stuff related to him. I think a lot of the later parts on Earth, like the weird fight between the two kids and Murph in general are a bit of a mess. Holding a grudge for like 30 years against your dad for trying to do what he thought was right doesn't really sit very well with me and I never really clicked with the character because of it.
-
Spotlight: Actually it's about ethics in journalism.
I think Spotlight was really deftly done, covering the coverage of a story that is highly sensitive (exposing the breadth and coverup of the child molestation by the Catholic church) in a way that avoids easy targets. It's not about demonizing the Catholic church but about the daily grind of journalism and chasing leads, which doesn't sound compelling, but this does a fairly good job about depicting that process without making things boring or trying to depict the characters as heroes. I actually think its restraint is the best part of it. There are so many potential Hollywood moments that would have completely sunk the movie, as well as opportunities to do ACTINGand yell and scream with the "For Your Consideration" text scrolling on the bottom of the screen, but it never bites. Its moments are stated on an appropriate level and it never goes for full blown melodrama, although the score occasionally highlights a scene more than I would like. It gets its drama through showing process and the minor victories of discovering how to follow up on a lead or securing a source. I liked it and am interested if its choices to be more understated might actually hurt it come Oscar time. Like, it has Oscar-worthy subject matter but tells the story straight, but it does an effective job and doesn't dress anything up more than it needs to. It just reminds me about how I'm annoyed at Hollywood choices (again, the Imitation Game sticks out here) and how glad I was that this mostly avoided them.
Also it is weird to me that the director (Tom McCarthy) did this and the Cobbler, which is apparently an awful sack of shit even compared to other Adam Sandler movies, in the same year.
-
Is Spectre worse than Quantum of Solace? (I actually enjoy Quantum of Solace but readily acknowledge it's way worse than Casino Royale and Skyfall).
Apparently nu Bond runs on the reverse Star Trek rule.
-
I don't remember Quantum that well but it can't be as stupid as Spectre.
Spectre is almost a statement against competency porn
It does have a cool opening long take though
-
Quantum of Solace has Mathieu Amalric getting a monopoly on water so he can increase the rates on water. It has an opera scene which would be cool except all the action has barf inducing shakycam. I don't remember much else.
I will probably watch Spectre at some point just for that opening.
-
It has a woman being dumped in oil and left on the bed in reference to Gold Finger and then is a movie not about Oil.
-
In Spectre, Christopher Waltz is running a secret organization behind EVERYTHING that happened in the last movies. His motive is that he hates Bond and just wants to fuck with him. Why? Because Waltz's father adopted Bond and Waltz was jealous
Bond forgets to finish a boss at one point, and surprise the boss is still alive and comes back later. This happens twice. At one point Bond just walks into a trap with his current girlfriend and no plan, he gets captured, and just survives thanks to incredible luck.
Waltz is way more stupid than him, trust me on that.
At the beginning there's a weird explosion and I was waiting for the movie to explain it later. Nope
The plane scene is so dumb
I could go on
-
Yeah that sounds bad and similar to older Bond, which I don't like. We may be ready for a new Bond. Idris Elba is a popular choice and I'd probably be fine with that. I will also accept Nicholas Cage.
-
Spotlight: Actually it's about ethics in journalism.
Thank you.
-
Spectre doesn't even really work as Old Bond because it's shot as New Bond and there's Daniel Craig.
I mean, imagine a 4th Nolan Batman with typical Nolanian techniques / acting, except the bad guys are Mr Freeze throwing one liners about ice, and Jim Carrey.
-
Spectre doesn't even really work as Old Bond because it's shot as New Bond and there's Daniel Craig.
I mean, imagine a 4th Nolan Batman with typical Nolanian techniques / acting, except the bad guys are Mr Freeze throwing one liners about ice, and Jim Carrey.
It's called Gotham.
-
I should start watching Gotham.
-
Christian Bale: WHERE ARE THEY
Schwarzy:ICE-ure ain't telling ya... Because you leave me COLD
Yeah allright it would be the best Batman. But it doesn't work with James Bond
-
Crimson Peak - I am unsure if this was the intended reaction but I laughed and laughed and couldn't stop laughing whenever Jessica Chastain appeared on screen. Chastain basically plays Mrs. Danvers from Rebecca and spends the entire movie with complete disdain and smoldering rage plastered all over her face and you could see chewed scenery still on her teeth, if she ever smiled. She is so fucking crazy that it makes the movie and every scene without her is boring in comparison and makes you wish she was around ("whenever Jessica Chastain is not on screen, all the other characters should be asking 'Where's Jessica Chastain'?"). I don't know that anyone else will find it as funny as me, maybe I'm broken. I think what it is is that everyone else is playing it completely straight and Chastain is in a completely different movie.
The story is silly but it's worth watching for its visuals (also Chastain). Del Toro is just incredibly talented as a visual stylist and the production design is ridiculously good (where the fuck did they even get that house?). I still think that his Silent Hills could have been interesting because he really knows how to shoot and frame horror even if none of his movies are really horrors to me.
-
Isn't Devil's Backbone the last horror movie he directed (that wasn't stuck in preproduction hell)? That is a pretty sound assessment of his body of work.
-
I don't tend to like everything Del Toro does, but I try to watch it all anyway just because I know at least it'll look amazing.
-
Anyone seen the newest Hunger Games? This seems to be the only good movie out this week.
-
Only saw the first one. I liked it, but never got around to the sequels.
-
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Decent movie, better than the fourth but not as good as the third. ~
-
Brooklyn - This movie is sentimental and openly emotional, and it should not have worked on me but it did. I think part of it may be me being homesick for a place that may not exist anymore, but this did convey the initial sense of alienation from moving to a new country quite well. The movie has very old school sensibilities but handles drama without being melodramatic. When conflicts come up, it is never that anyone is a bad person but it feels like there is a genuine crisis of indecision when it comes to building a new life and the promises of a life Saoirse Ronan could never have imagined back home. The decision she has to make seems impossible and there isn't necessarily a right answer (no matter what happens, she will hurt someone and be sacrificing something). This isn't a brilliant movie or anything but it is really well done, and I like how they kept the scope small even though a lot is at stake on a personal level.
Also Saoirse Ronan is so gorgeous it seems unfair.
I want to see Creed, Carol, Anomalisa, The Hateful Eight and to some extent the Good Dinosaur before year's end. There's been some really good movies out this year but I think little tops the Look of Silence or Fury Road for me so far (Inside Out is great too I guess).
-
I saw Creed instead of Hunger Games. I followed that up with Fruitvale Station. Both good movies. Creed was well paced and Fruitvale Station was just a movie I needed to watch.
-
Bridge of Spies: Very Spielberg. It's well made but a bit boring? With "great american drama" style jokes and filming?
It's based on real events and the added fiction elements are painfully obvious and melodramatic.
There is that hilarious plane crash sequence that's just supposed to be "missile hits plane -> pilote ejects" in real life. They turned that into a ridiculous Uncharted action sequence. The rest of the movie is just Tom Hanks looking anxious in warm clothes so they just threw all the budget into the plane crash.
The movie heavily suggests that russians were merciless with their POWs while americans were super nice with them and really guys you went there? In 2015?
Also, germans are cowards.
Movies like to waste talents from the Wire and this one wastes two of them. NEW RECORD (I'm at least glad they still find roles though)
-
Oh yeah the weirdest thing about the movie is that at the end one guy says "if X happens, then cool. If Y happens, then I'm fucked"
Then a bit later the music gets all dark so of course, Y happens. Sad times.
Then the end credits say "Actually, he's fine"
The hell?
-
Oh yeah the weirdest thing about the movie is that at the end one guy says "if X happens, then cool. If Y happens, then I'm fucked"
Then a bit later the music gets all dark so of course, Y happens. Sad times.
Then the end credits say "Actually, he's fine"
The hell?
Yeah, that was weird. I would have been happier if the movie just ended there.
I was annoyed that we essentially don't get any kind of insight into why Tom Hanks is such a staunch defender of this dude, especially since he starts out as an insurance lawyer and he was essentially forced into the case. I guess most of it is that they cast Tom Hanks who is the Hollywood avatar of this idealized American morality but I really don't buy that as sufficient.
The score was really intrusive too. Stop trying to tell me how to feel! Some of the scenes were shot well enough to get the point across, but the soundtrack just bashes you over the head emotionally.
It's not bad, but it falls prey to Spielberg's worst instincts, at least to me.
The Coen brothers wrote it apparently, which I don't think I would have guessed since I think their version would be a lot less idealistic and more like all parties fuck up and everyone ends up dead. But based on true story, blah blah.
Anyway, the trailers before the movie were all boring and shitty except for the Coen's newest, Hail Caesar, which looks goofy as fuck. It's coming out in February which is a weird sign, but I hope it's good.
-
Agreed re: Bridge of spies.
Its 91% rotten tomatoes setting convinces me that this site is made for movies with unenthusiastic positive consensus. (which is not a surprise)
Hail Caesar looks fun but Burn After Reading looked good too?
I've watched a pretty cool Italian movie called Suburra.
Do you like rain?
(http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2015/51/1450115599-sub3.png)
(http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2015/51/1450115585-sub2.png)
(http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2015/51/1450115604-sub1.png)
Unfortunately you can't watch it.
Sorry
I quite liked Macbeth, but came away from it almost like I came from a dream. I remember basically nothing from it, except that one character went on a long tirade when he really should have just said "OMG FUCK!!"
You like Scottish landscapes? Slow movies? The fog? And red? If yes, Macbeth is pretty decent.
-
Some of those showers are golden.
-
May the force be with you.
And by force I mean nerd stench.
Because it will be with you if you are trying to watch that movie tonight.
Shits gonna reek so bad.
-
Hail Caesar looks fun but Burn After Reading looked good too?
Wait, what was wrong with Burn After Reading? I was just happy the Coens could make another comedy that actually succeeded at being a comedy (Intolerable Cruelty and Ladykillers didn't really cut it.)
-
Burn After Reading was really entertaining. It's not top shelf Coen Brothers and I think it is the most egregious example of them being contemptuous of their characters, but it's genuinely funny, in particular Brad Pitt's character, Clooney's... contraption, and the ending lines. But then, I also kind of liked the Ladykillers.
I think I'll like Hail Caesar but then I tend to like a lot of the Coens' goofy shit in between masterpieces.
-
Those dildos aren't cheap.
-
Burn After Reading was really entertaining. It's not top shelf Coen Brothers and I think it is the most egregious example of them being contemptuous of their characters, but it's genuinely funny, in particular Brad Pitt's character, Clooney's... contraption, and the ending lines. But then, I also kind of liked the Ladykillers.
I think I'll like Hail Caesar but then I tend to like a lot of the Coens' goofy shit in between masterpieces.
Yeah, in total agreement here. It's impressive they could so thoroughly make George Clooney a dork, and Brad Pitt's character was entertaining.
Damn Mickey Mouse reviews...
-
May the force be with you.
And by force I mean nerd stench.
Because it will be with you if you are trying to watch that movie tonight.
Shits gonna reek so bad.
I'm going to take this to prove that even our gross nerds are better when you get out of the cesspool that is the South, then.
-
Star Wars: The Force Awakens-
Short Version- Very good. The new cast carry the movie very well, the pace is brisk, the emotional stakes are clear and have the necessary impact. The First Order, Resistance, and Republic could have stood a bit more detail, mostly in terms of their scope and the current state of the galaxy as a whole, but the lack of this information isn't enough to dull our heroes' stake in the battles so it's not a crippling thing.
Long Version-
So, there's three major bits of the movie that are intended to be surprising to the audience:
- Luke Skywalker has disappeared. This is actually in the opening crawl, but between creative use of a flashback in the main trailer and the announcement that Ford, Fisher, and Hamill were returning, that he actually only shows up for the final shot of the film and a major plot point is finding him is definitely surprising. I didn't have any speculation on this one, and the Internet had called him turning out evil (which would have been Stupid As Fuck), so good show JJ.
- Kylo Ren is Han and Leia's son. The internet had speculated that Kylo was 'Jacen Solo' a while back, which made too much sense to me to ignore, so yeah, Called It. In what is likely a call to the EU fans, his name is actually Ben, who was Luke's son in that universe, and of course the name makes sense here for the same reason. Now, that same speculation went one further and posited that maybe Rey was 'Jaina Solo', and at this point they HAVE to be taunting EU people because she actually shows a lot of Jaina's traits (uber mechanic and pilot, gts on famously with Chewie), and we are very definitely supposed to see a deeper relationship between her and Kylo Ren than just "well she's the heroine and he's wannabe Darth Vader (aside: I love that they made that an actual defining character trait for him, especially since he has a lot of reason to feel that way!)", but if it's actually supposed to be brother/sister that'd be dumb now. She met both Han and Leia and spent several days around them, it'd be fucking irresponsible of them not to TELL her she was their daughter at taht point. Instead I (and quite a few others I've seen) are wondering if she's Luke's daughter. Adds a lot of weight to that lingering shot of the two of them at the end and goes very well with the Skywalkersaber having such a strong vision for her.
- Han's death. I recall saying repeatedly and loudly "yeah Han is dying in this movie' when they announced Ford was returning. Basically every second he's on screen reinforces that notion, and while I like that he went out not in a blaze of glory but trying to reach out to his son, they do draw out that scene a bit long for such a foregone conclusion. Still, the actual stabbity has a lot of weight and works very well.
So yeah, I was 2/3 on major plot factors going in. In spite of that I was always drawn right back in any time I started to try and think ahead, and the biggest feeling I had leaving the theater was wondering how to predict the next one with all this new information. So yeah, actually super hype. But I can admit the flaws and strengths of the movie independently of fandom and for that refer to the non-tiny version.
-
Star Wars - The Force Awakens - I think the movie plays its cards a little too safe and the movie feels like it draws a bit too much from 4/5 but overall I was pretty pleased. I enjoyed Finn and his backstory, and Rey is a cool enough action heroine. They aren't as fun as the trio in the original series, but still pretty good.
And Han Solo is shockingly important in that movie, which I was pumped about! Unlike Cmdr, I was surprised that Han dies, but that was mostly from a metaplot perspective, since I didn't think that the new director would want to kill off old beloved characters. I also found the stuff with Han and Leia interesting because they treat Ben turning evil really similarly to a couple who lost a child and the ensuing breakup that often happens. In some ways I was also surprised that that plot arc wasn't resolved in a happier way. I also love that Kylo wears a mask because he wants to cosplay his grandfather. Dude looks like such a prick, btw.
Oh, and sitting in the second row kinda sucks >_< only booked the tickets 10 days in advance, I am a fool~
-
Star Wars TFA- I'm not a huge star wars fan and I still enjoyed the hell out of it. The overarching plot is thin as Cmdr noted, but it isn't thin enough to damage enjoyment of the film.
-
Star Wars 7
As someone who only watched 1-6 once, and thought of them as decent action flicks...
7 is the one I enjoyed the most, pretty easily. Probably the first of the series that will merit a second viewing from me.
(I was in the second row, but I booked the tickets 2 hours in advance so... >_>)
-
We were also in the second row and we booked ten days in advance. It wasn't bad except that I had to keep adjusting my 3D glasses to get the right focus.
Anyway, it was a good movie. I think the setting work/a few plot points could be better (but this isn't really new to this particular Star Wars movie, and as CK notes it doesn't ultimately hurt the movie much), and it's a fair knock that it retreads a lot of ground that A New Hope covered, but it was still a thoroughly enjoyable movie. I liked all the new cast it has me eagerly awaiting future episodes.
I thought Kylo Ren was particularly great. He has a whole childish, immature aspect to him (loved his temper tantrums), but men like that can be extremely dangerous, and his characterisation makes a whole lot of sense. Finn was funny and Rey seems cool but I'll want to see how they develop in the next film, especially Rey.
Why are they called "the Resistance", WTF are they resisting, aren't they part of the New Republic or whatever? It doesn't ultimately matter but to me this felt like a decision which placed "capturing the feel of Episode IV" over something which actually made sense.
Han is still Han, still excellent. I also liked how the tragedy of Han and Leia's son drove the two apart (Han to his roguish ways, Leia to her political work). He still has some of the best lines in the movie. ("That isn't how the force works!") Loved the scene with him and his son. (I see some people on the internet are already whining that Han didn't go out like "enough of a badass", which seems like a quick way to ascertain what people have an emotional age of 8.) Actually everything from that scene to the Ren/Rey fight was pretty excellent.
Props to the writers for being willing to off Han, it totally changed the dynamic of the end of the film. This was the first time I ever believed that an attempt to blow up a Death Star or Death Star-like object might fail because hey they just killed Han, nothing is sacred, maybe they'll succeed and blow up the resistance planet and kill Leia too. He'll certainly be missed in the later films, though. (For all that it's a good thing for the films to get out of the old characters' shadows.)
It's funny, I used to think that Ewan Macgregor -> Alec Guiness just ages up Obi-wan too much for the timeframe to be believable, but hahaha damned if Luke didn't look olllld. I know some of that is probably just Mark Hamill, but it's still funny, given that they apparently went through some very similar things.
I thought R2-D2 randomly waking up and being all deus ex machina was kinda silly at the time, but then I realised* that he woke up the first time Rey is around. Suspicious. Lots of Rey-related things are suspicious, curious to see how it all fits together when we learn the rest of her backstory.
*read on the internet
-
Bridge of Spies: I didn't see this movie, but here's the SnowFire cut of the movie anyway.
A) Toward the beginning, there's some kind of James Bond & Q-esque scene where Tom Hanks is given some gadgets to his mission to East Berlin or whatever. One of the items is a special pair of glasses that "Q" says will let Tom Hanks see "the true nature of things." Hanks says WTF. Q fobs him off and says "you'll understand later" or the likes.
B) The movie proceeds as normal, with spy wheelings & dealing & stuff.
C) Hanks is told that everything is set for the exchange, and he should go to the bridge where the handoff will occur.
D) While waiting, Hanks becomes curious about the bridge, and puts on the glasses from earlier.
E) He sees that the bridge is not made of metal. No, it is actually a writhing mass of still-living human flesh. This is where spies, both capitalist & communist, who are no longer needed and know a few too many secrets are disposed of... permanently.
F) Hanks and the Soviet spy who thinks he's being exchanged team up & jump off dramatically as they're about to be fed to the bridge. There's an exciting chase sequence through Berlin as shadowy forces pursue them relentlessly through the streets, alleys, & rooftops.
G) The kindly station chief of the CIA welcomes the fleeing spies into his apartment, seemingly to help them out. But he too is a cultist who effortlessly disables them after they drop their guard. Their escape is futile.
H) The spies are fed into the bridge, which devours them and makes their life force part of it. Passerby the next morning walk over Hanks' screaming face, continuing their daily lives, oblivious to the true nature of the bridge.
I) A government official in Virginia takes out Hanks' personnel file, stamps it with a big "Lost in Action" stamp, and tosses it back into the folder. Camera zooms out to show a giant warehouse, a la Raiders of the Lost Ark.
...wait, that's what we were talking about, right?
Star Wars: Oh yeah, movies that I actually saw. It was good!
Maybe spoiler thoughts in the next post.
-
Saw Star Wars Force Awakens, mostly just because I didn't want to be left out of the inevitable discussions about it on the internet for the next 3 weeks.
Overall agreed that it was enjoyable, perhaps the best of the series? It doesn't take away from what the original films did to be groundbreaking, but fortunately the new movie takes what made those movies work and overall improves on it.
Maybe it was just me, but I didn't think there was any room for ambiguity that Rey is Luke's daughter? That whole scene was like "This lightsaber was Luke's, and his father's before him, and now it's yours..." Honestly, I would be much more surprised if she WASN'T his daughter? I don't feel like it's supposed to be a secret.
Hell, none of the 'reveals' CK mentioned feel like they were supposed to be big surprise 'twists'. They were downplayed, none of the characters were surprised by the information because they all already knew them. And that was honestly the best part. I was actually intrigued when they mentioned that Ren was Han's son, which is a far easier emotion to craft and then create meaningful character moments out of than 'shock'. I feel like this is Abrams strength, so I'm glad they played to it. If they had tried to do a cheap shock moment with that by having Ren rip off his mask at some point and yell at Han something like "You can't stop me, FATHER!", I would have rolled my eyes so hard.
So... glad that they didn't do that. Actually, that sums up my general feelings about the film - relief that it didn't suck. Nothing too ambitious happened, but honestly I'm okay with that after all the series has suffered through. With any luck, the amount of money and goodwill built up from this episode will allow the next episodes to get more experimental.
-
Saw Star Wars Force Awakens, mostly just because I didn't want to be left out of the inevitable discussions about it on the internet for the next 3 weeks.
Overall agreed that it was enjoyable, perhaps the best of the series? It doesn't take away from what the original films did to be groundbreaking, but fortunately the new movie takes what made those movies work and overall improves on it.
Maybe it was just me, but I didn't think there was any room for ambiguity that Rey is Luke's daughter? That whole scene was like "This lightsaber was Luke's, and his father's before him, and now it's yours..." Honestly, I would be much more surprised if she WASN'T his daughter? I don't feel like it's supposed to be a secret.
Hell, none of the 'reveals' CK mentioned feel like they were supposed to be big surprise 'twists'. They were downplayed, none of the characters were surprised by the information because they all already knew them. And that was honestly the best part. I was actually intrigued when they mentioned that Ren was Han's son, which is a far easier emotion to craft and then create meaningful character moments out of than 'shock'. I feel like this is Abrams strength, so I'm glad they played to it. If they had tried to do a cheap shock moment with that by having Ren rip off his mask at some point and yell at Han something like "You can't stop me, FATHER!", I would have rolled my eyes so hard.
So... glad that they didn't do that. Actually, that sums up my general feelings about the film - relief that it didn't suck. Nothing too ambitious happened, but honestly I'm okay with that after all the series has suffered through. With any luck, the amount of money and goodwill built up from this episode will allow the next episodes to get more experimental.
I saw it with five people and we all came to the same conclusion independently. I think the biggest flag is the ambiguity about what happened in Kylo Ren's training.
I presume it will be elaborated on more in Episode 8 but it's definitely the most ambiguous thing about the time between 6 and 7. From what we've seen, people don't spontaneously just fall to the dark side and go about their regular business, Anakin's official change was marked by him murdering a whole bunch of little kids, for instance. Luke was supposed to kill his father. My guess is that Ben flipped his shit and killed Luke's wife, which cause Luke to decide to go be a hermit. He separated from Rey because he was concerned about possibly falling to the dark side out of grief and anger, and neither Leia nor Han were options. Everybody was clearly real fucked up at that time.
One other thing I think is interesting is that, by my recollection, Finn is the one major character with whom Kylo Ren both gets into a violent confrontation with but does not have the Force used on him. The dude clearly loves throwing people into shit, it's kind of his signature move. If he can toss Rey around, who totally has Force powers to try and push back at him, why didn't Finn eat a tree? I think he might be revealed as a blind spot in the Force.
-
I also saw Star Wars, and I only bought the tickets two days before.
It was basically everything I wanted in a Star Wars movie.
-
So... JJ Abrams clarified R2D2's boot up timing
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/12/20/jj-abrams-answers-burning-question-about-r2-d2-star-wars-force-awakens
So....R2D2 is a really old computer that just takes a few hours to boot up, apparently. Rey being there when he finished booting up was apparently more of a coincidence than anything.
-
Aaand Foldable Human discusses Kylo Ren (lots of spoilers)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR1e4idmvWY
-
Star Wars:
Mostly see everybody else for spoiler thoughts. I should add that I went in almost totally blind - as in, I didn't see any trailers or ads.
Direct sequels involving the main cast (i.e. not side stories which have a lot more leeway) are always tricky, as there's two options:
A) Don't rock the boat, don't change the characters, don't undo anything they've accomplished before except perhaps in an obviously fixable way. This has the not inconsiderable benefit of not retroactively screwing up earlier stories, but usually makes things too safe & predictable.
B) Be daring, mess stuff up. High risk, high reward.
On the continuum, you probably need to go B for a compelling story. Sadly, the downside is real here, and the same as the EU: introducing new crises diminishes the triumph in Return of the Jedi. Even worse, you have to do things like say "No, Han & Leia did not live happily ever after, and Han apparently became some kind of failure to explain why he's still wheeling & dealing rather than being a high muckety-muck." It is the right choice for this movie, but it's a painful one for the series. Oh well.
I agree that adding some kind of throwaway line, or something in the opening scrawl, to make more clear what exactly the relationship between the "Resistance" and the Republic was. I think that the writers think - somewhat correctly - that there's some ill will toward the "servants of the Republic" setup that was in the prequels. So they were desperate to cast the action is being headed by a scrappy Resistance and wanted to spend 0 time elaborating on what exactly their link to the Republic was. Suikoden V had a bit of a similar thing, as the game desperately wanted to insist that you, the friggin' Prince & Royal Aunt, were leading some kind of heroic rebellion rather than presenting your forces as the legitimate government dealing with traitors. I do hope that after the success of this film, they're willing to edge a bit back into talking about the Republic.
On a related note. Starkiller Base. So... it can shoot other star systems if I understand correctly? This seems a little too godlike in power, Star Wars has been well-established that its super-weapons conveniently need to get into attack angles, take time to power up, etc. for good & proper dramatic reasons. And blowing up the Senate wasn't really established well, unlike Alderaan. Yes, I get that they wanted to hit the exact same notes as the Death Star, and that means amping up the stakes, but bah. Building something like this would also take ages, so not noticing was a supreme failure on the Resistance's spies, but that's how things roll in movies I guess. Additionally... if this is a converted planet, did they really have to blow the whole thing up? I'm sure that there'll be some excuse that they actually converted a planet with no sentient life on it or something, so it was just First Order lackeys on it, but still. This would get REALLY dark if they had to destroy a planet to save others. Then again, as others have pointed out, this movie explicitly struck back against the "Stormtroopers are disposable clones you can slaughter without feeling bad about it" meme that the prequels tried to set up, so maybe they really are willing to go there.
I like the new cast a lot. One benefit of going in totally blind was that I was willing to believe that Poe Damaron might actually be dead, but sure, he's fun so I'm glad he isn't. Rey & Finn both seem like they have interesting plot arcs ahead of them, and BB-8 is super-cute, which is a niche not taken by a droid yet.
As another thing the writers explicitly borrowed from Star Wars episode 4, I see that everybody is back to thinking of the Jedi as myths again. I guess people lap this stuff up, buuut it's really not all that credible. The Rebel Alliance all said "May the Force be with you" & stuff, you'd think they could have imposed their theocracy on the New Republic. People generally want to believe in a religion, after all, especially one that says you'll become a Force ghost and help your friends if you die!
Anakin/Luke's lightsaber should totally have been disintegrated in the middle of Bespin, or whatever the gas giant the cloud city orbited was called. But I guess maybe it just got stuck on something and some poor janitor droid cleaned it up from the bottom of the pit in the worst job in the world. Ah well, nitpicking.
Speaking of which, leaving Luke largely out was totally the right call. He'd dominate the action far too much. Part of why making the sequel at all is a bit disspiriting that he NEEDS to be at least temporarily out of commission, or immediately killed off a la Ben Kenobi, and keeping him isolated was probably the right call. Dunno why Snoke particularly cares, though.
Speaking of which, I really hope that Snoke isn't somebody possessed by the Emperor's dark spirit or something, a plot twist the EU allegedly used a bunch. Also, I knew enough about the EU to assume that Rey was a sister to Kylo Ren as well, but I'm convinced that the odds are more likely she's Luke's kid at this point, even if the sister angle is possible. If they play the sister angle, it'll have to be something like "our daughter TOTALLY DIED in Kylo Ren's betrayal somehow, so this can't possibly be her!" Cousin is probably more workable, sure.
-
Star wars.
It was safe, and for that a little disappointing.
Guess it's better than that slop they created in the last trilogy.
Hope part 8 tries to be different now that we got a new hope 2.0 our if the way.
-
Saw Star Wars. I don't care for the series, but I liked the movie. Also, Kylo Ren deserves an Emmy for his hair, the sonofaBenedictCumberbatch clone.
-
I saw Star Wars, so now I can read the internet again.
Good overall, maybe around Return of the Jedi/Revenge of the Sith level? Definitely cribs a lot from A New Hope. Really liked Kylo Ren He's a little kid pretending to be a Sith. Love the way he stomps around. , didn't like Finn. Way too comic-reliefy, can't buy him as growing up with Stormtrooper training. His part could have been played just as easily by Kenan Thompson. Haha you can't unsee that now.
-
Star Wars 7 - It was good, I had fun, there is a ton of call backs and references (whether it be explicit, thematic or cinematography), enough that I am dead certain I missed some. Between that and the occasional too smart for its own good but okay you get that one moments you can tell it is a JJ Abrams gig in the same way as Star Trek, though I think this is better as a whole.
Two bits of tiny text
Starkiller base, fucking L O L.
And the first thing I did when I came here rather than read other people's tiny text was to ctrl+F for Bespin. 1 hit. I was expecting CK, but I got Snowfire. You my dog.
Edit - And I agree with Idun on Kylo Ren. 10/10 would watch him be angry and petulant with that hair again.
Edit edit - About the link from mc. It is more his wake on lan is shit, he runs Vista and has 5400 RPM plate drives.
Edit edit edit - MORE TINY TEXT
Huh, I was really expecting more people to talk about how recursive this is on the original series. Like so many of the same points are called back and inverted (or reinverted again because the original series was about inverting things a previously established already...). I think the two big ones that got me the most was the Han death sequence. Not the death itself, though that is great, but the way it is shot.
Oh hey look it is a big scene where the character is going to confront their father suspended over an infinite void on a skinny bridge.
That said Kylo Ren as a whole story arc already does it with Vader both incredibly obviously, but very explicitly in the dialogue. Han and Leia talk about how they both lost a son, Ren talks about how Ben Solo is dead, he no longer exists. Clearly a young Jedi named Kylo Ren, who was a pupil of Luke's until he turned to evil, helped the First Order hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered Han and Leia's son. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Kylo was seduced by the dark side of the Force.
I love that his thoughts betray him and he can still feel some good in himself.
Also I think it is probably telling that I am missing family a bit, but if where Leia tells Han "If you see our son, bring him home", if she had just said "tell our son I love him" I would have fucking lost my shit and probably left the movie so I wouldn't cry in front of friends.
Not to mention they end the fucking movie with a trench run. Holy fuck dudes that one is probably a bit TOO on the nose.
This thread needs way more hype for the Wedge Antilles stand in getting to do all the old cool Han Solo bits.
Wedge + Han = the best.
-
My kid got some Studio Ghibli movies for Christmas.
Tales of Earthsea It's based on the Ursula LeGuin novels, which I haven't read. I suspect some important plot points were lost in the adaptation, because some stuff about the true names doesn't make sense. Still enjoyed the movie. Bad guy's eyes are super creepy. http://49.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbhenqVzuX1qbphcgo6_r1_250.gif
Whisper of the Heart Found this really boring. Maybe I would like it better if I hadn't seen The Cat Returns first. I kept expecting something fantastic to happen and it was just really dull.
-
My kid got some Studio Ghibli movies for Christmas.
Whisper of the Heart Found this really boring. Maybe I would like it better if I hadn't seen The Cat Returns first. I kept expecting something fantastic to happen and it was just really dull.
bleh
-
So... JJ Abrams clarified R2D2's boot up timing
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/12/20/jj-abrams-answers-burning-question-about-r2-d2-star-wars-force-awakens
So....R2D2 is a really old computer that just takes a few hours to boot up, apparently. Rey being there when he finished booting up was apparently more of a coincidence than anything.
"It doesn't really make sense, but it means more fanservice so"
Jesus they could have toned it down with the fanservice. It is the Advent Children of Star Wars
-
Oh gawd.
-
Star Wars: Force Awakens: I have just re-watched Episode 4 and 5 beforehand. Why not 6? Because timing mostly; those two were done at my parents house and didn't have the time to watch episode 6, simple as that (also Mandy was not in the mood and yeah, kind of wanted to take her to see Ep 7 but oh well, that didn't work out!), so many things were fresh in my mind...
And all I can say is...it's good. Yeah, it's basically A New Hope with a paint job and callbacks to the old series but honestly, it still works well enough as a way to just start a new saga, and sometimes just going back to the familiar doesn't hurt. I wouldn't go OMG THIS MOVIE IS AMAZING, but it was enjoyable enough and certainly makes me interested in subsequent films.
-
Much like the ultimate goal of the PS3 wasn't to be a great system or have a lot of cool games but rather to get blu-ray players out there, the goal of Episode 7 was to put people at ease that George Lucas wasn't going to hurt us anymore.
They succeeded.
-
So... JJ Abrams clarified R2D2's boot up timing
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/12/20/jj-abrams-answers-burning-question-about-r2-d2-star-wars-force-awakens
So....R2D2 is a really old computer that just takes a few hours to boot up, apparently. Rey being there when he finished booting up was apparently more of a coincidence than anything.
"It doesn't really make sense, but it means more fanservice so"
Jesus they could have toned it down with the fanservice. It is the Advent Children of Star Wars
Hey now, Star Wars actually has something approaching a coherent plot and characters.This puts it far above FF7AC.
-
Yeah, I don't think it's fair at all to claim The Force Awakens is "Star Wars: Advent Children" for that reason alone. The Force Awaken, at very least, feels deliberate and while fanservicey, did show some sense of care for the original product (more so than the prequel trilogy.) Advent Children was...not that at all.
If anything, The Force Awakens is more Star Wars: Crisis Core, ignoring the prequel/sequel thing.
-
You guys are the Advent Children of DL posters
Sick burn
-
hey, we're all friends here
let's not say anything we can't take back
-
Fenrir, that was the Prequil Trilogy of sick burns.
-
hey, we're all friends here
let's not say anything we can't take back
Saw Star Wars myself. My opinion is summed up thusly:
(http://i.imgur.com/RHRBSg5.png)
-
Finally saw Star Wars. I really like all the new characters and the opening 20 minutes or so were really good. After that the characters are still well-acted and generally well-written but the plot goes completely to shit. I know everybody likes A New Hope, but still, maybe don't mash your dick into the reset button quite so hard?
I thought I understood the relationship between the New Republic, the Resistance and the First Order. FO is the remnants of the Empire resurgent, having consolidated power in a section of the galaxy the Rebels/Republic never liberated -- presumably toward the core, since Finn was trying to flee to the rim. In order to avoid a shooting war, the Republic covertly sponsors the Resistance within the First Order's borders, and publicly denies any relationship with them. Snoke and his people don't buy this for a second, but it's still enough to keep a lid on open hostilities between the two governments. Okay, that works as a premise. But then the bad guys turn on the Starkiller superweapon (ha ha, I see what you did there) and it blows up....the Republic? Which only had five planets? And the Resistance doesn't actually seem concerned about that, only about the possibility that their base of operations could be the next target? Instead of keeping the movie from getting bogged down in political details, choosing not to elaborate on this leaves me puzzled as to why I'm supposed to care about what happened (because of the loss of life, or because the good guys are now totally screwed?), and whether they really did just throw the entire ROTJ victory into the garbage for the sake of another round of Ragtag Rebels vs. Big Bad Empire.
After that, it's mainly a matter of the copypasta from ANH getting so overt that it takes me out of the action. The climactic confrontations with Kylo Ren were all well-done (Like other people have said, emo teen Vader with all his grandfather's superhuman and military power makes for a dangerous, unpredictable villain! That's good.) but the X-Wing stuff was so on the nose that I stopped caring. And the very end was just incoherent crap. The map doesn't just tell you what star system Luke's searching, it leads to the exact plateau where he happens to be hanging out that day? They send Rey instead of Leia or Chewie or Lando (where the fuck is Lando?) to make first contact with him? I mean, yeah, she's almost certainly his kid, but they don't know that yet. Having that whole thing play out with no tension at all, just follow the map, climb the mountain, Luke's right there, was no way to do a "to be continued."
Short version: I'm in for Episode VIII, entirely because I want to see more of the cast, but I doubt I'll watch this one a second time.
-
I thought I understood the relationship between the New Republic, the Resistance and the First Order. FO is the remnants of the Empire resurgent, having consolidated power in a section of the galaxy the Rebels/Republic never liberated -- presumably toward the core, since Finn was trying to flee to the rim. In order to avoid a shooting war, the Republic covertly sponsors the Resistance within the First Order's borders, and publicly denies any relationship with them. Snoke and his people don't buy this for a second, but it's still enough to keep a lid on open hostilities between the two governments. Okay, that works as a premise. But then the bad guys turn on the Starkiller superweapon (ha ha, I see what you did there) and it blows up....the Republic? Which only had five planets?
The Hosnian System was the Republic's capital and where their fleet was at the time. They've scaled down their military to just one primary fleet because they don't view the First Order as an existential threat. If the US Navy cut down to just the Seventh Fleet and they were in Washington, which suddenly exploded, we probably wouldn't be helping Taiwan too much anymore.
e; Also you should probably be glad we didn't see more of the Republic since they were apparently more concerned with "trade negotiations" when this shit was going down. Addition by subtraction.
e2: Apparently the First Order is based out of the Unknown Regions, which is even further away than the Outer Rim.
-
Shale, re the end: I'm pretty sure that showing X hours of searching the location would end up on the cutting room floor, and a throwaway line of talking-to-myself-about-what-I-just-did-offscreen would kill the mood.
Anyway, maybe this is more for Misc. Links, but since this is the Movies thread, an old classic:
http://winterson.com/2009/01/episode-iii-backstroke-of-west-redux.html
-
It's more that I wish they'd just left it for Episode VIII. After the way they'd set up that plot thread, doing it within the time and pacing constraints of what might as well have been a post-credits stinger was a terrible idea. Either change the setup (it's Abrams' script, he can foreshadow whatever he wants) or just leave it until it'll have some breathing room.
-
Shale, if you are doing A New Hope it needs to hold up as a standalone movie that you have plans to build into a 9 part series if the studios will back it.
-
The Hateful Eight - I saw this in 70mm. Uhh... I guess it is about how a shared sense of misogyny can overcome a long and bloody history of racism? It's definitely Tarantino's most violent film, and it's extremely talky, set up like a play. People have said that it is like the opening scene of Inglorious Basterds extended to three hours but I don't think that is true at all. It didn't keep up the tension very well for me, and although it does have a lot of escalating conflict primarily through dialogue, the stakes don't quite work because I didn't care what happened to these characters. When the bullets start flying, I was going to be on board with whatever happened because everyone is pretty repugnant. I suppose that might be the point, since the characters represent some ugly facets of American history, but that did kill the tension a bit for me. I dunno, I wasn't in love with this one but as I get older, the less I am enamored of Tarantino's most Tarantino movies. Like, Jackie Brown is really rising in my estimation but I am starting to care less for Tarantino's directorial indulgences.
*People really like Walter Goggins in this. He's pretty unlikeable in the beginning for obvious reasons but makes a turn. He seems weirdly unperturbed by the death of the general but I suppose there isn't much time between when that happens and when the coffee is poisoned. Also I guess he was armed and attacking, so it was self defense? I wasn't that crazy about his performance like some people are although he does have line readings that are pretty funny.
*No one in the movie has a dignified death, there is no room for the coolness or style that usually comes with Tarantino movies. These are ugly, hateful characters who get ugly, hateful deaths.
*For example, projectile blood vomit.
*Tarantino uses slow motion in order to make some pieces of dialogue slower, mostly for comedic effect ("YOUUUUUUUU REALLLLLLLLLY GONNNNNN MAKE A DEALLLLLL WITH THIS DIABOLICALLLLLLL BEATCHHHHH"
*I kind of wish Channing Tatum were not so visible in the credits (he's the last one listed and it lasts for a while) since the inclusion of his character could be a pretty big surprise. His entrance and exit are very jarring, let's say.
*Jennifer Lawrence was supposed to be Leigh's character in this movie and that would not have worked at all in my opinion. I think she can act big but lacks some kind of conviction to be truly malicious character which is absolutely required in this role. I also dislike Jennifer Lawrence but that's another tangent.
*Bruce Dern is the very image of a crotchety racist old Confederate general. I feel like there are paintings of his character all over the south.
*The intermission starts at a time that is pretty conducive not only towards peeing and crapping but in a time that is intriguing and where you can have conversations about what's going on. I do appreciate Tarantino's insistence on making film experiences like they used to be in the past.
*Tarantino's voiceover is really jarring and a weird choice. Takes you right out of it.
*I don't necessarily see what 70 mm gets you here. A lot of it takes place indoors or within a horsecart so there isn't much room to make use of a wide screen. Some shots are good in terms of portraying spatial relationships within the room but the format doesn't seem indispensable for a movie like this.
*Saw this in the south and there were a lot of people cackling whenever anyone dropped the n word and it felt kind of gross. I dunno.
*With all the hidden weapons lying around, why does the gang wait so long in order to kill Ruth and everyone else? While eating the stew, they could have easily just ended things it seems.
-
I dunno, I wasn't in love with this one but as I get older, the less I am enamored of Tarantino's most Tarantino movies. Like, Jackie Brown is really rising in my estimation but I am starting to care less for Tarantino's directorial indulgences.
I always thought he should write books instead of make films. I think he will be retiring to do just that. I was never a fan for many reasons. I am being pulled to see this film before I leave though. Sigh.
-
Star Wars: Wait, That Was It?
It was okay. No aspect of the movie struck me as outstanding, but I didn't hate it or anything (it's possible I'll change my mind about this later, since I initially tried to be positive but gradually assumed the latter position on the Star Trek reboot as well). If there's one principal problem, it's just that this is the most risk-averse movie I have ever seen. The slavish imitation of every plot beat from A New Hope is stifling--you know immediately just what's going to happen on that catwalk because it's exactly what happened in the Death Star--and it's distracting spotting all these entirely too obvious callbacks even when the movie is doing something right (like the aforementioned scene is actually one of the movie's more effective moments anyway). I don't need to be reassured every second that this is STAR WARS, real Star Wars for real fans, do you get it?! I'd prefer you just concentrate on making a good movie than can stand on its own.
None of the returning actors really looked like they wanted to be here. Harrison Ford was occasionally okay when he had imperial baddies to stand directly against (I can sort of buy Han as the sort of rebel who's comfortable with the heroic process of actually overthrowing The Man and just can't seem to find a place for himself in the establishment afterward, but the movie doesn't really present him this way), but otherwise him and Carrie Fisher look vaguely embarrassed to be involved, and anytime both her and Ford need to have a conversation it just drags the movie down. I suspect the sequel will make me feel the same way about Mark Hamill. You guys, do I really have to be involved in this again, I've got cartoons to make.
It's a shame because I liked the younger cast and this could've been a much more enjoyable movie if it was more about them, and about whatever unique struggles a new generation might have, instead of yesterday's villains with a different label on the tin. Relationship between Resistance and Republic was indeed very vague, and this is mostly to the disservice of the Republic (which, you know, we're supposed to care about) and by extension the ending of the original trilogy, which is even more unfortunate. I'd mostly also concluded that "Resistance" was a label Republic forces used in contested territory to appear less like overt meddlers, but that's finer detail than the movie itself is ever interested in painting. I'd agree that the godlike superweapon is kind of a dumb way to instantly up the stakes and force the story into a recursion of "plucky oppressed rebels vs. unstoppable fascist overlords." I was really happy to see Republic X-wings openly kicking ass once it happened, but it feels like it took forever for them to do anything and they seem to have a whole like dozen ships in their fleet? [Note: I don't care what explanation was provided in franchised tie-in media for the Republic fleet not existing after them having thirty years or whatever to consolidate power. If it's important, it should be in the movie.] It undercuts what the heroes were working for in the original trilogy if it's this easy to knock down everything they tried to build. It's also impossible for me to take seriously a villain named Snoke. I know Star Wars has a history of wonky keyboard-mash names, but was that really the best you could come up with?
(Complete nitpicking corner: why is there a laser crossguard on a lightsaber? Like, I know he used it to burn a dude that one time when they had sabers locked, but come on, it looks dumb. It's okay guy, a traditional lightsaber is good enough.)
So I guess I have to be the community crank on this one and be glad I saw it the one time just so I can understand what the conversation's about, wonder why everyone's so happy about it, and be totally unmotivated to ever watch it again. There were moments early on when it seemed like this might go places worth seeing--I really liked Finn's introduction, and Rey spelunking through the wreckage of the imperial hulks that overlook her home is both a great visual and thematic statement about living in the shadow of yesterday's demons--but there aren't enough of these and there's not much payoff for them either. It certainly doesn't do anything to change my impression of Abrams as a guy who's good at moving things around onscreen and bad at giving us reasons to care.
I am probably just stuck being that "There were only three Star Wars movies" guy.
Also the Map to Luke subplot just had me thinking wait didn't I play this in a Bioware game once?
-
It undercuts what the heroes were working for in the original trilogy if it's this easy to knock down everything they tried to build.
In the EU the New Republic was only held together by the intervention of Luke, Han, Leia and occasionally Wedge or Lando. Considering none of them are there anymore I'm not surprised the whole thing fell apart.
-
In which case I have to echo the "Where's Lando?" question.
More Lando fixes everything.
-
Apparantly the canon reason for the crossguard is that it's not really a crossguard. The crystal Ren used to make his lightsaber is flawed/cracked, which causes it to be unstable (hence the wavering edge instead of a perfect beam), and the crossguard acts as a shunt for excess energy and the flaws in the crystal.
Not sure why he used a flawed one, but whatevs. It's Kylo Ren.
-
The unstable nature of the blade is a pretty apt visual suggestion of its wielder's temperament, I'll grant that much.
-
I presume that, in the period where the Republic was downsizing its military, Lando bought their biggest battleship and converted it into a mobile pleasure palace. Lando ain't got time for your shit.
-
Doubling as the secret base from which he conducts the galaxy-wide hunt for his missing son.*
*To be clear there's no actual information suggesting Finn is Lando's son or anything. I just hope he is.
-
I presume that, in the period where the Republic was downsizing its military, Lando bought their biggest battleship and converted it into a mobile pleasure palace. Lando ain't got time for your shit.
I wouldn't doubt it. Lando did stupider things with Republic capital ships in the EU (Nomad City anyone?)
-
Cid you can't ask the movie to stand on its own then ask for more of the only non-returning major character at the same time
-
Doubling as the secret base from which he conducts the galaxy-wide hunt for his missing son.*
*To be clear there's no actual information suggesting Finn is Lando's son or anything. I just hope he is.
"Hello there kids, I'm Lando Calrissian!"
"My momma said my daddy's name is Lando Calrissian."
"Hey, my momma said that too!"
"...Hush up, little girl... lotta cats have that name."
-
Cid you can't ask the movie to stand on its own then ask for more of the only non-returning major character at the same time
Did that really look like a serious post.
-
To someone who haven't watched old Star Wars in 15 years and only vaguely remember Lando, yes!
He's not Jar Jar? He might have fans?
-
I actually do like Lando but wouldn't seriously suggest TFA would be improved by even more callbacks.
If I use too many words in a post then I probably am trying to make a real case for something, because it remains my sincere hope that there's no problem in the world that can't be solved by just throwing enough paragraphs at it. But if I drop two lines then it's pretty safe to assume I'm being flippant.
-
Lando is Billy D Williams in a cape. Yeah he has fans, the same way Prince does.
-
I had two friends have a drunken shouting argument at Thanksgiving about which one of them was a bigger fan of Lando so yeah gonna be honest I just kinda took Cid's comment at face value
-
I feel like the beginning of the movie is the exact right mix of ANH nostalgia with actual creativity - Finn and Poe's side starts with a very familiar setup but flips the script quickly, while Rey is reminiscent of how Luke started out but with very few salient details in common. It's only once they leave Jakku that the balance swings too far in that direction.
Also, for my part I don't object at all to the OT characters still being around and important. It's just the rehashed plot points I don't like. So bring on Lando in Episode VIII, just not in an obvious parallel to Cloud City.
-
I actually do like Lando but wouldn't seriously suggest TFA would be improved by even more callbacks.
If I use too many words in a post then I probably am trying to make a real case for something, because it remains my sincere hope that there's no problem in the world that can't be solved by just throwing enough paragraphs at it. But if I drop two lines then it's pretty safe to assume I'm being flippant.
You weren't serious about hiring prostitutes every tuesday when you talked about it that one time?
-
It's not every Tuesday.
Also, for my part I don't object at all to the OT characters still being around and important.
Yeah, to be clear, it isn't the fact of returning characters in and of itself that I have a problem with, it's that the specific actors doing it aren't any fun to watch (whereas the younger ones at least sometimes are). They radiate obligatory involvement (because the movie can't happen without you guys, yeah?!) and really look like they'd prefer to be doing something else. It pulls me right out of the movie to see actors feeling so obviously awkward in their parts. If Fisher and Ford legit didn't want to be in another one of these movies thirty years later, then I'd suggest the best decision would've been to rework the story and script and minimize the characters' involvement to distant authority figures or something.
-
The Hateful Eight - I saw this in 70mm. Uhh... I guess it is about how a shared sense of misogyny can overcome a long and bloody history of racism?
I hated this film and I expected it. I've hated Tarantino films for over a decade now. No one left the theater happy. They seemed confused about what happened. Way too long, bad pacing. I am surprised, but the dialogue was awful. I am exhausted by films that villify white people (coded only as southern) as some backwards appeal to liberal desires to see people in pain. Not one joke was funny, not even the slowmo, and I have never watched the type of final death that happened at the end. I just looked away. This is a film of caricature and stereotype that doesn't have any finesse in its verbal or physical violence. The whole BBD white man's fear was so poorly written. Tarantino needs to get out of the 19th century as a way to legitimize his unsophisticated (gore and "nigger" word can indeed be executed far better) use of our imagined ideas of racists and misogynists.
Also saw it in a southern theater. Also very proud to be southern. Also very annoyed that Hollywood recycles a shitty representation of southerners, one that seems more like a naive northern portrayal of southern people. Completely unrealistic, but his unrealism wasn't even enjoyable. Fat ass? Really?? Someone get this white boy more PoC friends he claimed he had in his youth.
-
*shuffles into thread, makes vague gestures indicating "Yeah, everything Cid said," shuffles back out*
-
Doubling as the secret base from which he conducts the galaxy-wide hunt for his missing son.*
*To be clear there's no actual information suggesting Finn is Lando's son or anything. I just hope he is.
"Hello there kids, I'm Lando Calrissian!"
"My momma said my daddy's name is Lando Calrissian."
"Hey, my momma said that too!"
"...Hush up, little girl... lotta cats have that name."
Dynomite. DYNOMITE!!!!
-
The Hateful Eight - I saw this in 70mm. Uhh... I guess it is about how a shared sense of misogyny can overcome a long and bloody history of racism?
Tarantino needs to get out of the 19th century as a way to legitimize his unsophisticated (gore and "nigger" word can indeed be executed far better) use of our imagined ideas of racists and misogynists.
I agree with this. His writing is such that it seems like he's shoehorning slurs in places that are really weird and unnatural and hiding behind the post-Civil War era as if to say "it's okay guys everyone said it back then." However, the sensibilities he uses in this movie are undoubtedly modern, so it really does seem like he's seeking refuge in his setting. People online have said that it has something to say about American race relations on par with Do the Right Thing and I have never wanted to slap someone over the internet more. There may be something here about the ugly truth of America and Americans in there, but only in the most stereotypical and juvenile way. I have wondered if I am missing something here but Tarantino is rarely ever (read: never) subtle with his commentary.
-
What he's saying is that violence is everywhere in our society--
*Cid is decapitated*
-
Honestly this is the first film in quite a long time where I saw Harrison Ford in it and he felt like a character, rather than Harrison Ford The Grumpy Old Man. I suppose that could just be fanboyism talking. Though yeah I don't think Carrie Fisher wanted to be there.
-
People online have said that it has something to say about American race relations on par with Do the Right Thing and I have never wanted to slap someone over the internet more. There may be something here about the ugly truth of America and Americans in there, but only in the most stereotypical and juvenile way. I have wondered if I am missing something here but Tarantino is rarely ever (read: never) subtle with his commentary.
I'd have the urge to slap them too. They're probably only drawing this parallel because of some mainstream beef between Tarantino and Lee. Do The Right Thing would not have been as successful were it set in a realm of pure fiction.
Whatever the critique Tarantino may offer, the only solid one is how fantasy can distance and distort historical narratives (which themselves are not singular). But even this isn't enough; it's irresponsible for filmmakers to keep depicting racism as something only located in the South. Where is Trump? Why can't he make a movie about Trump? I think I'm asking too much of film that's inherently political.
-
Ehhhhh even as a Tarantino fan (apologist at this point?) I think the only critique I have on your last point is the production time of movies more than it can't be done or he can't do it. Maybe if he made more than one movie every 3-4 years he could be doing something on Trump right before election.
All I want to know is if it is yet another post 9/11 Tarantino movie all about revenge. I am sure I will enjoy it at some point, but I am a bit less jazzed for this one. It is a good cast, but we aren't going to be having Christof Walz solving world hunger with all the ham he is bringing to the mix like the last couple.
-
Did I ever comment on Star Wars? No?
I had fun and it's more or less what I wanted out of a Star Wars movie. Dunno. Objectively I agree with the fact that it probably plays it too safe and some of the beat repetition is obnoxious, but, subjectively, don't really care. Might be that I haven't watched the original trilogy in ages and never had a strong attachment to it?
...you know immediately just what's going to happen on that catwalk because it's exactly what happened in the Death Star...
Disagree. You know what's going to happen on the catwalk because you've seen a movie/read a book/played a video game before. I'm pretty sure you could have never seen Star Wars and understand exactly what's going to happen. That framing is hella obvious.
-
Did I miss that part?
It's Bespin during Empire, not Obiwan on the Deathstar there as well.
its okay cid i still luv u
-
Ehhhhh even as a Tarantino fan (apologist at this point?) I think the only critique I have on your last point is the production time of movies more than it can't be done or he can't do it. Maybe if he made more than one movie every 3-4 years he could be doing something on Trump right before election.
You're right, but Trump's been Trump since the 80s. I forgive Tarantino for doing cooler things earlier and ignoring Trump.
All I want to know is if it is yet another post 9/11 Tarantino movie all about revenge. I am sure I will enjoy it at some point, but I am a bit less jazzed for this one. It is a good cast, but we aren't going to be having Christof Walz solving world hunger with all the ham he is bringing to the mix like the last couple.
Nah, each of the Hateful Eight don't have an origin story in revenge, no. Maybe 3/8? Makkotah? I recall revenge being more happenstance.
-
Grand Budapest Hotel: a movie so contrived and self-assured that it would be completely insufferable if it were not more or less a perfect move. Fortunately it's more or less a perfect movie.
-
Did I miss that part?
It's Bespin during Empire, not Obiwan on the Deathstar there as well.
its okay cid i still luv u
Nah, totally Death Star. Talking plot developments here, not architecture.
Though I will admit that I was very happy to see that the Star Wars universe still retains blatant work hazards like single-file, railingless catwalks over gigantic pits of nothingness. I feel like you can't have proper Star Wars without that kind of obviously unsafe civil engineering.
-
Grand Budapest Hotel: a movie so contrived and self-assured that it would be completely insufferable if it were not more or less a perfect move. Fortunately it's more or less a perfect movie.
So, so true. Still love this movie.
-
You're right, but Trump's been Trump since the 80s. I forgive Tarantino for doing cooler things earlier and ignoring Trump.
Well true. Trump has always been a shit. I still think even 24 months ago no one was seriously thinking he would be remotely as close to a serious contender rather than purely as a commercial stunt.
-
Pitch Perfect: The Treblemakers got robbed.
Pitch Perfect 2: Das SoundMachine got robbed.
-
Saw Concussion. Didn't meet my expectations. A B-rated drama with some good dialogue but poor editing. Smith's accent was safe and stereotypical (hello again Hollywood) but his facial expressions were sometimes spot on.
Eh. Got into a long argument about pipeline violence, s
have been set on never encouraging a football career for future unborn child. Grew up in too much of the HS/college football cheer.
Edit- OH
Saw Tangerine finally. Great acting, yaaaaaaaaas, slay queens!
-
Goodnight Mommy: I got snowed in and my friends and I watched this. I think maybe twenty years ago it would have been fresh and original but we saw through it in like the first 5 minutes and we were all disappointed that we were right because it's so easy to anticipate. This film is a little unsettling but more in a baffling way than one ground in what the director actually does. I guess horror isn't really my genre. It's genuinely rare for me to be perturbed or bothered by anything in horror movies, even cheap jump scares. I don't say this out of any macho I can't get scared thing but most of the best acclaimed horrors of the past few years have done little for me (It Follows, Babadook). Maybe I am able to disengage from that kind of thing really easily and the grisliest gore stuff doesn't really bother me.
Want to see Carol and Anomalisa soon. Hail Caesar also looks like the only new movie coming out for months that could be good.
-
Picking the twist really isn't the point of horror. It's mostly about the feeling of unease it gives you. If you shatter that then all you have left is enjoying genre tropes (which you can certainly base good and bad movies off! Cabin in the Woods is all that. So are slasher flicks). If those aren't your thing, yeah horror is always likely to fall flat.
-
This movie isn't necessarily reliant on a twist but it was there and I think I was looking for things that confirmed it rather than sinking into the tension or mood. Maybe that's part of it, but this movie did a poor job of making things particularly suspenseful, instead it was just kind of weird. There are moments of tension and unease in movies that definitely work for me, the most notable in my mind being most scenes with Anton Chigurh/Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men, but I don't get as much of that from straight up horror movies really.
I did like Cabin in the Woods though. I'm trying to get recommendations from people who are really into the genre but I realize it just may not be my thing.
-
I enjoy horror sort of as a concept and horror movies en made rather than a lot of discreet examples. It's sort of "here is a bunch of weird things people make movies about". It means even if an individual movie kinda sucks it is just one more data point.
If you want a weird suggestion of a range of them from good to trashy to interesting as things that exist?
I Spit on your Grave (warning this one is roooooouuugh), Last House on the Left remake (same) both cover off a weird side part of horror, both that reinforces but is kind of a response to Last Girl stuff. They are both Rape Revenge movies, which is hard to deal with.
Nightmare on Elm Street 1 & 3, both of these are 80s camp while playing with big concepts when paired together.
Valentine, a textbook post Scream suspense thrillers. Urban Legends sort of fits the same space but tries to be More Scream and fails.
Behind the Mask: The story of Leslie Vernon. Cabin in the woods hits similar notes, more serious though.
Sopko would slap me if I didn't say In the Mouth of Madness, I figure you have seen that though.
Oh and Event Horizon if you want Doom's plot ripped off and played completely straight. Some sexy Sam Neil action there.
J-Horror, K-Horror and Body Horror also have a bunch more there I either don't know or didn't note because it is too big and I don't do them justice. The body horror wiki has a damn good checklist to hit and honestly just ask Alex for recs. He doesn't compulsively consume it, but he knows good stuff.
-
Of course I would've slapped you.
There's also some of my odd favorites to add here. Most in the slight horror-comedy vein.
House, which is as you can figure, a haunted house movie that does its thing and relies on the horror genre tropes for comedy rather than scares. It's an odd, but very enjoyable film. Plus NORM is in it!
Hard Rock Zombies. Cheesy, low-budget, so-bad-its-good horror movie with some completely out-of-place scenes that come off as well-written. 80's hair metal band fights zombie Hitler. Need I say more? Why aren't you watching this movie right now?
More serious entries:
The Mist. Such a downer and it feels so good.
-
The Mist is really good, yeah. I have seen some J-Horror but haven't come away being very impressed by the ones I saw.
I get camp horror and like that a lot, but most straight up horrors aren't that effective. I'll check some of these out at some point though, thanks!
-
Do you mean this one (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076162/?ref_=fn_al_tt_3) or this one (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091223/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2) for House?
Because the first one is notoriously weird and amazing. A horror movie based on the dreams of the director's 5 year old daughter populated with Japanese school girl tropes.
The kung fu girl gets in a fight with furniture.
-
Probably the second one, though the link isn't working. The one with William Katz and George Wendt.
But yes, totally forgot about that other House. Watch both.
-
Fixed the link, but yeah that was the one.
-
Jurassic World: Saw this because parents had it on Netflix. All I can say is it's enjoyably stupid and yes, THAT is how you do a big Dinosaur fight with a T-rex.
-
Ex Machina: Really interesting movie, well-directed and acted. Nicely creepy, tense and affecting by turns. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending -- without getting too spoilery, I feel like the big twist at the end made it a better SF story, but also undercut its strongest themes as a piece of social commentary.
-
Ex Machina: Really interesting movie, well-directed and acted. Nicely creepy, tense and affecting by turns. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending -- without getting too spoilery, I feel like the big twist at the end made it a better SF story, but also undercut its strongest themes as a piece of social commentary.
I saw it as a commentary on the nature of self-awareness. Oscar Isaac's character was all hung up on empathy and genuine reaction, but the ability to prioritize yourself over others meant that she was beyond a set of hard-coded rules and could judge options as the best for her, not whether they adhered the most to their programming.
Also if you want to look at it through the lens of all the talk about god, the decision to kill someone as the true marker of her self-awareness could be an original sin/Cain and Abel thing
-
Ex Machina: Really interesting movie, well-directed and acted. Nicely creepy, tense and affecting by turns. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending -- without getting too spoilery, I feel like the big twist at the end made it a better SF story, but also undercut its strongest themes as a piece of social commentary.
I felt the shift at the end was jarring and went in a direction that wasn't as interesting as the first half or so. Like, I've seen the second half of that movie dozens of times in other movies but the first half seemed like a set up for something a lot more intriguing than it ended up being. Great performances all around though.
-
Stop whatever you are doing and watch Neil Breen's third film Fateful Findings right now. There's only two kinds of movies that can surprise you: truly great movies and truly bad movies, and this movie was non-stop surprises. It felt like Neil Breen decided to make a movie after having one described to him.
This is his third movie and he shows steady improvement, but because his first movie Double Down was so incredibly bad we'll need to wait for hundreds of movies before he produces the greatest film ever made.
Watch it. It has the most surprising ending I've ever seen and I have seen Lethal Weapon 6.
-
Fateful Findings is better than what Tommy Wiseau does in the Room in many ways and that's remarkable.
-
Fateful Findings is better than what Tommy Wiseau does in the Room in many ways and that's remarkable.
Also Neil Breen shows his balls and taint in Double Down if that's your thing
-
Do you mean this one (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076162/?ref_=fn_al_tt_3) or this one (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091223/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2) for House?
Because the first one is notoriously weird and amazing. A horror movie based on the dreams of the director's 5 year old daughter populated with Japanese school girl tropes.
The kung fu girl gets in a fight with furniture.
House (JP) is the most amazing thing I've ever seen. It is pure, unadulterated madness.
-
Hail Caesar - I thought this was really fucking funny, like among the Coen Brothers' funniest. I don't know what it means entirely. Would that it 'twer so simple.
SQUINT, SQUINT AT THE GRANDUER
-
It was good. I wouldn't place it among their best? It feels like one of those things I have to watch a couple times to sort out how I feel about it. I'm not sure it's ultimately about anything other than the Coen brothers really really liking movies, and the process behind making movies, and Hollywood history, enough to be honest about the fact that 2/3 of those things are often hideous drudgery but it's totally worth the bother when everything works out right so why would someone actually want to do something else professionally, right?
The narration seemed unnecessary. I realize the same thing could be said about The Big Lebowski, so I'm not sure what the distinction is here. Maybe just that Dumbledore feels less like an appropriate Coen movie presence than Sam Elliott did.
"Divine presence to be shot."
-
Flew out to Oklahoma and back, watched a movie each way since Delta has free in-flight streaming of stuff I actually wanted to watch (weird!).
Mad Max: Fury Road -- holds up well on a rewatch, even when that rewatch is on a tablet screen and has an intermission halfway through for a layover. I didn't really notice anything in it that I didn't catch before but it's so so good.
Ant-Man - Not as good as I was hoping it would be, not as bad as I was afraid it would be. When the movie gets some momentum going it's quite fun, and especially the heist sequence and the big fight deliver that, but the setup moves in fits and starts. It's worse because Scott Lang is maybe the worst protagonist in the Marvel movies yet, and a movie that was just Hank Pym as the retired Ant-Man and Hope Van Dyne as the new Wasp working together to bring down the Yellowjacket project would have been way more effective. Hell, have Scott as the most prominent member of the criminal crew they bring in to assist, so he can take on the Ant-Man role in the future. That'd work. But making it about him from the get-go drags down the movie.
-
Captain Deadpool: Not much plot that wasn't seen in the trailers already, but who watches Deadpool for the plot? There's a hot chick, a moody teen, a CGI character, and that's just in the opening credits. Was not expecting the cameo of Keira Knightly as Cable. She really has great range.
-
She rocked that flat-top.
-
Deadpool: You know while watching it I was thinking they were spending too much time on the backstory and was afraid the movie would drag. Then they're like "oh yeah, we're at the climax already...yes, this is like the 3rd scene set in present day, what about it?" so THAT fear got tossed out the window. It's just a lot of fun overall.
-
Deadpool: Saw this just now. I laughed. And now I have forgotten everything about it.
-
Deadpool was fun.
-
Hail Caesar was finally released here. Fun. I do not know what it is trying to say (what is the deal with communists) but it wad a lot of fun.
Since when has Johan Hill become that big of a deal? He's there for like 1 minute and has like 2 lines. Yet he's on the poster of the movie instead of like Ralph fucking Fiennes?
-
I dunno, but for me personally I have a decent respect for him? He isn't whoamazeballs or anything, but he is a solid worker who is gets a lot of mileage in comedies. I was kind of pumped to have him in a Coen Brothers movie. Sad to hear it isn't a big role. Hopefully it means he works his way into their catalogue of people they use a lot though.
-
Well yeah, he's not bad by any means. It's just he's literally there for seconds. Murray in Grand Budapest Hotel has a bigger role. I missed when he became a much bigger deal than Ralph Fiennes
-
I don't think he is huge. I am just happy for him.
-
Ralph Fiennes
who
-
:(
Oh yeah he's bigger than Channing Tatum too apparently. Holy shit
-
Channing Tatum
now youre just making up names
-
Hail Caesar was finally released here. Fun. I do not know what it is trying to say (what is the deal with communists) but it wad a lot of fun.
It's pretty muddled on a Message level. There is a scene with a room full of priests being ridiculous people and there is a scene with the Ann Coulter catnip of Hollywood writers being a commie conspiracy. So people who believe in things are just silly I guess? Ultimately I think it's a mistake to attribute any more substantial a statement to the film beyond movies are pretty fun you guys. And it definitely enjoys making that point, but that's about as it seems to have on its mind. It's enough to fuel some pretty funny moments and a couple outstanding setpiece homages to bygone genres, at least.
-
I think there's something in Hail Caesar to be said about faith, not just faith in religions, but faith in institutions (the studio) and in systems/authority (capitalism/communism). The whole thing with Brolin is a Christ parable (tempted by Lockheed Martin for example), where he has to deal with the ugliness and transgressions of those around him in order to uphold this veneer of perfection, or at the very least, functionality. Everything he does is to prop up the reputation of the film studio. As he says to Baird at the end "the picture has worth." (the picture could mean movies themselves as well as the veneer/perception that has been built up). Even though the production of movies (as shown by what Brolin has to deal with daily) and the movies themselves are build on lies and artifice, they have value. It's a weirdly positive message for the Coens. I don't know how much more I would dig into it but there's a little more there than just "movies are fun."
-
The Witch - so this isn't explicitly that scary but there's a palpable sense of evil that drives a lot of tension even as the scenes themselves play out slowly. The movie goes for it very early and doesn't really stop in being pretty ballsy. The less said the better, but I'm not a big horror dude and this worked on me, more from a sense of ambiance that is fuuuuuuuuucked up
-
Mississippi Damned
best drama I have seen in years, for personal reasons
jesus christ.
-
10 Cloverfield Lane is faithful to its trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEHbFYB_Bec), which is amazing. It's not a movie I'll see more than once, but if you're at all interested I'd make sure you go before the story is spoiled. The tension of never being quite sure what's going on is what holds it together.
-
10 Cloverfield Lane was indeed awesome.
Warning though, it is totally a Fenrir movie.
Concussion told a worthwhile story in the most boring way.
Also, the characters from this movie :
1) are very good people
2) will never have fun in their lives
You kinda dislike them because 2), but you feel guilty about it because 1) . Not a pleasant movie experience.
They're like that nice and boring guy who wants to hang out with you, but you'd be happier if you never saw his face again, because you can feel entropy slowly killing you anytime you talk to him?
-
So, finally got around to seeing Deadpool. Worth noting that even a month after release, this thing managed a super long line in the theatre hallway before the doors were opened, and the theatre itself was packed. And by the end of it, I could see why. On a related note, I think killing a person with a Zamboni has been added to my bucket list.
-
This is my life. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz2CMDCD3WQ)
I also saw Deadpool. It was pretty great. I was happy when X Gon' Give It To Ya kicked in. I was sad that it wasn't DMX-Men by DJ Nada One, but it was pretty close to perfect.
-
I saw it again, and it really holds up on a rewatch. Lots of fun references you probably won't catch the first time through and the jokes still land when you know what's coming. Good movie! I just wish there hadn't been 10-year-olds in both of my screenings.
(Also, the X Gon' Give It To Ya scene is emblematic of one of the best things about the movie, which is that it knows when to end a bit. The song goes on just long enough to do its job, you get the gag where it cuts to Colossus on “stainless steel,” and it's done. Economy!)
In other news of the day, Batman v. Superman: This Time It's Judicial apparently sucks. WHO COULD HAVE PREDICTED THIS.
-
Batman v Superman looks fucking miserable and Zack Snyder is also miserable and as such, Snyder also wants to do this:
http://www.avclub.com/article/zack-snyder-wants-adapt-fountainhead-idea-objectiv-233954
-
It does help explain that interview where he says that he's growing up Superman when he makes the guy question the value of altruism. Also, it seems Snyder saw BvS as a spiritual sequel to The Watchmen.
If you don't mind spoilers, Movie Bob has a review up on Youtube. It's a lot like his Pixels review. My favourite bit is the non-reason why Bats and Superman decide to stop fighting and need to team up.
-
So BvS came out today, but I was at parent's place yesterday with my sister off from school, so I wanted to do something with her, which led to us discussing movies, and impulsively we went and saw...
Zootopia: ...yeah, that doesn't have anything to do with what started the conversation, but it's what we saw! Anyway, what intrigued both of us was the whole 99% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is downright absurd (90+% on Rotten Tomatoes is not unheard, and high 90s stands out...but 99% is "Wait what!? That's as close to universal praise as you can get without being literal!"), so we decided to see that. Given the low profile nature (at least it felt low profile to me? Didn't seem marketted as much as some of Disney's other animated movies, but maybe I'm blind), I was expecting a simple yet fun and enjoyable experience...
...which is pretty much exactly what I got, so yeah, can't really complain. Honestly, outside of being predictable, I can't really say there's anything this movie does wrong, and Mandy was quick to point out though that this IS a family film, so you kind of know it's going to be some level of predictable going in, so honestly, it's really a nitpick level flaw at best, which means you can't really hold it against the movie.
What I'm saying is it's a good movie and worth seeing if you like Disney's animated features.
-
Yes, Zootopia was a lot of fun. My watching experience was a bit different: in the Alamo Draughthouse and drinking wine while surrounded by families. I didn't enjoy the ending as I did the rest of the movie, and my friend and I were busy thinking about segregation and profiling that we forgot to even care about the superduperevilpersonsurprise. But, it was pretty solid and I am officially hyped for Finding Dora.
-
Batman v Superman: Oh boy where do I start? This is probably the worst *directed* movie of all time. Having said that, it's not a bad movie overall. There are some outstanding individual scenes. Watching it you will continuously flip back and forth between "hey this is pretty cool" and "what the fuck is going on?" This isn't a movie that you love or hate - it's a movie that you love *and* hate. It's a 151 minute movie, and the resulting CinemaSins Youtube video will be about 145 minutes long.
Pleasant surprise of the movie was Jesse Eisenburg as Lex Luthor. Thought he was going to be terrible from the trailers, but he really kills it.
-
Batman v Superman v State of Ohio v Board of Education v The Entire Marvel Cinematic Universe: I wasn't expecting much going in and overall came out with the impression of the movie being simply "ok." I enjoyed Man of Steel as a guilty pleasure, so there was some hope for this movie but eh, it's just dull and boring until the last act, and there are a number of decisions made that seem to exist purely for SHOCK VALUE!!! but they'll just end up pissing off the hardcore fans. I also agree with Angry Joe on the notion of killing off Superman in this movie basically kills any investment you can have in future movies. Yeah, they tease the whole OMG HEALING COMA!!! bull crap in the very last few frames, but now that we've seen Superman 'die' if he comes back, you've literally left us with nothing to look forward to. How can we be invested in future movies if we've already seen him die once? No, I don't buy "well they used Doomsday!" because that could have easily just been followed up with "THEN DON'T USE DOOMSDAY AS A VILLAIN!" I'm sure there were other Non-Darkseid Villains who could have worked...heck, just make Luthor create his Not!IRon Man suit by getting access to Kryptonian Technology and powering it up with Kryptonite. That'd have worked as a final boss, and you could have still had the "they still needed Wonder Woman's help."
Speaking of Wonder Woman, she was basically the only "teased" Super Hero that worked in this...because she actually played a role. It was a relatively minor role, but she was actually there, and we got to see real impact with the character since she actually DID SOMETHING. She's also the only character that was needed to get the "there are other Super Powered individuals out there besides the Kryptonians" point across; shoving in what are basically Teaser Trailers to 3 other Super Heroes is a complete waste and feels forced. We get it, DC, you want to compete with Marvel and want to establish a foundation for characters...but there are way better ways to handle it. While I understand not wanting to copy Marvel, frankly this is one case where copying them would make perfect sense. Throwing in the nods here and there via single namedrops or background images gets the point across without bring too much attention to it, just "oh I see what you did there." Like how in Incredible Hulk, they simply mention World War II Super Soldier Serum...well congrats, a single line just established Captain America is a thing in this universe, while not bringing too much attention to itself.
So I'm fine with Wonder Woman for all that I would have preferred she got formally introduced in her own movie, but at least she played an actual role; the other cameos felt forced and just a means to make trailers without actually making trailers.
In the end, if you expect the movie to suck, you'll probably hate it. If you have any hope for this movie, you might walk out finding it alright. What I'm saying is this movie is significantly worse than Zootopia.
-
Crimson Peak - Fluffy, generically enjoyable film with decent character work and great set pieces and outfits. Tom Hiddleston can make anyone's day, and Jessica Chastain was great.
Kingsman The Secret Service - A decent Bond action flick with a villain who I was exceedingly fond of. His conclusion about the world is one that is not hard to draw, and it's not that surprising that someone with the capability to do so and the sheer callous evil required would do something like that.
-
Crimson Peak - [Jessica Chastain] is so fucking crazy that it makes the movie and every scene without her is boring in comparison and makes you wish she was around ("whenever Jessica Chastain is not on screen, all the other characters should be asking 'Where's Jessica Chastain'?").
Also,
Kingsman: The Secret Service - [Samuel L. Jackson] is so fucking crazy that it makes the movie and every scene without him is boring in comparison and makes you wish he was around ("whenever Samuel L. Jackson is not on screen, all the other characters should be asking 'Where's Samuel L. Jackson?").
Aside from both having outstanding villains... the former was also stunning aesthetically and pretty fun all-around honestly, the plot is pretty silly but it's enjoyable to figure out what is going on and the film had me engaged. I don't really like horror but the horror elements aren't really what this movie was about.
The latter I obviously enjoyed the James Bond parody aspects of but didn't really appreciate the final arc in which we get not one but two weird power fantasies played straight to end the film and the female lead is literally shoved into outer space. (Some would point out that things like this are par for the course for Bond and of course they would be correct, but I still expect better in 2015.) It could also have stood to be less... completely casual in its approach to violence. But despite these complaints I had a good time overall.
-
BvS
Eh?
The plot..bad
I still enjoyed it?
Why is batman so much older then the rest of the justice league?
I rather enjoyed the inclusion of the other JS members. I'm guessing there was still a sting from some other issues, which lead to some founding members missing.
The fights were fun.
lex luthor was interesting. I kinda dug it.
I don't know. I'm just glad it's over. Give me the flash movie now please.
-
Crimson Peak - [Jessica Chastain] is so fucking crazy that it makes the movie and every scene without her is boring in comparison and makes you wish she was around ("whenever Jessica Chastain is not on screen, all the other characters should be asking 'Where's Jessica Chastain'?").
Also,
Kingsman: The Secret Service - [Samuel L. Jackson] is so fucking crazy that it makes the movie and every scene without him is boring in comparison and makes you wish he was around ("whenever Samuel L. Jackson is not on screen, all the other characters should be asking 'Where's Samuel L. Jackson?").
Aside from both having outstanding villains... the former was also stunning aesthetically and pretty fun all-around honestly, the plot is pretty silly but it's enjoyable to figure out what is going on and the film had me engaged. I don't really like horror but the horror elements aren't really what this movie was about.
So del Toro says he was trying to make a Gothic romance, not explicitly a horror. It does have some horror elements but as you say, it isn't what's front and center here.
I could watch Jessica Chastain screeching with a knife for a really long time. Or just her scowling in the background while other things are happening. Or her scraping a spoon against a bowl of porridge. That scene was amazing.
Want to check out the new Cloverfield and Midnight Special but it looks like there's nothing else that I want to see for a while.
-
Why is batman so much older then the rest of the justice league?
Because to Warner Bros. The Dark Knight Returns is TOTALLY the only story worth taking ideas from, and Batman was in his 40s in that.
-
That isn't really just Warner Brothers, that is tons of comics medium as well.
And if you are going to rip off Batman fighting Superman in a powersuit story weeeeeeeeelllllllllllllllllllllll.
Also it works in with the casting since the Ben isn't really young any more.
Aaaaaaaaaand it cross markets well with Nolan Batman even if this isn't actually that continuity, that's just the state that movie goers last saw him in, so it is keeping on brand.
That is to say, because this movie is incredibly cynical and has a lot less soul to it than you would want. It is the embodiment of "Too Big To Fail".
-
So...I'm just kinda over the superhero movie thing. All it took was the grayed-out posters of BvS for a deep desire to never watch the movie ever to set in. See also: Deadpool.
I mean, GotG was nice?
-
Scroll up for my opinion on Deadpool. Low expectations help it out!
but yes Marvel/Disney side the burn out is high. Sony side is just spinning wheels to make Disney pay. Fox side is just Me To! attempts at cashing in on Disney/Marvel success. Time Warner/DC stuff is pretending that the 90s is the thing to emulate because that was when comics was "Big" (which is stupid because as we know Speculator market was what drove it not really the content).
-
I think the 90s gets waaaaaaay more shit than it deserves. I may write something about this at length at some point, but probably not. I read comics in the 90s, and a lot of them were good! and if not good, fun! People laser focus on Liefeld, and particularly on the very worst Liefeld comics, but the most prominent driving force of "90s" style was Jim Lee, working on Chris Claremont's X-Men. (If you're not familiar, think Liefeld if he could count abs, had fashion sense, and loved cross-hatching.)
The sins of present-day comic book movies are, for the most part, the sins of present-day action movies. I don't recall 90s comics being drained of color. Far from it!
-
Edit 2 - Sorry for the 10 billion disjointed words
Ehhhh the story arcs that Dark Knight Rises riffed on were very 90s arcs (Knightfall, No Man's Land being the stand outs to me).
Whenever I am bashing on DC for it I am much more about that story telling style and the specific arcs than some general hate on 90s comics. I don't know enough Superman to cite specific arcs but Corporate Lex is 90s AF. Lex who gets by on the strength of his conviction that regardless of his intent Superman is too powerful to be trusted got him a presidency in 90s comics.
BvS I assume has Doomsday in it.
If the third Justice League movie isn't a spin on Identity Crisis I will be stunned.
In comparison Marvel's flagships have been doing chunks of 2000s storylines for its stories (Iron Man 3 being Extremis, Civil War being Civil War obvs, Winter Soldier being from mid 2000s Captain America) and riffs on old stuff (I was going to quote Obadiah Stane in Iron Man 1, but I am sure that gets rewritten every 2 or so decades).
It isn't even that Comic Book Movies do it. It is that DC movies do it ->DC Movies don't do nearly as well as Marvel ones -> DC continue to do the same damned thing -> DC does the same damned things in its comic books as well -> Fuck the New 52.
The line of logic is flawless.
That said, Gotham Academy is the shit and you should check it out Jim.
Edit - Also part of the point isn't that 90s comics are bad. It is just that the sales figures are artificially inflated and aren't really a representation of a well you should keep going to.
I guarantee you if there was a Skrull Kill Krew movie there is an audience for it (thought it might be tiny so you should make it a B-Movie, or lets be real, just license it to Troma).
-
Bats v Supes Ultimate Suplex Hold- nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.
Okay so. This movie is like... three other movies frankensteined together. And I think they're all better movies than this one? Actually, start over.
Y'know how making 5-10 minute short films and airing them online, or as DVD extras, or so on is kinda a thing now? I feel like this movie has three or four of those jammed into it. The first two scenes, and some of the scenes with Wonder Woman, stand out there.
The trouble is we're missing a couple of them. Like, some extra scenes to introduce Bruce and Diana are welded into this thing, and they... need to be there to explain what's happening here! But in particular there's a missing scene with Batman. The movie alludes to it, and it's vital to making this version of Batman work, but I think not having it actually... exist is hurting things.
Like you have the opening, it's this really awesome condensed version of Batman's origin. Great. Then [scene missing], and Batman is broken, realizing his 20 year crusade hasn't accomplished anything and just served to get a young partner killed. Maybe he even hangs up the cowl for a few years, but that's just a guess. Then we get a sort of added scene from Man of Steel, showing Bruce Wayne on the ground of the devastation in Metropolis, renewing his desire to make the world safe. But he's so horribly broken by it all that he's stopped caring about being justice, trying to get scum off the streets by any means necessary.
Why yes Batman IS post-9/11 america, why do you ask. Zack Snyder's brilliant mind for "subtle" "depth" strikes again *sigh*
Much as I think DC needs to give us [scene missing], if not in the BvSvMeeple dvd then in another film, they do give you more or less enough to surmise it was there so it's not that bad. And maybe I shouldn't complain too much because it's about the only time the film DOES respect the audience's intelligence. So many lines that any smart viewer could fill in are instead left hanging for several minutes then the actual answer (again, an obvious thing anyone paying attention could put there) is treated as profound wisdom later. The "subtle" "depth" thing is a recurring problem.
All that aside Ben Affleck as Batman is probably the most successful part of the movie. I dunno why he makes a way better Batman than Daredevil but here we are. And... once the movie gets past the title and have hashed out the actual Batman VS Superman Round 2 FIGHT... suddenly the next bits of the movie are some actual super heroing! It took them nearly 5 hours of screen time (that's including the entire run time of Man of Steel plus BvS to this point), but finally, FINALLY some hero shit goes down and it's such a relief and... maybe, just maybe, this franchise will turn out okay over time. I dunno. But it really is pretty good after that.
The main problem really is this takes it's version of Superman from some... questionable sources. I get the sense that one or both of Snyder or Goyer are full on Objectivists, and just can't envision a version of Superman who wants to help people because it's the right thing to do, rather than being some sort of crushing obligation or some self-satisfied desire for adulation. So a lot of times he comes across as a teenager, full of himself and petulant when people try to argue with him. And while they brush up against a story that could work for a more traditional superman, one who wants to do good but has trouble appreciating the full consequences of his actions and the complexity of global politics, it's only partially told and they cut it off at the critical juncture.
Actually that's not quite right. The main problem is the goddamned music. It's way too loud, nothing but percussion, and it gives almost every scene that feeling of being weighed down and lethargic. Like, 20 minutes after thanksgiving dinner, the whole movie.
Lex Luthor... I dunno man. You can't say that much about him because he's pretty clearly putting on an act the whole movie. Dude cracked at some point, some point very recently, but while we might be able to guess why we don't really get a sense of how much or when. At least, that's what the performance felt like to me. And if that's true, due credit to Eisenberg for getting it across. If not, uh I guess that's the movie being a frankenstein again.
Hey DC, there's a reason Marvel puts its teaser trailers after the credits. Just sayin'.
I really, really wanna watch that Wonder Woman movie now though.
-
a Skrull Kill Krew movie
I'm down.
Superhero movies are kind of all over the place right now. Some of the mainline ones are indeed tired (Avengers 2). Deadpool wasn't exceptional but it was *different* which helped a lot.
X-Men Apocalypse looks really really bad which is a shame because Days of Future Past was good.
-
Edit - Also part of the point isn't that 90s comics are bad. It is just that the sales figures are artificially inflated and aren't really a representation of a well you should keep going to.
My comment wasn't meant as a response to that particular point (which is true). Really, it's just something that's been on my mind.
I think you're giving a little too much weight to the stories that are being adopted here, though. Doomsday, Bat-armor, that stuff's just window dressing. You can take a single story and change the points of emphasis, the presentation, the coloring, the casting, and it comes out entirely differently. After all, how much do the Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies have in common with the next batch of them, except for the part where Spider-Man is in them?
Also, Re: Deadpool, I'm willing to believe it's a better movie than its trailer made it out to be, but that trailer was just so damn colorless and joyless I couldn't be bothered.
-
I get the sense that one or both of Snyder or Goyer are full on Objectivists,
Snyder's expressed an interest in filming The Fountainhead, so.
-
I get the sense that one or both of Snyder or Goyer are full on Objectivists,
Snyder's expressed an interest in filming The Fountainhead, so.
best joke I've heard in a while:
when an objectivist masturbates to completion, does that make their dick a fountainhead?
-
All that aside Ben Affleck as Batman is probably the most successful part of the movie. I dunno why he makes a way better Batman than Daredevil but here we are.
My caring about this movie is super-minimal, but I noticed this and feel obliged to point out that Affleck is a pretty damn good actor and if he didn't work as Daredevil I am certainly inclined to blame the movie. (Also, the fact that I've never even heard of this movie despite hanging out in a chat which cares 1000% more about superhero movies than any other type also supports this hunch.)
-
Daredevil's pretty old (2003 I think) so that plays a part. Daredevil and Batman are relatively similar characters and... both movies suffer quite a bit from weird writing problems, so it's strange the gap in the performances is so large. Granted maybe he was better in Daredevil than I remember, but I think it's more that Ben Affleck is a much better actor in 2016 than he was in 2003.
-
You haven't heard us talk about Billy Vs Snakeman or Daredevil? Cause I can talk your ear off about Daredevil. That is a mediocre movie that is a cultural phenomenon.
And... yeah Jim I feel you pretty much all on all points. I figured it wasn't really directed AT me just sort of around the point. That's why it triggered words words words response. Not defensive just sort of... idea vomit because I want to respond and agree but I have so many thoughts.
I think the only thing the two Spider Man series have in common is the both throw Gwen Stacey off buildings because that's what you do to her even if its fucking up the reference and the characters that do it.
Also right with you on how meh the trailers looked for Deadpool. The movie is bleak as Deadpool origin story is, but it is funny. Ryan Reynolds is damned good casting.
Edit - And of course you would be down for Skull Kill Krew, Cap'n. You, Jim, Sopko and myself were exactly who I was figuring would be 1/10th of the small audience it would have with the other 27 people being youtube movie reviewers of varying levels of appreciation for exploitation movies.
Edit 2020202 - I have deleted like 90% of this response like 5 times so I don't get distracted doing that ear talking off.
CK I think you should revisit Daredevil. It is neither as bad as you remember nor is The Ben as bad as you remember. It isn't GOOD, but man Affleck is alright, Michael Clarke Duncan is amazing as Kingpin. Colin Farrell is a skeezy as fuck Bullseye with a terrible costume. Even Jennifer Garner is pretty good even though I don't think there is a ton invested into her character other than Trophy.
Casting wasn't the problem there. It is mostly a poor script that under delivers and is chock full of padding. Even the decent parts of it are too thinly fleshed out then like 50% of the movie is just shitty padding.
Edit edit edit - revisiting could just be watching a 15 minute retrospective online rather than deep sixing 100 minutes of your day.
also holy fuck it was seriously 103 minutes long maybe more than 50% of it was padding
EDIT SO MANY EDITS
In 2004, an R-rated director's cut of Daredevil was released, reincorporating approximately 30 minutes of the film, including an entire subplot involving a character played by Coolio. The director's cut was intended as an improvement over the theatrical version.
So fucking great.
-
For the record I am also down for a Terror Inc. movie and a Darkhold Redeemers movie.
-
Michael Clarke Duncan is amazing as Kingpin.
Yeah, that part I remember. The rest of the movie is just kinda...s tuff... question mark? There's something about standing in a rainstorm so he can see her heaving bosom. But Michael Clarke Duncan commanding your attention and utterly dominating the screen every second he's on it I remember.
-
The rain storm is a neat idea. Not how any of it works, but it is a neat idea. One of the better pieces of padding.
Also it makes Matt a real fucking pile of dicks. Hurrr hurrr your blind so can't tell how hot attractive your partner is.
<MattDDMurdock> lol no only hotties 4 me
Because that's all that matters (and to be fair is consistent characterisation across mediums)
-
So this bvs movie is alluding to Lois lane being supes tether to the human world right?
Like, if she were to die, he'd go rogue, which is why batman was scared of him in the first place?
Is this superman based of the injustice version? I don't remember supes being so weak minded that the potential death of his loved ones could knock him over the deep end. He basically is always monitoring lane wherever she is on the planet. Crazy stalker. I guess his mom works in this role too, but he cares less about her so she isn't being watched 24/7 like lane is.
Also these dream sequences...
what's up with flash in batman's dream? I Get How He Can Time Travel, But Now He Can Enter Someone's Subconscious? And wtf was he wearing?
-
The dream sequences are horrible in general and one of the major reasons the movie is so confusing.
-
So this bvs movie is alluding to Lois lane being supes tether to the human world right?
Like, if she were to die, he'd go rogue, which is why batman was scared of him in the first place?
Is this superman based of the injustice version? I don't remember supes being so weak minded that the potential death of his loved ones could knock him over the deep end. He basically is always monitoring lane wherever she is on the planet. Crazy stalker. I guess his mom works in this role too, but he cares less about her so she isn't being watched 24/7 like lane is.
Actually, Superman does that... a lot. In every iteration of the character. Some call more attention to it than others, but he's ALWAYS keeping an eye out for his closest friends. It's why Jimmy Olsen/Lois/etc get kidnapped so often. People know it's one of Superman's buttons.
The weak-mindedness changes depending on source, but it's always been there. Golden and Silver Age Superman was always getting tricked into doing stuff- the naivety went with the pure-hearted do-gooder in him. More modern versions have him being pretty susceptible to mind-control and magic, one of the most famous instances being in Countdown to Infinite Crisis where Max Lord uses his psychic powers to make Superman go on a mass-destruction/killing spree. So honestly, Superman being tricked, manipulated, etc is pretty damn faithful.
I think what's going on a lot with this movie is that people have this amalgamation of Superman and Batman in their heads, and in putting it together pull the best traits from all versions of the characters. So any flaws, deviations from that source, regardless if it's actually been done, is an abomination. I agree it goes too far in some cases here, but it really feels this is one of the problems people have watching/accepting some interps of the characters.
EDIT: Yes. The dream sequences definitely needed to get cut down a ton.
-
The Batman dream with Flash was really just a cheap attempt to get Crisis on Infinite Earth's teased or pay homage to that or some such, since I seem to recall that very plot point was part of that story. Could be mis-remembering, or they do that particular plot device more often than I expect since that's part of that character or some such; won't pretend to be an expert on him.
-
10 Cloverfield Lane - Good thriller with great performances by Winstead and especially John Goodman. I don't think the ending worked for me, but most things up until that point did. I really like the way they built Winstead's character (the opening scene is very instructive about her personality and flaws) with good instances of characterization through action and with only a few hamfisted character moments. The refreshing thing about her is that people in movies who are trapped like this often act like idiots. Everything she does is fairly well considered, so she doesn't slip up because of incompetence which 99% of protagonists in these kind of thrillers fall prey to. The interpersonal relationships between Winstead and Goodman are pretty strong and the third dude was okay despite not really having much to do. The movie also plays with expectations and what characters actually know about each other and the situation in a compelling way. Worth a watch.
I think my biggest problems with the movie are to do with marketing. Like, I think there's a conflict here between trying to build a brand and making something effective and surprising. In several ways, I think the movie would have worked a lot better without the Cloverfield name attached to it and then some reveals in the story would be a lot more impactful. Some of the tension is in whether Goodman is delusional or actually right and here, I actually had no doubts that he was prepared for something real because of the Cloverfield name. Moreover, when Winstead drives away at the end and the Cloverfield Lane mailbox is shown, that could have been a really cool reveal! And when she's out of the bunker for the first time and sees aliens, I didn't have a big reaction other than that it had become a movie I wasn't as interested in anymore because I knew something of the sort was present because of the name. The thing is, I don't think the producers/execs/studio/whatever are necessarily wrong if they thought that the movie would never sell without the name, and it seems like they are building a Cloverfield brand here (something JJ Abrams has become very good at), with Cloverfield being some kind of overarching setting where these stories can occupy the same world. On the other hand, I do think that if they stealth released these things without the Cloverfield name and had several films that ended up being in the Cloverfield setting, that would be pretty cool, at least the first few times. It might also be unworkable due to the internet but it's something new that people haven't tried.
*the contrivance of her being able to make a hazmat suit because she was a costume designer is kinda dumb.
*I think things would have worked better if the movie ended ten minutes earlier where she first sees an alien or something. They do go for it but it's really goofy, like a molotov blowing up the alien thing? But I guess to complete the character's arc, she has to make the choice to help people since it is the first time she is not running away from things. I don't know, I don't think the parts when she's dealing with the aliens is that compelling.
*I think the part where they play charades is really interesting and it's a good instance of character building, although the setups are kind of absurd and overwritten (John Goodman literally cannot conceptualize Winstead as a woman, him screaming a bunch of clues like "HE'S ALWAYS WATCHING YOU" for Santa).
*I kind of miss John Goodman at the end.
*Goodman straight up executing the third dude is really jarring, really well done.
*When Goodman comes out clean shaven oh my god that is so creepy
-
Zootopia: Much better than the trailers. Really good message about racial issues and it doesn't dumb it down for the kids. Smartly written and lots of beautiful scenery. The little details like the multiple doors on the buses are great.
Also, I may be a furry cause Officer Hops was hot in that police jumpsuit. Ha ha bunny. jumpsuit.
My biggest gripe about the movie is that Gazelle was not played by Adele. If you're going to use Shakira give her a name that sounds like Shakira. Like Sheepkira or something.
-
Gourryspoils
I thought the third guy was a red herring myself. Like I genuinely thought it was all about him being a bastard for about 5 minutes right before he got shot.
I agree with the Cloverfield franchise bit, but... I was kinda doubting there were aliens midway through the film anyway? I think the alien being real thing is something that is completely obvious before and after seeing the movie, but in the middle I was not completely sure. Abrams said that there was no plot connection to the other Cloverfield movie, which is a complete lie but I'm glad he did it anyway.
Also, I may be a furry
Yes
I've been thinking about how the Boondock Saints became a cult classic (they're in Broforce) even though the movie is completely appalling and has 0 sense of irony.
I think that maybe this is kind of a MRA sensibility thing? The more I think about it, the more it is the MRA official unofficial movie.
I'd need to rewatch it to confirm, but nope I'm not doing it.
-
Boondock Saints has zero sense of irony because its writer/director genuinely thought he was making a serious statement about the real social value of vigilante justice.
I kind of hate that movie.
-
Boondock Saints- I'm not sure if this is a good or bad movie. It's so over the top that it's almost a parody, except that the director takes himself pretty seriously. It was reasonably entertaining though.
Boondock Saints 2- This was just bad. The female detective wasn't a match for her counterpart in the first film, and some of the humor mixed in was pretty juvenile. I still enjoyed it well enough though.
The Hangover- OK is so Stu. So very Stu. It's more or less a documentary of what would happen if Elfboy, VSM, myself, and OK went to Vegas for a weekend.
Boondock saints is entertaining enough but it's a bad film on a bunch of levels. The second film is uh. Yeah. Somehow much worse.
-
I find Boondock Saints actively repulsive because of what Cid is talking about (there's a documentary called Overnight about the director, who is completely insufferable). The ending montage with the fake interviews was also really gross and gives the impression that the creators believe this shit. The THERE WAS A FIREFIGHT scene was so fucking stupid that it actually made me angry. Not sure if it's necessarily an MRAs movie but it plays to this sense of amorality/nihilism that 15 year old dudes have (it was the favorite movie of a bunch of guys I knew in high school and college, some of whom got tattoos from the film and said latin nonsense from the film like it was a thing to do in social situations). A lot of people grow out of it, some people don't, kind of like with objectivism.
Even as something not to be taken seriously, the action is really terrible.
Cloverfield text for ants
I do think the movie generally does a good job of keeping you questioning a lot of things, like character motives and whether certain people are crazy. John Goodman is delusional and also correct! I didn't know whether there were aliens or monsters specifically, but I did get the feeling that something was going on outside. I think another part of where the marketing failed me here is that one of the trailers does show them outside and with the exploding molotov thing, so that plus the Cloverfield marketing really made me think that there would be a point during the movie that occurred outside the bunker where actual stuff with monsters or some shit was going down. I still think calling this something else and then having the mailbox reveal would be great, but it's kind of too late now. They can still do a stealth release of a movie in this world but I think it would have had the greatest impact here.
-
I remember the action being dudes with black shirts and black trousers and black trenchcoats and black sunglasses shooting their dual black guns in slow motion and missing with every single shot.
The vigilante religious bits were pretty awful and I don't remember the trans stuff being very progressive. To say the least
-
Friend and I saw the Akira at the Alamo Draughthouse. The invitation prior was a bit interesting though. All I can remember was that the movie was gross, insane, and traumatizing. "Would you like to go see Akira?" was pretty weird to hear in this case. We went anyway, and it was great.
The Alamo used LED lights throughout the movie, so all the crazy chaotic 80s-laden scenes had rays that matched it. Remember the red room scene? Imagine a red room theater.
I first saw this film with my mom, and she loved it. Being like, 10 or something and seeing it at home, I didn't pick up on all the nuclear symbolism, etc.
Also, Kaneda is a motherfucking boss.
-
Captain America: Civil War
Apparently this is out earlier in Japan than in America. I find that hilarious.
Feels more like Avengers 3 than a Captain America movie. That said, holy shit I fuckin loved it. Especially hilarious since it and Batman v Superman are playing concurrently in the same theatres here in Japan.
And Civil War is just kicking its ass so very hard.
There are stingers at the end, they are very cool, please don't miss them when you go to this movie.
The female characters in the movie don't get to do a whole lot, so expect a huge shitstorm about that from both sides of the usual sources. In fairness, there are a TON of characters in this movie and not all of them get huge amounts of screentime apart from the main 3 (Cap, Bucky, Tony) that the movie is focused on.
The plot is pretty good, and despite the obvious complaints I can already see about people talking about who is or isn't 'out of character', the main arguments on both sides of the 'civil war' at least seem to make sense without thinking too deeply on it - moreso than standard comic logic for superhero infighting at least!
Anyway, I am pretty hype for the Black Panther movie now! (And Deadpool when that finally gets a Japanese release...)
-
Not that I care about superhero movies, but Marvel has had arguably the most popular actress in the world ready for like 4 years, and they haven't made a Black Widow movie yet because, probably, women
-
The use of Scarlett Johansson in popular media is really strange. She's rarely playing humans nowadays, she's either an alien, a weird god because she can use 100% of her brain, a cyborg, or a phone. People seem to be obsessed with de-humanizing her (and there was that dude that made a robot that looks just like her). I'm not sure why that is.
-
I imagine that's the way she wants it. I am confident that if she announced her intentions to star in a vanilla rom/com that the studios would oblige.
-
welcome scarlett to the plight
-
The use of Scarlett Johansson in popular media is really strange. She's rarely playing humans nowadays, she's either an alien, a weird god because she can use 100% of her brain, a cyborg, or a phone. People seem to be obsessed with de-humanizing her (and there was that dude that made a robot that looks just like her). I'm not sure why that is.
Snake, too.
Jungle Book was a solid remake.
-
Jungle Book was visually very good. I saw it in 3D IMAX by recommendation and the colors seemed slightly washed out, but the effects were impressive and perhaps the best part was animal emoting. It doesn't do anything special in terms of plotting or character beats (Elba makes a very menacing Shere Khan though and Bill Murray is fun as Baloo), but the visuals make it worth a watch.
Weirdly, there is another Jungle Book in the works by Warner Bros with Andy Serkis. No doubt it will be darker and grittier.
-
Civil War was real fuckin good. There's a LOT of characters and moving parts but I never felt like you had a Hawkeye in Avengers situation where a character was being drastically underserved by their role. The new additions really worked out well and overall I'm very pleased to see what the directors do for the next Avengers films now that they're basically in the drivers seat for Marvel.
-
Seriously, Black Panther may be a fresh face for this film, but he's one of the driving forces of the flick. The big showdown at the airport is probably my favourite big Marvel brawl now because they managed to mix action and humour in a high-octane blend. And I think this may have been the best MCU villain yet. I mean, one of the folks I saw it with really didn't like Zemo, and I can see his points. But for me, the stuff that makes Zemo unusual were selling points instead of problems.
-
Civil War: Zemo was interesting but got very little screentime. That actually works because the movie is about making the heroes the villains. Action scenes were absolutely amazing. Watching Captain America fight is so beautiful. He's not doing martial arts or anything, he's just being a guy with better strength and reflexes than anyone else and doing whatever he needs to do at any point in a fight. Car chase scene made me motion sick but it was still very impressive.
Best representation of Spider-Man in a film, and he still gets upstaged by fucking Ant-Man. Actually I'm sorely tempted to make that {size=3000pt} but that would be a spoiler.
-
Civil War: I think I'm officially burnt out on Marvel movies. Despite liking the movie, I can't really express much enthusiasm about it. Some fun parts, Spiderman was used well. Paul Rudd channeled Bobby Newport as Ant-Man. But overall... just... wow. Apathy despite it all.
-
Civil War: The movie claims to be Captain America: Civil War. What the real title should be is Avengers 2.5: Civil War Starring Captain America. Make no mistake, he's the main character and it's mostly his story, but the story feels very ensemble like at times as well since it handles so many character, with Cap's story being the most important.
That said, I feel like in some respects this is what Avengers 2 should have been. I liked Age of Ultron fine, but it was very much just "More of the same" as the first (if even better in some respects!) This very clearly wasn't "more of the same" but still was the Avengers doing stuff, with Thor and Hulk swapped out for Spider-Man and Black Panther.
It's really good regardless. I think the best description was "it's the Antithesis to Batman v Superman." It has to handle way more characters, yet manages to give everyone their fair share, even Spider-Man and Antman who have only 2 scenes managed to be work really well in their roles, and the reasons for why they're fighting actually feel justified. It's not just "I hate this guy, I'm going to beat him up because I'M BATMAN!" vs. "LUTHOR IS BLACK MAILING ME :(." It's a take on Security vs. Freedom, which is more important?
While I do think the movie did a good job not vilifying one side for the sake of glorifying the other, it still feels a little Pro-Cap. It has more of a "Captain America is right, but Iron Man is not wrong" vibe rather than "CHOOSE YOUR SIDE!" It's more of a "Both have good points, and both are clearly good guys, but Captain America is slightly better."
I also appreciate how the climax DIDN'T try to one up the Airport scene, going for more emotional investment rather than "MORE EXPLOSIONS AND DESTRUCTION!" It's you don't see often because so many people think climax = BIGGER AND BETTER THAN EVERYTHING BEFORE! This movie goes more "or we could make it just a more personal, emotional conflict, and the fight is more just a representation of that."
Lastly, I think a big thing this movie had on BvS? We know most of the characters (basically everyone but the villain, Black Panther and this universe's Spider-Man) already, so we didn't have to explain a lot of why or backstory. It's more "oh, Tony WOULD act that way" and what not. Black Widow uncharacteristically siding with Tony? The movie covers that in 2 lines, and the audience immediately knows what they're talking about because yeah, that doesn't sound like Widow! In BvS, we knew like 2 characters (Superman and Lois Lane), so there's a lot of establishing, and we can't really say "Batman WOULD act that way in this universe." This is why Civil War could succeed with 10 characters where BvS didn't with 2. Jumping in with a big super hero vs. super hero brawl really needs established characters; Civil War had the 13 MCU movies to work with (GRANTED: GotG, and both Thor movies are completely meaningless here), BvS had only Man of Steel.
So yeah, great stuff etc.
-
Captain America: WAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRR- Well of course it's good. Black Panther and Spider-Man stand out. The final battle is brutal, amazing, and in a lot of ways is probably the only time the film really digs into the pro-accords argument; these people are TERRIFYING under the right conditions and regular people have no hope against them.
But actually I wanted to talk about the Accords, both because it's that time of the annual cycle and because the movie doesn't expound on it in a very straightforward way.
Okay, so as written, this is what we're told about the Sokovia Accords:
- signed by ~117 nations
- Overseen by 'The UN'
- Grants overseers sole control over how, when, and where to deploy the Avengers
Now the argument Cap gives in-movie is "we don't know what their agendas might be", an oblique allusion to how deeply and highly Hydra had infiltrated the government, SHIELD, etc. Which sounds insane but hey, Cap's been keyed to paranoia pretty hard over the last couple movies, not the most objective evaluation. But it does brush against the fact that, as presented, the whole thing is basically built for abuse. The Avengers could be deployed to destabilize unpopular regimes while creating plausible deniability and letting individual nations was their hands of deploying their own troops. Or the unscrupulous dealings of member states could operate with impunity.
Now, the other argument presented along those lines boils down to government agility; that is, the Avengers need to be able to deploy quickly, and being forced to wait for overseer clearance could be a critical and costly delay. This is valid, but leads to two branch possibilities. Both involve a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Avengers are.
1. All 117 signatory nations have representatives who convene to sign off on Avenger deployment.
I don't think this is what they're actually going for, even though it's the natural reading of the dialog, because it's abysmally stupid. This assumes the Avengers are a non-governmental military force, where operations are planned events based on outside intelligence. While they have done this, since they have to step in for SHIELD now, it completely ignores their function as emergency response to extra-normal threats. So more likely
2. Signatory nations will (or have) formed some smaller selection to act as governing council over the Avengers
For purposes of agility, small groups have to be formed. It also vastly increases the potential for abuse as outlined above. It also gives them the agility to perform much more minute oversight of the team, which might hinder their third function as a global intelligence force, but that's minor.
It's also not all that different from how SHIELD and the World Security Council worked. I mean, by evidence presented in the films, the WSC were basically appointees from several nations: the US, Brittain, China, and India, with 2 americans and 6 total members. One almost assumes that the remaining member was French and Russia just didn't want to get involved so America got an extra rep because THAT would basically be the five members of the UN Security Council plus India... which makes sense. And may even have been the original intent behind the group, but they seem to now suggest that while they were appointed in similar fashion, they were non-public and had low accountability to their parent nations. So, same concept, but without the middle man spy agency and slightly more public.
That seems functional, but I keep remembering that the WSC unanimously voted to nuke Manhattan four years ago, despite assets on the ground having the matter relatively contained and their vote to do so coming some half an hour after the incident began.
of course, there's a third option.
3. One of the previous is true, except actually the Avengers just answer to Everett Ross and he has to go between them and one of the above.
I suspect this is the de facto norm for the MCU going forward honestly, but I also suspect it wasn't the original intent of the Accords.
So independently of any arguments about individual liberty versus collective good or whatever, the Sokovia Accords as presented are just not a very good or effective treaty. The fact that the ink isn't even dry and they make a monumentally abusive decision* suggest this is actually intended to be how the law reads for the audience.
Y'know, I imagine the original Civil War was meant to be some sort of commentary on the PATRIOT Act or other such reactionary law passed in the fear-driven fever nightmares of 9/11. Do I respect the Russos enough to think they have tuned that plot to much more accurately make the statement "we can't let fear prevent us from making rational evaluations of laws"? I dunno. But do I think there are a lot of similarities in these two acts which seem incapable of serving their stated purpose but are AWESOME at opening new opportunities for abuse by the influential and well connected? Definitely.
*I mean, in the modern world an order of "do not attempt to arrest, shoot to kill" for a dangerous terrorist is, while terrible, perhaps ultimately to the good. In a universe where brainwashing is effective, long-lasting, programmable, and public knowledge, and the terrorist involved is a known victim of this brainwashing, this is murder. What, Russia afraid he knows some damning state secret?
-
I burnt out badly on Avengers 2, which was kind of a pointless slog, but Civil War was better ("I was entertained"). It still didn't fully click with me. Part of it is that the disagreement became a lot more personal rather than ideological. It starts out as an ideological clash (with some interesting things built from the previous movies and from what I understand from the comics), but the arguments are pretty poorly articulated from both sides in a handful of scenes and then it's all about vendettas. CK put more thought behind the accords than the movie did, since they're essentially tossed to the wayside. When the big fight comes around, the sides are not drawn because each individual hero has a clearly delineated, character driven reason for fighting on the side that they're fighting on. They literally bring in dudes for no other reason than extra firepower.
Additionally, I just didn't buy that the conflict would result with any permanent or meaningful consequences, in part because the fight has trouble managing tone (it's quippy and ridiculous but they even comment on pulling punches) and because we know Marvel's next slate of movies so we know no one important is going to die. They'll never do this (until maybe the end), but one of these movies might need a Game of Thrones moment to make it seem like there are actual stakes for these conflicts.
The opening action sequence is pretty terrible visually. I do wish they would get a real action choreographer (like, get the dude who did the Raid movies). The airport sequence was done pretty well, but most of the other action sequences were almost completely forgettable.
I guess I'm still waiting for one of these movies to be something other than pretty good. Cap 2 did different things and was good about not sticking to the stock Marvel formula. Black Panther is going to be directed by Ryan Coogler and I hope he does something different. If it's about establishing Wakanda as a place and about the political climate of that nation and the philosophies of a different culture in the context of this weirdass world, that'd be cool as shit. It doesn't need a boring villain or a dumb setpiece fight finale to do something interesting. As for Spiderman, Tom Holland is really good and they'll hopefully skip the origin story but I do hope they'll make something interesting with him.
Also for the love of God just make Cap and Bucky explicitly gay.
-
Why you gotta be like that duckhead.
Two bisexual men can have a platonic bromance without it being sexual.
-
Yo Gref we sucking each other's dicks later? No homo.
-
Chooo chooo.
-
The Nice Guys: Anybody who liked Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, go watch this immediately. It's great. More cartoony than KKBB but very definitely a spiritual successor to it (they're both comedy/noir written and directed by Shane Black, so that's not surprising, but still), with some LA Confidential thrown in around the edges. Plus it's got Russell Crowe fighting Keith David.
Anybody who didn't like Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, watch Kiss Kiss Bang Bang again and reflect on how you reached this sorry state.
-
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/24/civil-war-spider-man-2-and-the-dangers-of-assumed-empathy
Hulk helps me finally put my finger on why I have a waning enthusiasm for the MCU.
-
Most of Phase 2 definitely has a fun-but-disposable vibe and I don't think I've seen it put into words nearly so well. Also explains why Ant-Man tends to be the most fondly discussed phase 2 movie; it took a miracle to get it up and running, but once they had it the foundation was solid enough to stick with people. It's new.
I find myself liking Civil War more than most of phase 2 and I think it's a weird personal quirk. I've been looking at all the Bucky stuff as... that standing up for the little guy they try to paint as Cap's ideological underpinning. He's a fairly regular guy from a working class (at best) background who got tossed into this horrible nightmare scenario where he's lost all agency and has to participate in atrocities. But dealing with him humanely would be inconvenient for the powers that be, so write him off as a willing terrorist, shoot the shit out of him, and try to pretend he never existed. His lack of personal character arc is something I can gloss over because somehow in my mind he's instead he's... the real world has child soldiers and conscripts to corrupt regimes, the Marvel universe has brainwashed super soldiers, but the basic moral quandary is the same.
At least I guess I haven't seen anyone else quite as hooked on that part of the movie as I was.
-
I agree with Hulk on some things and not others. He's right about neither Winter Soldier nor this movie making me give a fuck about Bucky. But Hulk wants every movie to have some massive conflict and massive loss and... you don't always need that. Sometimes a movie that just feels good is perfectly okay.
I agree with him that they need to give villains some more screentime. Zemo worked with little screentime in this particular scenario, but I don't want Thanos to just come out and yell "RAWR I EAT BABIES" and get punched.
-
I don't want that but I also want literally that.
-
I agree with Hulk on some things and not others. He's right about neither Winter Soldier nor this movie making me give a fuck about Bucky. But Hulk wants every movie to have some massive conflict and massive loss and... you don't always need that. Sometimes a movie that just feels good is perfectly okay.
I think he means more that the movies need to start earning their dramatic moments again. That was my takeaway.
-
I don't want that but I also want literally that.
Done. Someone cut me a check.
(http://i.imgur.com/Hq3Rp0e.jpg)
That may be Amadeus Cho instead of Rick Jones but it doesn't really matter.
-
I probably would have cut to a Bendis Avengers Drinking Coffee scene for the last panel.
-
So. X-Men Apocalypse anyone?
I saw it tonight. It was good. Less mind boggling than First Class or Days of Future Past, but that is because it is about as good as those and happened after them.
The movie is okay.
The costuming is amaaaaaaaaaaazing. I love pretty much everyone's outfits except for Psylocke. Mohawk Storm as a teenager. Quicksilver as the same as Quicksilver from Days. Angel as Billy Idol with an 80s post post-punk Bouffant. Literally everything about Nightcrawler. The fact that Jubilee is literally Jubilee (now if only she had lines....).
So good you guys. Expect for the fact that Psylocke is literally Psylocke.
-
It felt like franchise maintenance to me in a way that Days of Future Past did not. There's some really cool moments but... overall it felt like "oh hey I guess we're far enough in the timeline to introduce new Scott Summers and Jean Gray now". It really felt like all the returning cast except Fassbender were just kinda there for a paycheck. They also didn't do a great job of giving the disaster sequences or deaths much emotional weight, although I guess maybe that was a weakness in DoFP and I didn't pay as much attention since it was also a tactical nuclear nostalgia bomb.
Also a lot of the cool moments could have been a lot better with some more attention to pacing and setting them up more early in the movie. So yeah, just felt like everyone just wanted to get this shipped on time rather than making sure it was the best movie they could make from the material.
Damn if they didn't do a credible job of making Apocalypse himself make some semblance of sense in the movies, even if they really didn't give Oscar Isaac much to do.
-
Yeah it completely felt like just another superhero movie to me. The villain was really uninteresting. His posse looked cool at first but as they embraced the dark side they also embraced worse and worse fashion sense.
Fassbender looked absolutely ridiculous with that goofy helmet on. (Probably still less ridiculous than Batman though) Sansa Stark was Sansa Stark. There was the Obligatory Wolverine Cameo.
Sweet dreams sequence was the only interesting part but it came too abruptly to really deliver.
If you like Fassbender you should watch Macbeth.
I also watched the Nice Guys and it was real bad, though I wonder how much of this was because of the movie and how much because of the dub (I normally never watch dubbed movies, but, you know)
It is a buddy cop comedy with Ryan Gosling as Inspector Gadget. The plot is completely inane and the movie is not saved by Gosling's uselessness.
92% on rotten tomatoes holy crap
-
Also, since we're talking Apocalypse, my only memories of him came from the '90s cartoon, so I decided to do some reading on his backstory and a few sagas he's been in through wikipedia. Is his overarching plot even half as stupid as wikipedia makes it sound?
-
Probably more stupid. Apocalypse is the ne plus ultra of supervillains who keep getting new power upgrades and secret backstories pulled out of their asses to stay "threatening" despite getting those same asses kicked by the heroes every time.
-
Oh. Oh dear god.
-
I had the cool experience of going with people that know nothing much about X-Men. Sit for the post credits.
Essex Corp.
What's that?
Torn between "Well you see Mister Sinister is like an actual sentient virus that is attempting to systemically construct itself to the perfect body to infest via Science. It is actually a System rather than a who, but that is pretty recent he is kind of otherwise a weird dude that wants Jean and Cyclops to fuck real bad" and (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/MXUYIkVC6kY/maxresdefault.jpg)Camp Disco Dracula with a voyeur fetish.
-
Yeah Apocalypse has always been pretty terrible. He came out of the X-Factor comics which were pointless in general until Peter David took over.
-
I also watched the Nice Guys and it was real bad, though I wonder how much of this was because of the movie and how much because of the dub (I normally never watch dubbed movies, but, you know)
It is a buddy cop comedy with Ryan Gosling as Inspector Gadget. The plot is completely inane and the movie is not saved by Gosling's uselessness.
92% on rotten tomatoes holy crap
I am fairly sure you would like it more with the original line readings, since the comic timing basically makes the movie. Otherwise I agree, Shane Black can write dialogue exchanges and individual moments but it doesn't hold together in a larger sense and the plot is really dumb. I laughed but forgot about most of it as soon as I left.
I think Shane Black has potential to do something really great but I haven't seen it yet.
-
Yeah it's the last time I watch a dubbed comedy!
I wonder if the plot being dumb is meant to be a throwback to 80's and 90's buddy cop comedies?
That doesn't really make it good though. The stupidity of the plot is vastly exaggerated even compared to those (Complete coincidences carry the plot constantly, the supposedly badass professional killer with a gun can't handle two 12 years old unharmed girls, there's that homeless mc guffin girl who appears in every scene just to run away and who always wears an impeccable dress and no shoes, etc etc)
Also Kim Basinger has two scenes in this movie and she acts like she's in a srs politics movie and her last scene is completely inappropriate.
-
I need to watch Kiss Kiss Bang Bang again.
-
Yeah it's the last time I watch a dubbed comedy!
I wonder if the plot being dumb is meant to be a throwback to 80's and 90's buddy cop comedies?
That doesn't really make it good though. The stupidity of the plot is vastly exaggerated even compared to those (Complete coincidences carry the plot constantly, the supposedly badass professional killer with a gun can't handle two 12 years old unharmed girls, there's that homeless mc guffin girl who appears in every scene just to run away and who always wears an impeccable dress and no shoes, etc etc)
Also Kim Basinger has two scenes in this movie and she acts like she's in a srs politics movie and her last scene is completely inappropriate.
there's a shaggydog quality to the plot and it reminded me of the Big Lebowski occasionally except the meandering nature of that movie was the point. I don't think that's what they were going for in the Nice Guys.
I liked Kiss Kiss Bang Bang well enough but haven't seen it in a while.
-
Yeah Apocalypse has always been pretty terrible. He came out of the X-Factor comics which were pointless in general until Peter David took over.
He's an outgrowth of making Magneto an actual character. They introduced Apocalypse because they needed someone who didn't really have an ethos or any goal besides to destroy things. They didn't really think out his powers or anything, so they just said he had the power of "molecule manipulation" which is basically like wishing for infinite wishes. And his backstory is really dumb and he's not interesting in any way.
On the other hand when I was eight I saw the cartoon and his weird fucked up mouth and said to myself "Well he's got a sweet letter A belt buckle and a weird mouth so I guess his name must be Apoco Lips."
-
Apoco Lips
Get your DC bullshit out of here.
But yeah otherwise you are spot on. Movie Apocalypse is pretty true to the source material. Terrible boring nothing character who's backstory and powers change drastically as the story needs it.
-
He's an outgrowth of making Magneto an actual character. They introduced Apocalypse because they needed someone who didn't really have an ethos or any goal besides to destroy things. They didn't really think out his powers or anything, so they just said he had the power of "molecule manipulation" which is basically like wishing for infinite wishes. And his backstory is really dumb and he's not interesting in any way.
It was made worse because he was introduced right when Louise Simonson took over writing the book after the first guy sucked so bad he couldn't finish a single story arc, and he'd been planing to reveal that X-Factor's big mysterious archnemesis was....The Owl (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owl_%28Marvel_Comics%29). Simonson decided that comics' most villainous accountant would not make for a compelling villain but at that point she had something like nineteen seconds to come up with something better.
-
I just saw Frederick Wiseman's The Hospital (1970, 35mm) at the Marchesa. It's a docufilm and Wiseman's cinematography's recognized for taking slow looks at institutions. In this case, he captures scenes, people, things at Met Hospital in New York. The film felt like a slow burn of nonstop melodrama, which is about right for hospital doctor and patient interactions, and a very nervewrecking moment of older hospital standards (re: no gloves for bleeding victims, surgery without knowing results first, tying almost all patients in chairs, equipment that doesn't alleviate any physical strain a patient might have). Now, I love me some melodrama and I love being melodramatic, but Wiseman captures one scene of a younger patient that is kinda the best melodrama my eye's have recently come across. And it burns for about 5 minutes or more, of a real flesh and life hipster.
-
Warcraft: Wasn't really interested in this but the wife wanted to see it. Turned out to be quite a bit better than I expected. It's videogamey without being cheesy - by that I mean people who enjoy videogames will appreciate it. There are subtle nods to the Warcraft game but they didn't just shoehorn in stuff. Everything is very deliberate and the world feels really fleshed out. Closest movie I could compare it to is Avatar, in terms of story quality and special effects. Recommend seeing it in the theater because the special effects are fantastic. Magic looks fucking amazing.
Didn't like the young magician at first but I grew to like him. Worst character was the halfbreed, she fails completely at acting.
and of course the ending resolves nothing because we gotta have sequels
-
Wow, you weren't kidding. I just read a summary and they didn't even resolve as much as the actual canon ending of Warcraft 1.
-
I also saw Warcraft this last week, but I had more or less the opposite reaction: agonizingly boring movie with terrible action and uninteresting characters.
-
Yeah I've been reading reviews online and they're all over the place. One guy said it was as bad as the Dungeons and Dragons movie. But there's just as many people that love it as hate it. I'm not sure what's causing such bipolar responses. Almost like they're showing different versions of the film in different theaters.
-
Chris Metzen's self-insert character is now both Jesus AND Moses so that's something.
-
Chris Metzen's self-insert character is now both Jesus AND Moses so that's something.
Speaking of that...
Why the fuck did she throw the knife down on the shore like a billion feet from her when she went to put Thrall in the water? That was like, the stupidest thing I've ever seen. Like, she deserved to get murdered with that knife for that idiocy.
-
So, Austin Film Society has an.. Austin Asian American Foreign Film Society series going on and I just saw Piccadilly by Arnold Bennett. It's a silent film from Britain, repaired/conserved. First silent film ever, music from a live DJ. I thought the film was okay. I was incredibly intrigued by how ballsy Shosho (Anna May Wong) was in terms of entitlement, which probably predates (?) the dragon lady stereotype in film. It's pretty awesome that I popped my silent-film virginity with a movie starring the first Chinese American actress though.
My friend and I went to see it because we're into surrealist film. The clothing and lights were pretty insane, man, and there were a few head-on shots of disembodied hands recording everyday human actions that was very uncomfortable to look at on 35mm. I didn't quite understand the repair process that the AFS mentioned prior to showing, but the scenes are pretty much tinted with a dark reddish/orange. Some scenes weren't salvageable in the restoration process, so they put in film from another reel (??????) and at times the room switched from the burning orange to an intense blue.
Lots of people were laughing at the cinematic/acting, I think because of how uncomfortable or crude they felt about old film. Apparently these folks have never been to a play in their entire lives. A pity.
-
Warcraft: I'll put my tent in the enjoyed it camp. Definitely helped by franchise familiarity though.
-
The Social Network: I don't know why I rented this one since there are few things I could give less of a fuck about than social media. Was actually good, which I guess shouldn't be a surprise since Fincher's actually an adept storyteller for someone coming out of a music video background. Not really why I'm posting about it though. Midway through the movie the guy behind Napster enters the story. Upon introduction I go, "Oh, that's a familiar name. Probably a coincidence though, since it's also not an unusual one." Keep watching movie. Then later on when this dude's in a police station he's got an inhaler out and he's going on about his allergies and hold the phone, Janine. Wiki search is go after movie: born in northern Virginia around the same time as me, transferred midway through high school and got in trouble with the FBI for hacking...holy shit, I went to elementary school with this guy.
So this was an unexpectedly surreal viewing experience.
-
Is pulling out an inhaler and complaining about allergies such a rare thing among people in Virginia that it triggers elementary school memories?
-
It is more that the movie has the dude's real name in it innit?
-
Man of Steel: caught this on tv. Not too bad actually. I liked it more than Superman Returns. Thought Cavill did a fine job portraying the character. Kevin Costner death scene is all kinds of retarded, but rest of the movie seemed pretty well thought out. Which makes BvS stand out even more as being bad, because Snyder has already shown that he can create a coherent film about Superman.
-
It is more that the movie has the dude's real name in it innit?
Yeah, that + the above = escalation from haha funny coincidence to oh wow, this is what happened to him? Neither in a vacuum would've prompted me to actually look this up and confirm it afterward (during which process it became apparent that non-movie details were also personally familiar).
-
Swiss Army Man - this is a movie with punchable Paul Dano about to kill himself before he sees Daniel Radcliffe who is a farting corpse and it becomes a magical realism thing where Dano goes on an adventure with Radcliffe, teaching him things about boobs, boners, and masturbation. It is unlike anything else I've ever seen and yet I cannot figure out if the movie is good or not.
-
Inside Out: Finally got around to seeing it and yeah, it was good. I wouldn't say it was OMG AMAZING, as it was about what I expected from a quality Pixar film, but that's by no means a bad thing...in fact, if anything "typical Pixar film" is a good thing seeing as their mediocrities (let alone their failures) are the outliers here.
-
Ghostbusters 2016-
From memory, probably better than Ghostbusters II anyway?
There's a pile of small issues in the movie, mostly flaws in timing, extraneous and distracting jokes, characters never quite coalescing. Like, it could have been great but needed another pass each on the script and in the editing room.
But damned if Thor doesn't make a great big dumb blonde. Holtzmann is also consistently awesome. And openly hitting on the other Ghostbusters. Thumbs up.
Vote for the best cameo: Sigourney Weaver.
-
Inside Out: Finally got around to seeing it and yeah, it was good. I wouldn't say it was OMG AMAZING, as it was about what I expected from a quality Pixar film, but that's by no means a bad thing...in fact, if anything "typical Pixar film" is a good thing seeing as their mediocrities (let alone their failures) are the outliers here.
I mostly enjoyed moments during the abstract thought segments.
-
Ghostbusters-
Was really good. I enjoyed it. CK's right in that there's some legit criticisms you can level at the movie, but they honestly didn't take away from my enjoyment of it. Kevin and Holtzman both make the movie. Everyone's cameo was great except Dan Akroyd's (a little too cutesy). The bust of Harold Ramis was a great Easter Egg.
Movie had a great sense of comedic timing in its dialogue in general. That's usually where the movie shined in its comedy, rather than the original's great one-liners and quotables.
-
I mostly agree with Sopko - not the same style of humor as the original ("that would have worked if you hadn't stopped me" wouldn't fit in this script), but that's a difference, not a flaw. Feig & co. nail the tone they're going for, and Hemsworth and McKinnon being awesome sure doesn't hurt.
-
I really liked the 2016 Ghostbusters. I am, however, the reverse of CK on this one... Holtzmann / McKinnon was the weakest character by a lot for me, and Sigourney Weaver's cameo was neither funny nor particularly fitting. Wiig & Hemsworth were the stars. Also, "better than GB2" is damning with faint praise, since GB2 was not actually good, and GB2016 is a lot better than that.
Also, looking at the audience reviews fills me with despair, as the crowd that really, really hates the movie is in full force. I guess I'll grant that *one* of the jokes they complain about wasn't very good, but sheesh. (The, uh, targeting of the Ghostbusters in the final confrontation. Hur hur I get it thx, except it doesn't make any particular sense because the villain isn't a chauvinist and is also a ghost, which makes it less funny. Flip side, compare it to Abby reading the comments to the YouTube video... that both made perfect sense "in setting", was funny, and was a nice shot across the bow at the haters.)
-
Just got out of it now. I am with Sopko as well.
I think your tiny text would have happened even with a male cast Snowfire, because it was a PG summer movie and that is what happens.
I am all about Holzman and Kevin. It helpsa bit that they both easily get the best action sequences, but the characters in general do it for me. The toast at the end by Holzman is those feels for all those introverts.
Leslie Jones was enjoyable but I don't know how strong the stereotype plays out? Patricia's opening sequence is pretty well done and anchors her really personably from the outset in my opinion.
I dug that the villain was the same personality type as internet edgelords without being about them.
-
Fuck you guys for making me briefly consider seeing the new Ghostbusters.
Toy Story 3: Did not care for it. This movie is dark as fuck. Like I would not take small children to see this because the incinerator scene would probably give them nightmares for weeks. And even though there's a "happy" ending, it's bittersweet because now you know what's going to happen the next time a child grows up.
-
Fuck you guys for making me briefly consider seeing the new Ghostbusters.
Toy Story 3: Did not care for it. This movie is dark as fuck. Like I would not take small children to see this because the incinerator scene would probably give them nightmares for weeks. And even though there's a "happy" ending, it's bittersweet because now you know what's going to happen the next time a child grows up.
What if that's because it's aimed at the people who were small children when Toy Story 1 came out 13 years before that?
-
How bad is it on a scale of 1 to Watership Down?
-
Have to get back to you on that, it's been a *long* time since I've seen Watership Down.
-
Just google it and know that it's worse than it looks. I'm not sure I could live with the guilt of having induced someone to actually WATCH Watership Down.
-
I watched Watership Down after reading the book for the Japanese/English book club I was going to a couple years ago. As an adult who likes hallucinogens and cartoons it was great. As a kid wtf.
-
Henry and the Search for Happiness
This movie struck a chord with me.
Maybe living I n the now, but this feels like Simon Pegg's best movie, or at the very least my favorite film from him.
Good movie. Good message. Hit me right in the feels.
I recommend it. Two Scars up!
-
Saw Ghostbusters myself, and I have to say...what the hell is wrong with Sony's marketing department? They basically put all the worst jokes of the movie in the trailer, or alternatively, the ones that didn't suck were ones that only work in context which is to say they would seem like forced humor otherwise. Because seriously, there's plenty of good stuff you could have shown, stuff that didn't even need context, in the trailer that would have worked.
So yeah, I enjoyed it overall, think the last time a movie looked absolutely awful in a trailer but was way better in practice that I saw was Baseketball, though in Baseketball's defense, I don't think it's possible to make that movie look good in a trailer, given it was made specifically to be a movie about the dumbest idea you can think of.
I won't say it's a perfect movie, or anything like that, but watching it did make me realize "This is exactly what a reboot should be", at least in the sense of the direction the movie took. Now yes, they had a bunch of callbacks to the original, but that's very much a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario, so whatever, but overall, it recognized the basic premise of the original movie, but tried to be unique and original, not simply "Same movie but gender swapped lol." Considering that, it really begs the question why the trailer further tried to evoke imagery of the original movie so much; showing that the initial ghost encounter appeared in what looked like a library was NOT a wise idea in the slightest, since it basically says "we're trying our hardest to evoke nostalgia damn it!", when most of the movie doesn't do that. If you're going to do a "reboot" instead of a "remake", you need to bother to actually change things up a lot to justify you're re-establishing a setting, new rules, etc., such that you can do your own thing with the same basic premise, which this movie does for the most part.
So overall, it was fun. Not sure I have any intention on seeing it again, but I don't regret the time I spent on it; it's a lot like Men in Black 3 in that regard.
-
If they didn't do the nods to the original in the trailers then that also would have been a garbage fire in the comments section. Also you don't use your best jokes on the stuff that is going to be seen by everyone and run into the ground.
Trailers is where good jokes die for your sins.
-
There's a difference between "not using your best material" and "using literally your worst material that fails miserably out of context, and only sort of works in context." Ghostbusters' Trailers are definitely in the latter camp.
And that's literally what I meant about "damned if you do, damned if you don't" as far as nods and cameos to the original.
-
So I'm still laid up, and some people are entertained by telling me to do things, so hey. A list of movies I have about the house that I haven't watched, if people want to give me a viewing order (or just stand agog going "HOW HAVEN'T YOU WATCHED THAT", either way.)
Alien
Aliens
Alien 3 (look it was a set)
Fargo
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Inception
John Wick
LA Confidential
Lost in Translation
The Road Warrior
Mad Max: Beyond Thunder Dome
Police Academy
Police Academy 2
Police Academy 3 (another set)
-
LA Confidential and Inception are two of my all time favorite films, watch them first.
-
Fargo
Alien
Aliens
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
The Road Warrior
LA Confidential
Inception
Lost in Translation
Police Academies
John Wick
Mad Max: Beyond the Thunderdome
Alien 3
-
Fargo
Alien
Aliens
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
The Road Warrior
LA Confidential
Inception
Lost in Translation
Police Academies
John Wick
Mad Max: Beyond the Thunderdome
Alien 3
-
Yes:
Lost in translation
Inception
Alien
John Wick
Okay:
Fargo
LA confidential
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
What are you doing mate:
Police Academy
-
What are you doing mate:
Police Academy
Prepping for 2 Lava 2 Lantula, obviously.
-
LA Confidential and Inception are two of my all time favorite films, watch them first.
-
Either skip Alien 3 or toss it in the middle of the pack somewhere where the taste will be quickly washed out. It might make a good leadin to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Lost in Translation.
-
Set up 2 TVs and watch Alien 3 and Fear and Loathing simultaneously.
-
Trip Report 1: Fargo-
THis reminds me a lot of another Coen's film, True Grit. The way they shoot the roads and the snowfields has a lot in common with those lonely meetings on the wastes between Jeff Bridges and the bandits. And I know that's backwards, but like... in True Grit it gave it that western feel which made sense. In Fargo it's far more interesting because it gives it that same Western feel to me, except it's snow. But it goes so well with the detective story about career criminals and a greedy dipshit in over his head trying to make land deals.
The ultra violence works for what it is, in that it feels out of place next to the western aesthetic and that's sorta the point. Setting up that contrast is well handled in general, especially with all the small details stuff they work in. Margie isn't some hard boiled detective, she's a pretty sharp lady who keeps town safe then goes home and talks about her husband's attempts to design a stamp.
I've only seen four Coen films now, this probably places #2 behind Lebowski? But really it's a hard call and it's a sort of movie I don't watch a lot so I don't have quite the same tools for comparative analysis. But it's was pretty engaging and did a great job of presenting itself and letting you figure out what was going on on your own.
-
Fair number of classic westerns feature snow - McCabe and Mrs. Miller most prominently.
-
Trip Report 2: Inception-
Man I don't watch nearly enough movies with Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
The arrangement of the final sequence once the fall from the bridge starts strikes me as peak Nolan. A glimpse into his truest mind, his id unchained.
We're unsurprised that Nolan's unchained id is still rigidly structured with immaculate timing.
But yeah, it's hard to say too much because it's one of those technically flawless films that says something but in a very clinical way? But seeing it in action and the ideas he brings together to do it are just enthralling on the screen functioning in his perfect Nolan clockwork.
-
Man I don't watch nearly enough movies with Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
Watch Looper.
Oh yeah, I watched Looper. It was very good.
-
It's like I say things for a reason.
-
Trip Report 3: Alien-
I don't do horror normally, so I'm definitely watching this as a bit of an outsider. Still, they do all sorts of cool stuff. The opening sequence lacking any true protagonist is great, especially for a horror flick. I'm told that Sigorney Weaver was the least famous person in it in fact. It's got an interesting progression because it's actually pretty intelligent except for a) the parts that are deliberate sabotage so y'know they make sense and b) cat, but hey, most people are idiots about cats. The middle of the movie has to be kinda intellectual about it since it's 95% tension, and it kinda works.
But holy shit Ridley Scott rocks that nightmare lighting during the self destruct sequence. It's the sort of thing that puts you on edge when NOTHING happens. Some Silent Hill: Shattered Memories stuff. Heck, during the whole sequence the alien doesn't actually notice or stalk Ripley at all, it just... sniffs at the cat a bit. But super effective.
Not really my street but hey, clearly good at what it's doing.
-
John Wick
-
Suicide Squad: not great, but decent. There's really no emotional investment at all for the first 2/3 of the movie, but the last third is pretty strong. Will Smith did a good job and so did Jay Hernandez.
-
Trip Report 4: Lost in Translation-
I love the opening. It sells the premise too well: human life is a series of rituals, and once you leave your comfort zone it's just a pile of contradictory nonsense that happens without meaningful pattern or context. Oh I guess we bow now, okay I need this message in an envelope, oh yes I am a giant in the land of the Lilliputians I cannot shower here.
And setting all that up makes the unlikely main plot make sense. Two lost souls living in a fish bowl, y'know? And for both of them that lack of context but continuation of ritual puts in question their own native rituals, so they anchor to each other. And together they make their own code of conduct to reassemble themselves in a way that worked in their new location. They've added a little piece of japan and each other to themselves.
Basically its an exercise in taking apart the basics of human interaction and blowing them up a bit so we can see how they fit together. Very cool.
-
Lost in Translation very much holds up and is in this tradition of Sophia Coppola and Spike Jonze basically directing movies at each other in terms of their relationship (Her is the next one). The one thing that makes me cringe is the "lip my stocking" scene.
-
Suicide Squad: Ash wanted to see it, so we saw it. There was a good movie in here somewhere, but it didn't make it out. Editing and pacing are an absolute mess. There is some good dialogue. Meh.
-
Yeah second DC movie in a row where editing is a major problem. Not as big a clusterfuck as BvS, but still a problem.
-
If your plan is to stop an Evil Superman, why are your two main people a guy with a gun and a 120-pound girl with a baseball bat?
-
Don't forget the guy who just throws boomerangs.
-
Just boomerangs? Man, I knew they were going to cut out the best part of the comics. (http://siskoid.blogspot.com/2011/04/task-force-x-pie-files.html)
-
Don't forget the guy who just throws boomerangs.
People thought Ant-Man was a dumb name and then DC was like "yo check out this guy: CAPTAIN BOOMERANG."
-
I mean I'm perfectly fine with a guy who just throws boomerangs, if he actually threw boomerangs. He does almost entirely nothing in the movie. And he's not the only one.
Deadshot: main character, good backstory, good acting, actually does something
Harley Quinn: main character, so-so backstory, decent acting*, actually does something
Diablo: minor character, good backstory, good acting, actually does something
Captain Boomerang: couldn't understand anything he said, does nothing
Killer Croc: couldn't understand anything he said, does nothing
Katana: couldn't understand anything she said, does nothing
Slipknot: Is Slipknot
*Margot Robbie has been largely praised for her portrayal, but she's pretty much copying Arleen Sorkin's version note-for-note. She doesn't bring anything new to the character other than looking good in hot pants. Not that that's a bad thing!
-
I have to ask whether Slipknot serves basically the same purpose here as in the comic. (Get his arm blown off because Captain Boomerang needed a guinea pig, and because John Ostrander hated Firestorm villains or something.)
-
See how tiny this text font is? It's still bigger than Slipknot's role in the movie. And it's not his arm that gets blown off!
-
Deadpool- It was fun. I find the character to largely be insufferable (I hate fourth wall breaking) but it was still amusing. Colossus did a fantastic job playing the straight man in the film, that I was not expecting.
-
Inam the literal human embodiment of Joy.
The only emotion I can feel is self loathing.
-
Trip Report 5- John Wick
Man the intro here is fantastic. Everything being so stripped down. The house set is shot simply, almost no dialog, just... watching Keanu sell the shit outta that barely functioning detachment from humanity. And then another 15 minutes of him inching his way back to life because this puppy will not let him just lie there and die.
What really makes the movie is once the action starts, it actually retains a lot of these elements. The set pieces are flashy with tons of judo flips and shit, but in a very minimalistic way. We have exactly enough information to appreciate exactly how devastatingly deadly Keanu is, and that there's really very little the mafia can do to keep him from killing them all.
The attention played to the gunplay is pretty great. I'll admit this is something I saw commented on when I was reading up on the movie later but damn. Put them down, headshot to be sure. Oh he's under cover, hit his foot to get him to jump, then headshot. Very nice.
-
Kubo and the Two Strings: Fucking great.
-
Kubo and the Two Strings: Fucking great.
-
Watched Terminator: Genisys while at the elder sibling's place over the weekend. This movie is continuity climbing up its own anus.
-
Terminator: Genisys is a Chuck Tingle novella but without the charm.
-
flight movies back to the US:
The Boss: average comedy, some good lines (generally the raging feminist ones)
Keanu: average stupidity
Kung Fu Panda 3: meh, almost every comedic joke fell short of its punchline, female twirling Panda was p cool tho
-
I saw a bunch of Wes Anderson movies. I think they get way better the second time you see them, as you stop caring about plot
Life Aquatic is still the best
-
I'd actually put Life Aquatic near the bottom of the pile. Not that this means it's bad (I don't think he's made a genuinely bad movie, although there's definitely a few that I'm markedly less fond of than the others.)
Grand Budapest Hotel > Royal Tenenbaums > everything else, for me.
-
Life Aquatic is definitely his least focused movie, I believe it's a positive. I care about a small new neat different thing about it every time.
Also there are fight scenes
-
One of my favorite things is that the interns have to share a gun.
I've never gotten a good handle on the Darjeeling Limited outside of the scene where one of them says "if we weren't brothers, were we friends in real life." I also have a slight distaste for Rushmore because I can't stand Jason Schwartzman.
Grand Budapest Hotel > Royal Tenenbaums > Moonrise Kingdom > Life Aquatic > Fantastic Mr. Fox > Bottle Rocket (?) > Rushmore > Darjeeling Limited
I think? Grand Budapest sits better in my memory than it did coming out of the theater, funnily enough.
-
Jungle Book: This movie is far better than it has any right to be. I've not heard much about Disney's other "Live Action adaptations of animated classics" they seem to be spending all their time on lately, but if they're all as good as this, I may want to give them a try. Assuming they don't have more Bill Murray and Christopher Walken *cringe* singing....
Ghostbusters 2016: Another pleasant surprise. I actually really fucking love this movie. I recognize objectively that there are problems and some plot holes, but the movie is wonderful and energetic in the moment in a way I hadn't really felt since Avengers. Faaaar outstrips the original GB to me, especially having just recently rewatched that and cringing at all its eighties-ness. Yeah, I said it. Fight me.
Anyway, I would really like to see a sequel if only because the cast and chemistry was amazing. Hell, I'd be happy with just another "Saturday morning cartoon" version. Fun stuff all around, but apparently it didn't do so hot in the US, so I guess that's not happening?
-
Becoming Miles Davis - 3/5.So, Don Cheadle made a movie. It was okay, but it ended way too quickly and without any clear reasons for the final scenes. I enjoyed the scenes with his wife the most, and appreciated a different sort of play on infidelity that you generally don't catch in FFBP. Otherwise, it would have been a 2/5. Think he got Miles's voice pretty correct and that was impressive.
-
I saw two very disappointing high profile movies: Shame and Broken Embraces
Broken Embraces was my first Almodovar. It is like nu-Woody Allen without any interesting dialogue. Is the appeal only in exotic Spanish locales/women/interior architectures? Plot and cinematography were mundane. I am not particularly impressed by the mise en abime.
This movie also really doesn't believe in Show don't Tell. Maybe it's more interested in showing how people tell stories than the stories themselves.
Shame is a movie about how Michael Fassbender has SUCH A HOT BOD everybody wants to have sex with him all the time BUT he can't have meaningful relationships because he watches too much porn. (Plus a hinted traumatic childhood) His sister is a wreck and hints at commiting suicide, and he blows her off, so she tries to commit suicide. The end.
The character is not interesting! So he pretty much just thinks about sex 24/7 and is annoyed at her sister because she gets in her life and he can't fuck her. The movie doesn't give him a voice, but it likes to make the music not fit the context of a scene, to create a dissonance, because the character is dissonant or something. This doesn't work very well. You also get scenes like Carey Mulligan singing all of New York New York for 5 minutes. Or Fassbender going for a 5 minutes jog.
Hints of sexual tension between family members are the only good part of the whole thing. This movie is like *Grefter/Zenny/insert random DLer* 's life in that way
-
Broken Embraces is incredibly melodramatic in a way that Almodovar usually isn't, at least not so explicitly. Although, thinking back on it, I don't remember very much about Almodovar's other movies. I saw them a long time ago and remember liking Talk to Her, All About My Mother, Bad Education, and Volver, but again, I only have vague recollections of them and don't have very many specific comments about them. Maybe that means I should revisit them but maybe it means none of them left a very strong impression on me.
Steve McQueen is somebody who I appreciate more on paper than in practice. His direction is always cold and austere and he specializes in protracted portrayals of misery/suffering but in an detached way that makes it so that I end up not actually caring. He is a very good director technically but has not done anything that completely works for me.
I've seen some things lately.
Don't Think Twice: Reinforces my belief that improv is a weird cult. I really like Gillian Jacobs and think she should be in everything.
Hell or High Water: Jeff Bridges is a national treasure. This isn't the first time he's played a mumbly, fart voiced sheriff before, but who cares because he's pretty great in the role. The movie itself doesn't actually contain much action, building relationships between characters by showing them shooting the shit. Wherever they are in Texas also seems kind of horrible and shows what happens when literally everybody has a gun. It also has a Big Short-esque commentary on banks, which I wasn't quite expecting. Worth watching. I think it's good but not as good as the universal acclaim it has gotten.
Lo and Behold, Reveries of the Connected World: I will watch anything by Werner Herzog and I was really excited when he was doing a documentary on the internet and technology. However, it is really diffuse and is broken up into small vignettes that don't really do their subject matter much justice, which makes me feel like this should have been like a TV miniseries rather than trying to cram everything into one doc. It covers some interesting topics, like robot soccer, self driving cars, variations of sunspots resulting into disasters on earth, Mars colonies, and artificial intelligence/consciousness, as well as the dark side of things like internet addiction/harassing assholes online, but it doesn't have time to go into any of these topics in very much depth. As such, it serves as a bit of a survey with shallow coverage of interesting subjects.
I thought he would spend more time with how shitty people can be to each other on the internet. That segment involves a family who have lost a child in a bad accident and the pictures of the kid's gruesome death were posted online, with some people harassing them. It's probably a fine story to illustrate things, but it's framed really strangely, taking place in their house before a wake or something, so the family is dressed in all black but there is a spread with croissants and fruit around the house while Herzog films the sad family silently staring into the distance for long shots with a nice food spread on the table. It is really strange and makes me wonder whether this was the only way that he could get them to approve getting footage of them.
Herzog specializes in humanity's relationship with nature and the sort of inexorable struggle we have with forces beyond our power, but he describes himself as a luddite and doesn't have the same insights when it comes to our relationship with technology. He has thinly veiled contempt for some of these things but the movie doesn't really have a clear thesis. Again, I think if he had more time with these subjects and it was more of a miniseries, this could be really good. As is, it's worth watching but still very uneven.
-
Watched John Wick.
Three things I'm ordinarily not thrilled about in movies:
-REVENGE
-No-holds-barred, adrenaline-fueled thrill rides
-Keanu Reeves
But the DL said it was worth watching so I thought I'd give it a shot.
Fortunately DL is usually right about these things.
-
John Wick 2 is legitimately one of my most anticipated movies next year.
-
Man Gourry I really cannot contribute much to the conversation. Except that I absolutely loved Herzog's crazy ridiculous Bad Lieutenant.
My girlfriend is a big movie buff so I'm watching one movie per day right now, but it's mostly obscure euro stuff. I've seen some really amazing movies but there wouldn't be much point talking about them?
I can talk about We Need To Talk About Kevin. Its symbolism is so unsubtle that it would probably be the best introduction to film studies for 12 years olds? The moral of the movie is very dubious (some people are just born evil and you can't do shit about it) but as someone who's favourite Harry Potter character is Drago Malefoy, I had a really good time! Yay!
-
I don't know if you can watch Shame this late and be surprised at anything. I'm also not sure how Euro audiences would be wowed by anything. But in the US, full frontal of a male with a very gifted fleshy penis was a treat that's been traditionally couched in stupid male jokes. I admit, the movie sucks, but I was more angry that the only person he couldn't get it up with was a black wummun. I'm a psycho, I get it.
-
American Hustle: Lived up to the reviews. Really funny and engaging, with great performances all around (easily the best work I've ever seen Jeremy Renner do, and Christian Bale is a fucking chameleon).
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kknXBbnppzA
this is one of my favorite scenes in Bad Lieutenant
-
Yeah that's when the entire theater lost it
I've now seen Almodovar's Time me Up tie me down
It was more entertaining than Broken Embraces, but : this might be the most morally bankrupt movie I've ever witnessed
-
Here is the plot.
Dude walks out of an asylum, stalks a girl, breaks inside her house and punches her. She blacks out and wakes up tied down and gagged. Dude says he will not let her go until she falls in love with him. Eventually she falls in love with him. They ride into the sunset, happy ending.
-
Almodovar has a lot of plots with questionable moral values, check out Talk to Her.
-
Jesus
I recently saw another movie with similarly disturbing implications (Verhoeven's Elle) but there was such a massive difference in how tastefully this was handled
-
It's rare that Verhoeven is more tasteful/sensitive than somebody.
-
American Hustle: Lived up to the reviews. Really funny and engaging, with great performances all around (easily the best work I've ever seen Jeremy Renner do, and Christian Bale is a fucking chameleon).
What about Jennifer Lawrence? I've been loving her in films other than Hunger Games. I felt like her in AH was like Amy Adams in the Fighter (which was also really good and uncharacteristic!)
-
Erased: Technically this is probably more fitting for the anime topic, but it's a live-action movie, so whatever. I imagine Sopko's the only one who would care, but for those into Japanese movies, this was pretty good, actually. Watched it on the flight back from DLCon (airlines & their international movie catalog). Somewhat smarter than your average thriller, although there's still a few plot elements that they pull a fast one on if you bother to think too deeply about it. Still, good times.
The Cabin in the Woods: WELCOME TO 2012, indeed. It was really good! This was up my alley, I liked it. I'm not even really a horror movie fan either, you just need to be vaguely familiar with the conventions of the genre to enjoy it.
Also, I really want someone to make some kind of Corpse Party-esque RPGMaker JHorror game w/ the Kyoto scenario. Frog for the win! This movie also had a real "Kronk, why do we even have that lever" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw2B9knw58U) moment in it. You know which one.
So yeah. It was an interesting concept, and ... well, yeah. That's about it. I watched the whole thing, curious to see how it would end, but there was never really any suspense. Or horror, for that matter. I had no idea what the "twist" of the movie was (other than that it had a twist), but it was not subtle.
Eh, I liked the movie so I might be biased, but I don't agree? The fact that scientists are monitoring & sort of controlling the events isn't the twist, that's setup from the very start. The twist is WHY the scientists are doing this, and I thought that was subtle enough.
I think the movie would have been better if it had ended about five seconds earlier.
I liked the ending and prefer it with the final 5 seconds myself.
The movie needed to confirm that the eldritch horror threat from ancient gods placated & sealed by real-life horror film scenarios was real. If it wasn't real, then viewers will assume that the scientists were just crazed cultists who got shut down, yay, happy ending, you can feel good that everybody in the other international scenarios escaped and "won". So... it makes it a better horror film within its own universe where there's a completely screwed up moral choice.
It's also better at the meta-level. The ancient gods are the audience. If they don't have their tastes appeased, they don't watch the movie, which stops more movies like that from ever existing - this is the equivalent to destroying the world. So... you gotta follow the ritual or else you literally won't exist and won't get funding. No letting too many people live! And you gotta kill 'em in the right order! If the last 5 minutes are cut off, then maybe the audience will be happy that the ending went off script and not end the world, which is entirely too cheerful. You can still have a note of hope in that maybe they'll just rampage through the countryside a bit, but there's gonna be consequences, and you won't like them.
-
I liked the ending and prefer it with the final 5 seconds myself.
The movie needed to confirm that the eldritch horror threat from ancient gods placated & sealed by real-life horror film scenarios was real. If it wasn't real, then viewers will assume that the scientists were just crazed cultists who got shut down, yay, happy ending, you can feel good that everybody in the other international scenarios escaped and "won". So... it makes it a better horror film within its own universe where there's a completely screwed up moral choice.
It's also better at the meta-level. The ancient gods are the audience. If they don't have their tastes appeased, they don't watch the movie, which stops more movies like that from ever existing - this is the equivalent to destroying the world. So... you gotta follow the ritual or else you literally won't exist and won't get funding. No letting too many people live! And you gotta kill 'em in the right order! If the last 5 minutes are cut off, then maybe the audience will be happy that the ending went off script and not end the world, which is entirely too cheerful. You can still have a note of hope in that maybe they'll just rampage through the countryside a bit, but there's gonna be consequences, and you won't like them.
Yeah, but if you're approaching "ritualism in horror films" as a thing, you don't know that the audience likes it until after you're done. All you get are test audience results and pre-release reviews. That's why I think it works better if you cut it at exactly five seconds early, because the cabin shakes and you don't know exactly what's going to happen, just an overwhelming sense of foreboding.
-
And your faith in the existence of Azathoth has to be absolute, because to be wrong means the end of your reality.
-
I mean, by definition the concept of ritualism is that you do it because you see the process itself as being of importance, rather than because you understand the parts and can move them around. Once you justify ritual it ceases to be.
-
Deepwater Horizon, 8/10.
Even more distressing given the updates from the GoM and acquittals. I haven't seen a movie that's led by its effects & really good tension in a while.
-
Shin Godzilla - Godzilla is in this movie for like 20% of the runtime. The rest is bureaucrats in meetings talking about what to do about him and it's actually really funny. Actually if the whole movie were bureaucrats being weird and ineffective it'd be a trenchant statement and a better movie. As high ranking people die, officials get really ridiculous titles like "Giant Unidentified Creature Defense Force Replacement First Officer." Otherwise it is mostly anime bullshit but it's a sort of interesting take on the Godzilla concept.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGFBuPWYAQLge4.jpg
Godzilla evolves but this is one of its first forms. It has Cookie Monster eyes and is goofy as fuck.
Magnificent Seven - I watched this almost exclusively for Denzel and it's really bad.
-
Yeah, but if you're approaching "ritualism in horror films" as a thing, you don't know that the audience likes it until after you're done. All you get are test audience results and pre-release reviews. That's why I think it works better if you cut it at exactly five seconds early, because the cabin shakes and you don't know exactly what's going to happen, just an overwhelming sense of foreboding.
Late but I'm 100% with Rob on this one, if the ending plays to completion then the main characters are proven to be idiots and the film undermines its own metaphorical premise.
-
I just saw Moonlight, and I haven't figured out the right adjective yet but it was worthwhile. Gah, there were no skipped beats between the three generations of Black. I love that most.
I'll admit that I find myself excited by social tics that you can only recognize by living in a condition for so long. It's like, unless you live a certain intersectional identity you could have never written characters like this, and I believe that. Does that give the film more value? For me, insofar as character development seems genuinely cared for. It's great to see the positioning of more gazes in film. Also, shoutout to UT alum Trevante Rhodes. I think the whirlwind that will engulf him will help heal our theatre department since the recent homicide. So long as people see people doing things.
-
I watched the Big Short. I was alienated from 90% of the conversation. Bah, all that lingo. *looks up the film*
-
Casablanca - Good movie. I don't think it's as good as people make it out to be even though I can really see the hype in particular parts of the plot. I went into the movie blind meaning I didn't see the decision which Rick makes at the end coming; well I sorta did because I knew it wouldn't be deserving of its praise if it gone the way it was going. The cast was also pretty decent as well. They each do their job done well and it handles a love triangle in a way which other movies don't nowadays; and that is by making the opposing male (Victor) likeable with understandable motives rather than a one-note asshole, like every other Romantic False Lead. Instead of being this generic nice guy, we see that Rick is actually pretty jaded and pulls the rejection from Ilsa on to himself; sure he was drunk but he's still pretty snide to her when sober during that market scene. Ilsa was okay and we learn enough about her to know what made her want to start an affair; even though otherwise she was just there in comparison to the other leads.
My biggest issue with the film is the pacing during the beginning parts. It took a while to establish each of the cast members and the equilibrium of the film's story. Other films have longer equilibriums than Casablanca but they're at least excused with longer running times. Bear in mind that the pacing in the beginning is merely the reason why I don't think this movie is as good as a movie like The Godfather or The Shawshank Redemption. I still think this is a fine A-Tier movie which seems to have aged pretty well.
My first time analysing a romance like this. Excuse it for being rather half-baked.
Something I was doing since a couple of days ago was watching Shaun of the Dead (a dumb little joke me and my brother did for the sake of Halloween). And yeah, this movie is as good as I remember it. I love how Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright add little bonuses in their plots in order to make re-watching their movies a great experience. The film is probably the middle one of the trilogy in my opinion; Hot Fuzz has even more laughs and a better cast whilst The World's End is fundamentally flawed.
-
Hot Fuzz is quite possibly the most well-written comedy I've ever seen (and is absolutely in my top ten movies of any style). Rewatching is almost mandatory to pick up all the million or so callbacks the second half of the movie makes to the first half.
World's End has some great moments but does strike me as the least consistent of the group (for all that I probably still prefer it over Shaun of the Dead just from general distaste for zombie stories).
-
^
Except I definitely like Shaun of the Dead better. I think Hot Fuzz is so transcendentally brilliant that it makes the other two look worse in comparison, frankly.
-
Hot Fuzz is easily my favourite of the lot for the same reasons which Lemon stated. The reason why The World's End missed the mark for me was due to the rather rushed ending. During the first half, when The World's End was more of a relationship comedy than a take on the Sci-Fi genre, I honestly thought it would be able to top Hot Fuzz.
Hot Fuzz, although close, isn't my favourite comedy film though. That honour goes to The Big Lebowski.
-
Hot Fuzz is quite possibly the most well-written comedy I've ever seen (and is absolutely in my top ten movies of any style). Rewatching is almost mandatory to pick up all the million or so callbacks the second half of the movie makes to the first half.
World's End has some great moments but does strike me as the least consistent of the group (for all that I probably still prefer it over Shaun of the Dead just from general distaste for zombie stories).
Don't get me wrong, The World's End is a decent movie. Even though you summed the film's biggest issue perfectly. The first two were consistent with their genres whereas The World's End brings in the Sci-Fi parts too late into the plot.
-
I'll second/third the Hot Fuzz>Shaun>World's End. World's end had a really weak ending. Shaun of the Dead is good fun but not a total masterpiece like Hot Fuzz was.
-
Hear, hear! It baffles me when environmental messages are shoved into movies; considering how technology is used to make them.
-
I also felt that The World's End's ending was quite rushed. One second it was explaining the androids, then it was dedicated to the group escaping, and then we have the run-of-the-mill post apocalyptic future epilogue.
-
Doctor Strange: Pretty good! I liked it. Worth seeing in 3D too, if you can.
For more nitpicky, vaguely spoilery comments...
* I like how confident they were in their movie that they spent so much setup time in House's normal life, then in Nepal, with no villainous interruption. I could easily see a version of this movie made in 2000-2005 chopping that all out and going straight to "I found a mystic artifact and am now awesome, next fight scene!"
* I get why they did it, but the Rachel McAdams character is a bit *too* forgiving IMO. I guess they didn't want to end that relationship on a downer and knew there wasn't room for her in the final showdown, but considering what a stupendous ass Strange is toward her, she rubber bands fast, even given a near-death experience no-regrets excuse.
* The Mirror World is introduced as a place to play with spells, but then later on, Mordo implies that their spells are useless, or don't work, or something? I was a little confused on that plot point. He could have just said that dark dimension powerz were totally amplified there or something to give an excuse for why they'd be at a disadvantage.
* I'm not surprised they didn't show the bad guy attack on Hong Kong, because it'd be expensive, not include Strange, and also probably make no sense. It's like 3 guys vs. 30! It'd be one thing if Dark Dimension powers made them invincible or something, but we've already seen that isn't true.
* I liked the final showdown! There's always some amount of "because the script said so" BS in a magic-heavy confrontation, but this felt like clever BS rather than by-fiat BS.
* The plot notes of this movie are suspicious similar to "Green Lantern", if you ignore that this was a way better movie. Arrogant guy gets superpowers... his boss(es) get owned... suspicious nonsensical stuff happening off-screen.. evil dark god enemy... his mentor & ally with a suspiciously sinister name has a post-credits scene of going bonkers....
-
Doctor Strange: I guess Marvel Cinematic Universe burnout finally hit me. There was nothing wrong with this movie, but it just left me feeling "meh" instead of wowed. It's smartly written for the most part, and the climax is extremely clever.
The good: Benedict Cumberbatch's American accent
The bad: "Sling Ring" That sounds like some crap J.K. Rowling would write.
-
Doctor Strange: I guess Marvel Cinematic Universe burnout finally hit me. There was nothing wrong with this movie, but it just left me feeling "meh" instead of wowed. It's smartly written for the most part, and the climax is extremely clever.
Preeeeetty much how I felt after Civil War.
-
I liked Doctor Strange better than just about any other movie in the MCU, even having seen almost every other movie in the series.
I was very satisfied with this movie. I didn't leave it feeling super hyped the way I did after the 2+ hour quip-fests that have become the series, but this movie was just so much ... better... as a movie that I am left liking it a lot more. This is also the first time I left thinking, "I'm glad they waited to make this movie." It needed a lot of advancements in cinematic trends (thank you, YouTube, for finger tutting) and technical capability (hi, Inception!) to show what it did.
Sherlock Holmes, master magician, would watch again.
(Did not see in 3D. Think I might actually feel sick/get a headache with this one in 3D.)
-
I also liked Doctor Strange way more than I was expecting to, even despite Cumberbatch's atrocious American accent. I think I'm burned out strictly on Avengers movies, not Marvel movies, so that's nice (still haven't seen Civil War, and I'm okay with that).
Anyway, the movie was really well done visually and managed to do the CGIfest thing in a way that made the art direction stand out rather than swallowing it, which is sadly rare. (Oddly, the thing it comes closest to is the Devil may Cry reboot.) Also the story and set pieces were absolutely what I wanted to see from a Strange movie, rather than a standard action movie with magic instead of guns/power armor/thrown shields/etc. Especially the last fight and how it resolved. I'm looking forward to the sequel more than any (live action) superhero movie other than GOTG2, I think.
-
Yeah, +1 to Shale on the final confrontation being pretty neat and not "Avengers but with magic." I should add that I have seen neither Avengers 2 nor Civil War yet, so hey, I'm doubly insulated from Marvel burnout!
I will say that to the extent they team up Strange with any other part of the MCU, Thor is probably the right choice. Strange's powers are *really* hax, mostly held back by ominous rumblings about "the bill coming due" for breaking the law of nature. That's not a very good fit for a plot involving, like, Captain America or Iron Man. He's probably best kept to his own movies, or else only interacting with characters who already screw around with multi-dimensional nonsense like Asgardians.
-
You know who tends to pair really well with Strange? Spider-Man. Make it happen, Marvel.
Super hyped about this movie and it needs to hurry up and be in Japan already.
-
Jurassic Shark: I Hate Everything's Search for the Worst video influenced me to watch this one. I can see why this was considered the worst movie on IMDB at one point, it's as bad as you'd expect from a movie with that title. It's not even like The Room or Birdemic where there is some fun to be had from how misguided they were.
South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut: Had this around so I decided to view it for a laugh. It's a short, but amusing film which doesn't entirely come off as an extended episode of the show. The longer running time allows for jokes to be worked into the running time and the songs never outstay their welcome.
-
Marvel did good with Mr. Strange.
I feel like I should re-watch this film in 3D on shrooms.
-
Watched new Ghostbusters while at the parents' place today. Was decent, but more enjoyable when being a straight comedy than as a special effects extravaganza. Ditz Hemsworth was usually the highlight, but everyone was good.
-
Had some free time and managed to get ahold of Zootopia and Kubo and the Two Strings. These are quite possibly the best animated movies I've seen in forever. Bravo to both films for being more than a special effects extravaganza.
-
I watched Moonlight, Arrival, and Handmaiden (by the same dude as Oldboy and Stoker). All excellent, all worth watching, all to help escape some of the horseshit going on. Will probably write these up later.
-
Assault on Precinct 13: Interesting movie to watch in the context of a year punctuated by police shootings and protests. It opens with the police gunning down a small gang skulking through backstreets late at night. We don't have much context and it's hard to make any real judgment about what happened. Yes, one of the victims had a rifle, but the police also appear to have fired first. That's all the information we have and, probably significantly, that's about as much information as anyone else has.
It's nice not to see anything be over-dramatized in the manner of a modern thriller--all of the obscure actors turn in solid, professionally low-key performances, and the score doesn't butt in for effect more than it has to (I dig Carpenter's low-fi 70's synths, as always). The movie mines its fear from the breakdown of communication in society--once the mob is moved to anger, they operate more like the xenomorphs from Aliens than like rational human beings. This is an understandable perception for the people trapped inside the police station, who know nothing more than that a gang of strangers is trying to murder them for something they didn't personally do. The gang members rarely speak, they engage in sabotage offscreen that we only perceive through its deleterious effects upon the main characters, and they make direct appearances only in order to rocket into a hail of gunfire like rage-fueled kamikazes. Carpenter appears to have scouted out the bleakest corners of L.A. to shoot in--and suburban L.A. at that, there's no visual connection with the glitzy metropolis of your usual Hollywood production. We could be on another planet if not for the locational subtitles. I don't think we see any buildings higher than two stories, and everything but the police station itself seems to be in severe disrepair. I tend to think that Carpenter sympathizes with crumbling communities rather than demonizing them in the name of law and order, though (Escape From New York and They Live I think both make his skepticism of authority screamingly apparent). It's interesting to note that Carpenter deliberately made the gang pan-ethnic. For all that the gang looks a barely-human menace through the eyes of the staff (and prisoners) trapped in the police station, I think it's hard to seriously contend that Carpenter was really trying to condemn any one group of people. It reads more like a lamentation of what happens when civil discussion collapses.
I was really impressed by this considering it was a novice effort*. I enjoy Carpenter's movies when he's on his game. Too bad he hasn't been for like thirty years. I'm wondering now what it would be like to suddenly discover Big Trouble in Little China for the first time, as opposed to it being one of my favorite movies for basically my entire life. I guess I should actually watch Halloween one of these days.
(*Dark Star doesn't really count. It's hilarious, but it's only like forty minutes long, which is impressive enough for what's basically a studio-endorsed student film but not what you'd call feature film range.)
-
The first two Halloweens are good, serviceable slasher flicks. Halloween 3 is completely different. Very quality Carpenter but not at all a slasher movie.
If you haven't, also watch Prince of Darkness and especially In the Mouth of Madness. Good ol' Apocalypse Trilogy
-
Miss Peregrine: This was allright. Decent Burton kid's movie, that got a bit boring at the end.
The lore was highly convoluted if you don't pay attention. I understood Inception but not this.
There was a real standout scene about the bad guys eating eyes, would probably be completely traumatizing for kids. The movie was almost worth seeing just for it, we were laughing like madmen.
I might be weird about Burton. I'd rank the Burton movies like this:
1) Sweeney Todd, oh man it is just the best and i can almost sing along the entire film
2) Big Fish, I cry everytime at the end
3) uuuuh sleepy hollow?
4) whatever I don't really care about the others
-
I think Tim Burton has only made like three good movies, the other one is Ed Wood.
-
From what I can tell they kept the convoluted lore from the books and made up an entirely new layer of complicated lore (including the eye-eating) to put on top of that.
-
I used to be really into Burton as a teenager but yeah as an adult there's not a whole lot of stuff he's made worth watching to me. But then again me and films, etc.
Here's a fun game. Take an existing intellectual property and decide which remake/sequel would be the worst in Burton's hands. (The best one I've come up with is Tim Burton Presents American History X)
-
Well, Nightmare Before Christmas still holds up extremely well. But apart from that, while I enjoy Burton's imagery, there's not a lot of substance there except when he's lifting wholesale from another source.
-
Nightmare Before Christmas still holds up extremely well.
^
Also seconding Big Fish
-
The Social Network: Haven't seen this one until now. An excellent film that manages to capture both the sympathetic and antagonistic side of Mark Zuckerberg, the creation of Facebook and the opponents he made during its inception. Though I'm aware that several artistic liberties were made and certain individuals took offense to them.
-
Moana: Not bad, but not as good as I was expecting. Of animation I've seen recently, I'd say it's better than Kubo but way worse than Zootopia. Songs are poor, animation is decent. But hey, they worked in the Conceited Reaction meme! Also, "If you wear a dress and have an animal sidekick, you're a princess."
-
Moana: Not bad, but not as good as I was expecting.
Also, Lin-Manuel Miranda songs! I thought they were a little jarring -- they definitely don't fit with the compact, verse-chorus-verse-chorus of most Disney songs I can think of, but I'm trying to give it the benefit of a doubt. It was much more "musical" (see: LMM) and probably not just a little island-inspired.
That said, I hardly remember any of the songs now, a day after I saw the movie, so.
-
Other than Maui's You're Welcome song (which was decent), every other song in the movie is variations of the same song (We Are...fill in the blank). It was an attempt at telling a story through music but not a good one.
-
Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope: With Rogue One around the corner, I decided it was a good time for my annual rewatch of the original trilogy. This is my first time with the cinema versions of the films so I didn't have those monsters blocking the view when Obi Wan was to perform the Jedi Mind trick. I never really cared about the whole "Han Shot First" issue though, so I didn't gain anything from viewing the original version of the scene. Otherwise, the film has held up quite well asides from maybe the rare effect failure and one or two corny lines ("I noticed the foul stench" from Leia). Shame that this is the only Star Wars film George Lucas directed that was any good.
Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back: This is one of my favourite films of all time so I can't really talk about this one without getting too gushy. The plot twist has earned its place in pop culture (though I was aware of it before I watched the film for the first time ::)) due to the build up through moments such as that fake Darth Vader fight Luke has during Yoda's training. Speaking of Yoda's training, those scenes were great as they both answered and raised questions about the Force and it helps that he is a fun and interesting character. Long story short, my favourite moments are your favourite moments and the film does an excellent job at expanding the world of the original film and putting the cast at their lowest points.
-
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them came out in Japan!
It was the best high-budget episode of Doctor Who I've ever watched!
-
Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi: Time to wrap things up with the final film in the original. While it's my least favourite of the original due to the slow pacing of the Jabba's Palace scenes and each of the three climaxes vary in tone, it still has some of the best moments between the three. The Emperor in particular steals the show thanks to his performance, Ian McDiarmid does so well at the role that he's even tolerable in the prequels. Having watched all 7 Star Wars films this year as saw the prequels for the first time earlier on (Lord have mercy) and I received The Force Awakens on DVD, I suppose I could rank the movies from best to worst:
5>4>6>7>1>2>3
-
3 last is kinda surprising. I thought it was by far the best of the prequels myself (partly because of McDiarmid, as you noted), though how much that is worth is subject to debate.
-
Copying surprise, I thought 3 was the only watchable one of the prequels (Clones was especially abysmal, I'd definitely shuffle that to the end). This isn't to say it's great, because there are still huge, glaring problems, but at least I felt I could walk out of it afterward and honestly be able to say, "Something actually happened in that movie." And yeah, I'm pretty sure McDiarmid was the only person on that set having any degree of fun.
I waffle on New Hope vs. Return of the Jedi, but Empire's clearly best. Jedi has a lot of truly outstanding moments, but the Ewok assault is tonally off with the rest of the finale. Rewatching the original trilogy myself this weekend, just because it's been a couple years. Still amazed at the stark originality of the set design and how suggestive it is of its broader universe from pretty much the first minutes of A New Hope--everything looks battered and lived-in in all its low-fi glory, in ways that the sterile CGI of the prequels never for a second managed to recapture (this is in spite or because of that great sixties/seventies sci-fi tradition of "Just put blinking lights everywhere on every console, that means science is happening.") It's still astonishing to me that the person responsible for these movies could so completely forget over time what originally made them fun.
I actually find myself vaguely interested in Rogue One, because just from trailers, it looks like more of what I'd want from a Star Wars movie than The Force Awakens was (even though it's technically a prequel, and prequels are fundamentally almost always a bad idea). Was not a fan of Force Awakens on pretty much any level, but I'm also just consistently left cold by J. J. Abrams's movies.
Actually, I guess this is related, after watching Star Trek: Beyond with the parents a couple weeks ago (it was okay I guess), I decided to finally bite the bullet and watch Into Darkness. I expected this to be hard because Wrath of Khan is one of my favorite movies and I did not relish the prospect of seeing it remade by a director that I dislike. I was actually surprised to find that it addressed one of the key points that irked me about the Star Trek reboot, though: this time, the guy who's driven entirely by gut instinct and impulsive intuition is actually allowed to be wrong. This bothered me tremendously in 2009 Star Trek--that movie went out of its way to make the logic-driven character's judgment always wrong whenever it clashed with the guy who just followed whatever course his unchecked emotions told him to at any given moment*. But Into Darkness actually built its entire plot around what can happen when we let our basest instincts of fear and revenge dictate our actions, so color me pleasantly surprised that it managed to put together a story that didn't violently clash with my sensibilities. Zachary Quinto can also be a great Spock when he wants to be. "I am a Vulcan, we believe in technicalities." "I am capable of expressing multiple attitudes at once, that is one of them." So these will probably still never be my Star Trek movies, but it at least looks like they're getting better about balancing the validity of both captain's and first officer's views. I think it also warrants some respect that this time, the reason a villain is doing something is of greater consequence to the plot than is whatever doohickey McGuffin he needs in order to do that thing.
(*In retrospect, I shouldn't have been surprised about that approach, because "Emotions will triumph over reason, and it is good and right that this should be so" is also pretty much exactly how the end of Lost went down. Beyond this mindset being entirely incompatible with my view of the world, I feel I need only point to real-life developments of this year to highlight the grievous cost of an emphasis on emotional security over facts.)
Playing Khan as totally uncharismatic was an odd choice on Cumberbatch's part, though. I guess Ricardo Montalban's performance maybe isn't the kind that would fly in a movie made in the 2010's, but man did I miss his screen presence. Nice to see Peter Weller's still working, though.
-
Into Darkness is so close to being a good movie. It's got good acting and the Act 2 spaceship sequence is pretty cool. Just... the script and terrible, TERRIBLE Act 3 drag it down. Argh.
As a vaguely related comment on doohickey McGuffins. The Star Trek series is *infamous* for creating cool magical doohickeys for one episode's morality play and then forgetting about its existence afterward, which is honestly fine, don't let some overarching setting get in the way of today's episode is totally a legit way to run things, especially if the device would radically upend society via time travel / abolish death / whatever.
But... I think the absolute worst, plot holiest doohickey of them all was introduced in the ST reboot & Into Darkness, and I was glad to see it conveniently forgotten about in ST Beyond. That being the trans-warp beacon. You have a show about starships, and you just lightly created an invention that obsoletes starships. W. T. F. If people can just teleport wherever they want across the galaxy, you don't freaking need ships anymore! Just go there and throw your comparatively slow warp engines in the trash. This also has major implications for warfare & colonization of course, sure, whatever, but if there's one thing you absolutely don't want to get rid of, it's the excuse for your movie / TV show! At least unless you want to make a movie about sad former starship officers who are now out of work, their education now wholly worthless, wandering the streets of San Francisco in search of a purpose.
-
I tend to come down pretty firmly as pro-New Hope over Jedi. Jedi has some stuff which is great but a lot of the movie is filler and boring. I have a hard time hyping a film when I think that approximately half the scenes need to be deleted or rewritten. It's not just ewoks, it's pretty much everything that happens on that forest planet and the death star assault which is a pale shadow of Ep 4's. Some of this is inevitable due to comparison with the sequence that we actually care about (Luke/Vader/Palpatine) but I certainly don't think that's all of it.
ANH is well-paced (generally), does some good setting work, and none of the characters/arcs feel wasted.
-
Yeah I am surprised at the prequel ordering as well, I think the general preference is 3 > 2 > 1? Not that I have watched them since 3 came out.
Also agree with Elves yea.
Jedi could have ridden high on a super cut that is just stuff on the Desth star.
-
Into Darkness is so close to being a good movie. It's got good acting and the Act 2 spaceship sequence is pretty cool. Just... the script and terrible, TERRIBLE Act 3 drag it down. Argh.
I think the moment the movie runs out of steam is when Weller exits the film, because: A) it's at least clear what he stands for and this is something terrible that it's easy to be against; B) Khan is not an engaging presence in this movie. Gun fu alone doesn't make for a compelling adversary.
That said, I do like the confession that both Kirk and Spock made about their actions during the finale: they each did what they thought the other would do. I also liked that New Kirk's obvious recklessness is exactly why the admiral would think he's both exploitable and expendable.
It's not a fantastic movie, but there were some nice touches that clearly put it a grade above its predecessor (like for example the villain not being some random dumb miner who sits around the middle of nowhere for twenty years in an inexplicably super-powered mining ship so he can beat up on a dude who did nothing but try to help him except I guess not help him hard enough or something, I don't even know, Star Trek 2009 just had the stupidest damn antagonist).
-
To put it another way, ANH and ESB are ensemble movies. Even though Luke is the nominal main character, the rest of the cast get to do important things, have their own arcs and regularly save Luke's bacon when he messes up.
Jedi throws that away and makes it The Luke Skywalker show. Everyone else's arcs are already done. Every scene without Luke in it could be cut, except maybe the very opening at Jabba's (which provides some contrast for how badly the non-Luke characters now perform). Luke can no longer do wrong, even when he's wrong he's right. The whole Endor and space battle nonsense winds up being inconsequential, except to provide Luke with an excuse to hop off the Death Star and let everyone avoid dealing with anything messy like actually trying to get the Imperials to surrender or caring about their lives.
-
3 last is kinda surprising. I thought it was by far the best of the prequels myself (partly because of McDiarmid, as you noted), though how much that is worth is subject to debate.
I felt ROTS was the worst of prequels as the Obi Wan vs Anakin sequence took forever for a secne which could've gotten the point accross in 5 minutes. Anakin's turn to the Dark side was rushed and his reasons for doing so prevent the viewer from taking Darth Vader seriously when rewatching the original trilogy. I also felt that ending was a hasty attempt at trying to tie the prequels to A New Hope which caused it to take forever as well. I know AOTC is probably the worst objectively though (excluding the Holiday Special). Believe it or not; The Phantom Menace is actually my favourite of the prequels as I find it facinating how no one was willing to question George Lucas during the film's development, therefore causing the film to be an absolute train wreck in terms of writing and direction.
-
Yeah I pretty much have the reverse order of the prequels myself. I won't go to bat too hard on TPM vs. AotC, I just prefer the one without the interminable pod racing sequence.
I dug Anakin's turn to the dark side though. I don't agree it makes the character difficult to take seriously. It illustrated well that people who turn to evil don't do so for reasons which are cool or admirable, but for reasons which are selfish and short-sighted. Watching Palpatine nurture and exploit Anakin's paranoia related to Padme hit home as something that could absolutely happen, which made it rather chilling. My own main criticism of the movie is that most of the non-Anakin/Palpatine related things end up feeling like a waste of time, especially the drawn-out conflict with General Grievous (and did Padme actually do anything notable in that film?). In some ways it's a lot like Return of the Jedi (or its dark mirror), which makes sense.
Related article about a film reviewer watching the film with his kids (http://uproxx.com/hitfix/film-nerd-2-0-revenge-of-the-sith-devastates-the-kids-as-anakin-falls-from-grace/), kinda sums up what I like about RotS and why I think it's a good movie despite its George Lucas-related flaws.
-
Yeah I pretty much have the reverse order of the prequels myself. I won't go to bat too hard on TPM vs. AotC, I just prefer the one without the interminable pod racing sequence.
I dug Anakin's turn to the dark side though. I don't agree it makes the character difficult to take seriously. It illustrated well that people who turn to evil don't do so for reasons which are cool or admirable, but for reasons which are selfish and short-sighted. Watching Palpatine nurture and exploit Anakin's paranoia related to Padme hit home as something that could absolutely happen, which made it rather chilling. My own main criticism of the movie is that most of the non-Anakin/Palpatine related things end up feeling like a waste of time, especially the drawn-out conflict with General Grievous (and did Padme actually do anything notable in that film?). In some ways it's a lot like Return of the Jedi (or its dark mirror), which makes sense.
Related article about a film reviewer watching the film with his kids (http://uproxx.com/hitfix/film-nerd-2-0-revenge-of-the-sith-devastates-the-kids-as-anakin-falls-from-grace/), kinda sums up what I like about RotS and why I think it's a good movie despite its George Lucas-related flaws.
That's an interesting way off looking at things. Also, yeah, the pod racing can die.
-
I kinda see what you mean about Anakin's turn, but mostly I feel like I wish I could watch the version of the movie they made in a universe where Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman have romantic chemistry.
-
I kinda see what you mean about Anakin's turn, but mostly I feel like I wish I could watch the version of the movie they made in a universe where Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman have romantic chemistry.
What are you talking about Shale? "I don't like sand" is great romantic dialogue <_<
-
As the local Tatooine equivalent resident, he isn't wrong.
-
The Grievous thing made a ton more sense if you watched the Gedde Tartovsky Clone Wars cartoon, which was literally the best thing to come out of the prequel trilogy and of course was replaced in the canon by the CGI Clone Wars cartoon. Granted, a movie should be able to stand alone without having to watch it. Such wasted potential, since Grievous was actually pretty awesome in the cartoon.
-
I kinda see what you mean about Anakin's turn, but mostly I feel like I wish I could watch the version of the movie they made in a universe where Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman have romantic chemistry.
You can file that under "George Lucas-related flaws", yes.
-
Yeah I agree with the assessment that they should have Vaderfied him off screen between movies so we could have had Natalie Portman making out with a tall guy in a Vader mask you so strongly desire Elves.
-
What's Up? Balloon to the Rescue: Damn you I Hate Everything for making me interested in bootleg garbage *shakes fist*. What's Up is a truly terrible and shameless cash-in on Pixar's Up, except the only similarity is that a balloon is featured. The voice acting is awful, the visuals are crude and some of the jokes are borderline xenophobic for a movie that was probably intended for toddlers. Still better than Shark Tale, if by a fraction.
Saving Private Ryan: Now for something that actually has some production value towards it. Saving Private Ryan is a great movie, though not quite as great as the rest of the world says it is. The film gives us enough insight towards the characters for us to care about their motivations (Upham can die though) and it manages to capture what many have stated to be an accruate depiction as to what combat was like during WW2 thanks to the excellent practical effects and camera work, although shaky cam was used more than I would've liked it to be.
-
I kind of liked the prequels after someone suggested that you could read it as Obi Wan actually had betrayed Anakin. Wait, lemme see if I can find a video about it.
Here it is. https://youtu.be/95JD0Y5CDfw
Somewhat pithy presentation, but it basically summarizes the theory and makes the whole experience more watchable.
-
So, I watched Civil War finally.
Y'all (not just you guys but literally the whole internet) shittin me right? This movie is way worse than Age of Ultron, and I even realize in hindsight that Ultron was not very good. To be fair, the major fault is the same in both movies, making their characters do really stupid things less because it makes sense and more because they needed a plot point to happen. Stark making Vision after Ultron turned out to be a disaster (for almost no payoff, even in Civil War), Stark going all apeshit on the winter soldier after finding out that he killed his parents even though just seconds before he said in plain English that he knew his actions were due to brainwashing... Actually, it seems to be mostly Stark, which would be fine if the movie wasn't asking us to believe that he's a genius otherwise.
tl;dr: Was not entertained.
-
So, I watched Civil War finally.
Y'all (not just you guys but literally the whole internet) shittin me right? This movie is way worse than Age of Ultron, and I even realize in hindsight that Ultron was not very good. To be fair, the major fault is the same in both movies, making their characters do really stupid things less because it makes sense and more because they needed a plot point to happen. Stark making Vision after Ultron turned out to be a disaster (for almost no payoff, even in Civil War), Stark going all apeshit on the winter soldier after finding out that he killed his parents even though just seconds before he said in plain English that he knew his actions were due to brainwashing... Actually, it seems to be mostly Stark, which would be fine if the movie wasn't asking us to believe that he's a genius otherwise.
tl;dr: Was not entertained.
Hunter Sopko Likes this post.
Also the whole "No, you move." speech from Captain comes off way less as the importance of taking principled stands and more justifying being a petulant dick.
-
I will say that I do understand why my female and gay friends enjoyed the scene of Cap holding a helicopter to a building, though. Chris Evan's got some glamour muscles. Also, the Spiderman cameo was pretty neat and helps let their first Spiderman movie not be another fucking rehash of his origin story (i didn't even see the second time Fox did it because jfc), so it wasn't all bad. Just... lol, that ending was so terrible.
-
Saw Rogue One. I was pleased. For most of the movie, it feels like we're getting a Lower Decks look into the Star Wars universe. I appreciate this because it's nice to have a different perspective into an established world. While I'd agree with arguments that much of the heroic cast is fairly sketched-in, I do think there's enough of a start there for you to feel good about rooting for them, especially since they're pointedly not the people that make it into the history books--they're ordinary people who struggle to cling onto fragments of shattered lives while balancing daily survival against doing the right thing, often without any reliable guidance or support from someone in a position of authority. No one of them is going to go down as a classic character, but collectively I think it's a respectable representation of the beleaguered footslogger who helps make history without getting any of the glory for it. Their adversary is also completely appropriate: one of those ambitious gray mediocrities that scurry after dictators begging for scraps--the Eichmanns of the galaxy, only too happy to get force-choked by Vader if only it should mean they retain control over their own tiny scrap of turf. (Forest Whitaker, on the other hand, just breathes crazy, but he's one of those dudes who'd be impressive just reading from a dictionary.) Of course, the real danger is just malevolent architecture as always (justified here, for once: hey, the Empire doesn't want people accessing these files casually!)
So I was happy to see something new come out of a familiar property. This is maybe why the obligatory space battle is the least satisfying part of the film. But the director has an eye for composition, and it was often a rewarding film to look at even when (or especially when) nothing much was going on kinetically. I'd say the music also didn't rely on the past themes pretty much at all (barring end credits), but I may simply not remember any of the musical cues Giacchino used in The Force Awakens.
It was fun. It earned its ending.
CGI Peter Cushing was probably a mistake, though. The effectiveness of this really varies, as it's more or less convincing in different shots, but on the whole I think it constitutes a distraction that was perfectly avoidable. Would it really have been an unforgivable offense to just cast someone living in the same role? I'm pretty sure they also do this with some of the X-wing pilots at the end (duping the A New Hope Death Star assault crew), but it's harder to tell since things are moving faster there. (No Denis Lawson, though.)
First Star Wars movie without Wilhelm Scream?
No Bothans died to bring us this movie.
-
Rogue One: It starts pretty poorly, with cheesy scenes and dialogue ala Episode 7. But when it ramps up, it ramps up hard. Extremely enjoyable thrill ride that leaves you very satisfied at the end. I'm going to go ahead and say that the CGI is the best of any movie to date. I disagree with Cid about it being distracting. You will not be able to tell that Peter Cushing didn't film these scenes in advance thirty years ago. The Jedha scene is also crazy to watch.
Two complaints:
1.Vader's first scene is terrible. The actor moves nothing like Vader and his costume looks bad. End scene with him is good though.
2. Where the fuck are the Bothans? Would have been easy enough to make the Rogue One redshirts Bothans, but they go with humans because lazy.
-
Peter Cushing CGI clone you can spot it around the mouth a bit I think, the lips don't really feel like they lift up off the teeth. When you see it, it is hard to unsee it. That said it is just 100% uncanny valley stuff and I am okay with it as an advancing technology (though I do need to process the ethics of using the likeness of a dead person to wholesale create new art, regardless of the will of the estate).
Also I expected some love for the 70s staches from you Cap.
-
Titanic: Watched this for the first time. If you want a movie that's the epitome of average, Titanic is it. Kate Winslet's great performance counterbalances how underwhelming Leonardo Dicaprio is, while the excellent screenplay evens out the laughable script. Still a better movie than what everyone makes Pearl Harbor out to be.
-
Complaint #2 is bad and you should feel bad, Cap.
-
I think at least one of your complaints will be dealt with in Rogue Two, Cap.
-
Saw Rogue 1, thoughts: in reverse order.
Upon watching the movie: This was a pretty good movie and I do not regret watching it, and frankly it seems to get Star Wars in a way that makes episode 7 look worse. I have hopes that Episode 8 will be better now that ep. 7's retread of A New Hope is out of the director's system, but we'll see. Still a lot of the action sequences near the end of Rogue 1 were kinda bleh, but the world felt inhabited and cohesive in a way that Star Wars hasn't felt in a long time.
Upon watching the trailers before the movie: holy shit, complaints that movies are increasingly conservative and inward-looking and banal...they seem to understate the case. Lookin' at you Power Rangers.
-
Rogue One - Enjoyable. Not really one of the more memorable Star Wars movies, I'm quite confident I'd rank it below all but Episodes 1-2, but it does some neat things. Was not expecting -everyone- to die, that kinda makes the human cost of these things more real. For what it was, a prequel tale of the sacrifices made to acquire the death star plans, it delivered very well. I just wish more had been done with some of the characters. The movie sets up quite a few dramas but most end up irrelevant (e.g. Casian's assassination plot. Or how Krennic is basically irrelevant on the final planet which is a shame because I liked his villain setup for the reasons Cid said.).
I fall into the camp that was generally impressed by the CGI used to replicate Cushing/Fisher. I don't think I'd have suspected anything if I didn't know.
Props for the racial diversity in the casting, too.
-
I think I commented somewheres (either on Twitter or to Snowfire in chat, couldn't tell you which right now) but it did feel to some extent that they had enough writing/personality for two main characters then had to chop it up to spread among 5 main characters. What we actually get on screen for the main cast just isn't quite enough relative to the size of the cast, for all they got good actors who try to fill in some of those gaps (Felicity Jones does a lot with her eyes; like, when she's being rescued in the first scene she just radiates "I will kill you the moment your back is turned", which makes perfect sense for a sometime child soldier and gives you a good sense of where she starts the movie.) This also has the drawback of making the ending feel belabored though. Like you go into the movie knowing that it's entirely possible a bunch of the cast will be killed off, right? So when K2-SO dies you kinda go "Okay yeah nobody is leaving this movie alive", but then each character has to have a fully drawn out dramatic death which doesn't feel entirely earned because they stretched the character moments so thin. I've definitely seem some mixed opinions on the movie and a few cases of outright dislike, and I think it mostly comes back to that.
Being the sort of Star Wars nerd I am I can't not love a movie that gives us visceral ground-level shots of what staring down an AT-AT or watching the Death Star appear over the horizon or seeing the Alliance win their first fight with the empire mostly through determination and sacrifice and ramming a modified corvette into a Star Destroyer to shove it into ANOTHER Star Destroyer then that explosion takes out a planetary shield OR, y'know, seeing what the beginning of A New Hope would look like if Vader lead his troops into battle rather than coming in for cleanup would look like though. I like Force Awakens more, and it's a more complete movie, but damn if Rogue One didn't give me something I hadn't had before.
-
I thought of it this way when I came out. Rogue one is EU type of stuff hitting the big screen.
Also y'all motherfuckers need more love for Space Zatoichi.
-
And yet no discussion of the most important part of Rogue One?
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-disk-formats-of-star-wars-rogue-one-spoilers
-
They couldn't make any of the characters from rogue one memorable for obvious reasons.
-
I was personally happy to see that Star Wars will always be an analog universe.
-
Assassin's Creed: It's a lot of people standing around saying attempted profound things that have no bearing on anything going on.
-
True to the source material then, cool.
-
By that, do you mean the games or the historical time period?
-
Yes.
-
Harry Potter: Me and Brit decided to do a binge watch on the Harry Potter series for the sake of the recently released "Fantastic Beasts" film. We should have done this during November even though Rogue One was on the way and we decided to binge watch the original Star Wars trilogy instead. We're currently on the 4th film. We found that the first two films hadn't aged too well due to hokey child acting, the overly whimsical soundtrack, and costumes that made you feel more like you were watching a pantomime. The 3rd film was a step up in the aspects which the first two didn't do well in, including pacing. However, the good pacing means that it has to trade scenes giving more depth to specific plot points, such as detail on how Sirius "betrayed" the Potter family. Although this version gets points for executing the Time Turner better than in the book.
-
#3 is the first good movie in the series (and I would say one of the best). Chris Columbus directed the first two and Chris Columbus is the ick.
-
Chris Columbus is a director I think is very overloved. I don't even think Home Alone has held up all that well.
And yeah, PoA is the first good one out of the films. The first two are average and are mainly backed up by decent source material.
-
I also found the CGI in the first film to be quite tacky. Apparently it was because the effects were included later when editing the film. While they aren't perfect; the CGI from the second film onwards is much better as, from what I've learnt, the effects were included early into editing which obviously meant they were able to spend more time towards making them look good.
In terms of directors, I found Alfonso Cuarón to be the best director for the series. I'm with Lemon and El Cideon on Columbus and Yates seemed to be way too focused towards teen drama from what I remember. I also found the cinematography in the Cuarón to be the most exciting.
-
Mad Max Fury Road: Why is this random-ass sequel to a decades-old franchise so good? I mean, the story is nonexistent, but you do not want to take your eyes off the screen for a second in case you miss something. Somehow a movie about deformed skinheads and fire belching and sand is the most artistic movie ever made.
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/kSTaZCfZXtvri/200.gif) Because practical effects are great
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/kSTaZCfZXtvri/200.gif) Because practical effects are great
This is the first thing I watch every morning because it makes me scream.
-
Finished watching the Harry Potter movies. All in all, none of them are what I would call masterpieces. But none of them are outright terrible either. The closest to bad was Half Blood Prince due to the hefty amount of teen drama and shoddy editing during the third act, but even it still had some fun parts (Broadbent was brilliant as Slughorn).
If I had to rank the films, my order would be:
3>8*>5>4>2>1>7>6
*8 refers to Deathly Hallows Part 2.
-
Suited - HBO doc. Held off, finally watched it. Friend is dating Mel. I bawled during the scene with the teenager, because for fucks sake can we have more humans like the grandmother who care positively about each other?
-
Pearl Harbour: Decided to watch this film as a joke on Valentine's Day in order to entertain some buddies on a Discord chat. This is my first time with a Michael Bay movie and I don't want to see anything else by this guy. The quality of this movie was summed up by this song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z3GJiZqDCI
-
Watch The Rock. That's about all the Michael Bay that's worth watching.
-
Lego Batman: Very enjoyable despite significant pacing issues. Everybody involved clearly had loads of fun making the movie - the performances are really great, it looks amazing and there's tons of in-jokes and background gags. It also uses the Lego license well in the same vein as The Lego Movie despite being confined to one setting, which was a surprise.
-
A Tale of Tales: What the flying fuck.
I kept watching this movie wondering what they were leading up to. What's their endgame? SPOILER: Nothing. Absolutely fucking nothing. There's no resolution, no moral, no point whatsoever. It's like the scriptwriter died halfway through the script and they just said "eh, film it anyway".
Seriously the most pointless thing I've ever watched.
-
Watch The Rock. That's about all the Michael Bay that's worth watching.
I'm aware it was the one film Michael Bay made which got anything close to good reception. I might pick it up if I ever see it.
-
Edge of Tomorrow - Apparently Google Play was renting movies for 1.49 and spamming my email, so sure, fine. Although apparently they're now ashamed of the title so it's been retroactively retitled its tagline, Live Die Repeat Edgeoftomorrow (no, really, the font is actually tiny on the "old" title). Odd.
Anyway, it's pretty good, very much "video games the movie." The one thing everyone agrees on is that somebody massively wimped out on the ending, makes about as much sense as Ocarina of Time's. I checked the original Japanese light novel ending, and that one is ridiculous in a different way. Much more stereotype of shonen anime, there. (Apparently in it, Our Heroes realize that leaving both alive means there are TOO MANY TIME LOOPERS that will cause even their victory to reset, so they have to fight each other to see who will live. Come on, just rip off Terminator 2 if you must do this kinda thing.)
-
Get Out. Went to see this. Theater in Atlanta - created a much less positive vibe than the celebratory white sadism of Django. That was so weird. I never thought I'd sit next to a white person who was clapping about white folk being brutalized until Django. So weird. The folk in the theater less happy.
Movie was okay. It's less of a horror than it is a suspense but I suppose there's some fine line there?
-
Get Out. Went to see this. Theater in Atlanta - created a much less positive vibe than the celebratory white sadism of Django. That was so weird. I never thought I'd sit next to a white person who was clapping about white folk being brutalized until Django. So weird. The folk in the theater less happy.
Movie was okay. It's less of a horror than it is a suspense but I suppose there's some fine line there?
How did you think it worked as a racial commentary? There's a lot there but I didn't think it was quite as deep as others I'e read. Like, I think it's fairly upfront with what it's saying (most of my strongest reactions were from things like the microaggression montage rather than anything conventionally horrifying) and plot-wise, things escalate to the point where I think it loses the thread. I almost wish it had more of the polite white liberal bullshit since that's where most of the commentary was to me but things ramp up pretty quickly.
I thought it would be funnier (most of the humor is one character), but it is technically very strong (Peele's apparently a horror buff and it shows). I didn't love it like a lot of people do but it's worth seeing and in a theater setting with others.
-
Grown Ups: Continuing the theme of bad directors, I decided to see what an Adam Sandler movie was like. I found Grown Ups at a charity shop so I thought, why not? Grown Ups is easily one of my worst' Hollywood' movies of all time. The entire movie just seems like an excuse for Adam Sandler to go on holiday, the lack of an overall narrative and several scenes dedicated to him looking great (the water park and anything to do with his wife) are key examples of this. None of the jokes hit bullseyes as most of them are dedicated to milking each member of the main cast's one note (Kevin James is fat, David Spade is horny) and the others are based around weak and poorly delivered slapstick. I can safely say I'd never watch the sequel.
-
Damn if you're going to go cold into Adam Sandler at least start with The Waterboy or Happy Gilmore or even Fifty First Dates.
-
Too late. I've seen Grown Ups and I want nothing more to do with this director/writer. I'm aware Sandler has been involved in the occasional decent film, but a film like Grown Ups leaves a bad impression. It's like playing Sonic 2k6 as your first Sonic game, chances are you won't want to play any more titles in the series regardless of their quality due to how bad that game was. That's my take on things anyway.
-
There's a really funny podcast called The Worst Idea of All Time which involves two New Zealand comedians watching Grown Ups 2 every week for a year and talk about it, and it is so bad and miserable that you can hear the deterioration of their will to live as time goes on.
They then did the same thing with Sex in the City 2 and said it was worse.
-
I also saw Get Out, and thought it was really good. The racial politics are very on the nose, but in the current climate if you're going to err on one side or the other you go big. Beyond that it worked really well as a horror/comedy with the emphasis on horror; Peele's direction was great and the cast nailed the "creepily WASPy" vibe. Especially the scene with the cereal, holy crap,
-
Wow, okay. So like Grown Ups 1 was seen as a return to form and an Okay Movie tm when it came out. Not amazing, but the first decent Sandler comedy in a long time (check Rotten tomatoes views from near release they are more middle of the road than later). So that is rough, because the bottoms of that barrel is a long way off.
Punch Drunk love is unironically good though and Fofty First Dates apparently holds up though.
-
But Punch Drunk Love is less an "Adam Sandler move" then just a good movie that coincidentally happens to have Adam Sandler in it. It's a disservice to conflate with anything that typically characterizes an Adam Sandler movie, excepting the basic physical presence of Adam Sandler.
-
And he didn't write or direct Fifty First Dates, that's kinda the point.
-
Yeah. The stretch of Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, The Waterboy, and The Wedding Singer... these were all really strong and quotable comedies when they came out (And still are, though I'm not as enamoured with The Waterboy nowadays). There was a REASON Adam Sandler was so well liked, aside from being good on SNL. 50 First Dates is okay, it kinda holds up but I liked it best the first time.
Punch Drunk Love is also unironically good. Highly recommend it.
-
There's a really funny podcast called The Worst Idea of All Time which involves two New Zealand comedians watching Grown Ups 2 every week for a year and talk about it, and it is so bad and miserable that you can hear the deterioration of their will to live as time goes on.
They then did the same thing with Sex in the City 2 and said it was worse.
They were paid to do this right?
-
In the same way any comedian with a podcast is. Via crowd funding and exposure pretty much.
The best episodes are when one is touring on the other side of the world so the time zones are fucked and they are both so isolated.
-
But Punch Drunk Love is less an "Adam Sandler move" then just a good movie that coincidentally happens to have Adam Sandler in it. It's a disservice to conflate with anything that typically characterizes an Adam Sandler movie, excepting the basic physical presence of Adam Sandler.
I think it's worth noting that his performance is legitimately good in it, but it's true that most of what makes that movie work is Paul Thomas Anderson's direction and Philip Seymour Hoffman.
I would say that the huge blip that is Punch Drunk Love, where he plays a real character with actual depth, makes the rest of his career look a lot worse in comparison, because he showed that he has some capacity to act but chooses to play himself or just make trash. A lot of what the Best of All Time podcast rags on is how cynical Sandler's entire career is since he makes movies based on where it's going to shoot and as an excuse to put his buddies in movies to make fun of them (and to have shameless product placement).
-
A lot of what the Best of All Time podcast rags on is how cynical Sandler's entire career is since he makes movies based on where it's going to shoot and as an excuse to put his buddies in movies to make fun of them (and to have shameless product placement).
Literally the exact opposite of that mang, but the rest of the point is spot on yeah. Sandler these days is literally on a gravy train for he and his friends that is mostly maintaining itself entirely on brand inertia to fund itself while paying him to be writer/producer/lead actor.
-
How did you think it worked as a racial commentary? There's a lot there but I didn't think it was quite as deep as others I'e read. Like, I think it's fairly upfront with what it's saying (most of my strongest reactions were from things like the microaggression montage rather than anything conventionally horrifying) and plot-wise, things escalate to the point where I think it loses the thread. I almost wish it had more of the polite white liberal bullshit since that's where most of the commentary was to me but things ramp up pretty quickly.
They turned gossip about racial politics into some useful fodder. His friend was a great "repoussoir" figure. I'm sure there's a better and easier term for that, but he spoke aloud what a black theater audience could have easily projected about traits and white folk. The reasons for that home business's existence did not feel as insidious as the movie wanted. In my opinion, they could have went deeper into it rather than a vignette of previous comments. I thought the microaggressions went well but I was disappointed that most of the currency for "horror" resided primarily in the black folks' actions. It was a good movie though, and I wonder what it would be like if he kept to the suspense drama?
I'll say that my favorite characters were the mother and his friend. I don't even remember that characters' names. Was the black guy Jackson? Because if it was, that's even funnier given the intense swing of emotions white america expressed in the mainstream for Michael. Was it Michael? Bah! For me, the teacup stood as the most classed and obnoxious piece of material culture tied to colonial dominance and confusing labor identity in early America. I loved all the scenes with the teacup.
To backtrack though, I think the sexual politics tied into the racial one made good use of stereotypes about black males. But her "search" towards the end made me question why she even reached out to him in the first place. Leaving the movie, I felt more vindicated as a racialized viewer than something like Django, which I'm sure the whole board knows I loathe. But I couldn't watch it again since most of the scenes don't have much mileage for being (except the beginning scene, teacup scenes, cop scene, "end cop scene.")
Edit* AND THEY BROUGHT MAXINE BACK (re: Living Single, one of my favorite shows as a kid)
-
I saw Logan. You should too.
There's a lot I could comment on, but I'm inclined to wait until other people chime in about seeing it, so I'll just pick one for now: the villain getting shot the instant he tries to monologue = aces.
-
Worth praising the actress they got. Sure, they only ask her to do one thing the whole movie, but damned if she didn't prove there's a lot of ways to do "intense staring as a prelude to murdering everyone in a room"
-
There are many worse premises to launch a movie on than just "Let's put three really good actors on a road trip together."
-
I thought Logan was okay and am really unsure why it didn't land for me like it did for so many others. There are so many disparate things about it that I should fucking love like the setting, the road trip idea, the influence from classic westerns, the personalized stakes, the Children of Men vibes, themes about parenting and caring for someone who is infirm, but for some reason it didn't come together for me. It is very true that it handles heavier themes in a much better way than most superhero movies but I feel like that's grading things on a curve. There isn't anything special with the way that it's written and most of what makes things work is based on your previous attachment to Patrick Stewart and obviously Hugh Jackman over the past 15+ years (like, it's genuinely upsetting to see Jackman hobbled and Stewart not his usual sharp self). Their performances are really good, and they always have been, and the girl does a lot of strongly expressive nonverbal acting.
A lot of things that happen in the interim years between movies that are mentioned that are hugely consequential but didn't really have the impact that they should. I think I wanted the pace to be slower, to live in this world that they establish a little longer, to have more of a road trip, and more time for these characters to be together ("let's just take a moment"). The story is constrained and that's definitely a good thing, but I can't help but feel like this is a story that didn't need villains (at least these villains, who are shitty and boring) when the main conflict is with time, aging, and a world that has left you behind.
Again I think every part of this that involves superhero-like conflicts just bored me and I don't think Mangold does interesting action. The movie earns its R rating but the way the action is shot is very same-y, so even though things can be brutal, they're brutal in the same sort of ways. Life is also really strangely cheap in this and that comes into weird juxtaposition with the main characters self examining their life decisions.
I think it'd be good if they made more movies with superheroes that were more like this and not dumb world saving bullshit but I still didn't think this was a standout in the grander scheme of things.
There are some other points here:
*So the Deadpool 2 trailer came before this and holy shit did it not fit the tenor of this movie.
*Wholesale lifting from Shane is a bit on the nose but I won't complain because Shane.
*Initially I thought Xavier's death was a dream, and the following scene of Logan saying that it wasn't him was probably the best of the film.
*When talking about Eden, I liked the point about how even though both Logan and Xavier don't believe it's real, it's real to the girl and that kind of lie is worth something. Keeping up a known lie for the sake of a kid is a compelling idea to me for whatever reason ... of course Eden is and it was a real idea to the other kids as well. The comics being in universe was kind of cute
*The kids using their dumb powers and making goofy faces to kill the shitty villain was really funny to me and I don't know why.
*The ending was good and turning over the cross to an X made a lot of the nerds in my theater sob. It didn't have a huge impact on me but one thing coursing throughout these movies is that Logan has been through a ton of shit and never finds any peace and this in its way is a good way to send him off ("so this is what it feels like").
*I wouldn't care if they never made another X-Men movie again.
John Wick 2: This wasn't as good as the first but it's everything I wanted.
-
I recommend Raw. Saw it at an early screening with the director. Cool stuff.
-
So yesterday I decided to watch "Logan" (against my better judgement) based on the talk in mIRC. Lemme say right now, I did cringe. Like up until a certain point, I was cringing at this movie. No spoilers for me, so I'm just going to be as vague as possible. I liked it, but the story was just so gosh darn depressing that I couldn't just go home with that mindset.
So I watched a second movie "Lego Batman Movie". I think what CK said is about right:
[19:05] <%CmdrKing> Holy contrast batman
But at any rate, it did cheer me up. I did found something interesting at the end. The Two Face was voiced by Billy Dee Williams (I saw that in the credits and I was surprised, given what happened in the live action originally.)
-
I've been in a conteplative sci fi mood lately.
Arrival was one of my favourite movies of 2016, and I watched and enjoyed Moon, Soderberg's Solaris...
I then tried 2001.
Do not watch 2001 in 2017
-
I've been in a conteplative sci fi mood lately.
Arrival was one of my favourite movies of 2016, and I watched and enjoyed Moon, Soderberg's Solaris...
I then tried 2001.
Do not watch 2001 in 2017
Children of Men is a really hard watch nowadays.
Have you seen Tarkovsky's Solaris? He can be slow in terms of pacing but his movies are really good. Stalker's worth watching too.
-
Has it aged not so great or ? Because I haven't watched it in ages and uh you probably can remember how excited it made me all those years ago.
-
Oh no, it is still fucking brilliant, but its text resonates a lot more nowadays.
-
X-Men Apocalypse: This is the most emotionless and plotless movie I've seen in some time. But damn that Quicksilver scene is fucking brilliant.
-
I've been in a conteplative sci fi mood lately.
Arrival was one of my favourite movies of 2016, and I watched and enjoyed Moon, Soderberg's Solaris...
I then tried 2001.
Do not watch 2001 in 2017
What a coinsidence, I'm watching 2001 as well. What's the issue with watching it in 2017, other than quite a few of the computer predictions being completely wrong?
-
I'll track down OG Solaris, I've been meaning to for a while
2001 has just badly aged. Might be the slowest movie I've seen? But the issue is not that it's slow, it's that it's slow and (mostly) obvious. I often knew what the movie wanted me to think minutes before scenes ended. Do we need like thirty minutes of men in monkey costumes to understand that dawn of mankind = tools = weapons?
Obviously this was all palatable in the day because it was awe inspiring, but it isn't anymore.
I mean I think it's telling that you wrote a DL post while watching it no problem.
Props for the cinematography/design/ending though.
-
You can get away with watching 2001 at 1.5x speed and the experience is generally better for it.
-
I've been in a conteplative sci fi mood lately.
Arrival was one of my favourite movies of 2016, and I watched and enjoyed Moon, Soderberg's Solaris...
I then tried 2001.
Do not watch 2001 in 2017
Children of Men is a really hard watch nowadays.
Have you seen Tarkovsky's Solaris? He can be slow in terms of pacing but his movies are really good. Stalker's worth watching too.
OOC why is Children of Men a hard watch?
-
Oh no, it is still fucking brilliant, but its text resonates a lot more nowadays.
-
Fen have you seen Under the Skin?
-
Yes!
I'm actually looking at its poster in our bedroom right now
-
Under the Skin is one of the more original things I've seen in years. The score is incredibly unsettling and technically, I think the director is kind of a genius in creating an alienating mood.
I'm not sure what else has come out recently sci-fi wise that you might like... maybe Ex Machina which is half a good movie but I don't think it totally lands.
-
I think, Gourry, your summation of Ex Machina was, "I've never seen the first half of this movie before, but I've seen the second half a thousand times." Apt description. I think it's worth watching for the novel bits even if it does make too many textbook decisions for the ending. There is plenty of genuinely unsettling material in there (the dance sequence, the surveillance montage) before it runs out of ideas.
Under the Skin was deeply weird, and part (along with Lost In Translation and Her) of what makes me not mind Scarlett Johansson as a casting choice for Ghost in the Shell--playing figuratively or literally alienated organisms seems to come naturally to her (however, since this is the only remotely encouraging thing about it, I still don't have good expectations).
I haven't watched much new lately, other than the 2014 Godzilla. About which I'll only say that speaking as someone who grew up on Godzilla, I was pleased to encounter a non-blasphemous adaptation. And I guess I did over the weekend watch Dr. Strange, which was very much just yet another Marvel movie. What a waste of a supporting cast.
-
I have no idea what my expectations for GitS are. You make a good point about Johansson, but she's also starred in some serious dreck. So I dunno. And it seems like the movie - at least the trailers - has liberally stolen very specific shots from all of the prior animated GitSs. Maybe that means the director understands what is cool and good about GitS! Maybe it means he has no idea and is desperately parroting what worked before. SAC suffered marginally from bouts of franchise narcissism, but it was also, on the whole, brilliant.
-
I think it'll be beautiful visually and a wreck plotwise. They seem to have melded all the plots of the GitS franchise together, and I've seen articles that place Kuze as the villain.
-
Yeah, basically. I expect an unsalvageable script for a plot that lifts some of the more notable plot points of the source material, in a narrative that is fundamentally stock Hollywood thriller at heart without really recognizing the unique value of the source material. I expect a mess but maybe, if we're lucky, a pretty mess.
-
Which I sort of don't get. People ate up shit like Inception. Did they really not think that they couldn't attempt the source material? Or was it a fear of too strictly adapting it?
-
Time will tell. A movie like GitS I put very little stock in previews and the like - whether the film itself is adventurous, the previews are gonna go broad appeal to get butts in seats.
-
I'm currently rewatching Drive. A film I was required to watch during my media class. I remember really liking the film when I first watched it and I still really like it now. The action scenes are well shot and don't conform to the low hanging fruits, such as shaky cam and long shots. The acting is also very good, particularly from Ryan Gosling and Albert Brooks. Ryan Gosling is able to convey the tranquil fury of the driver effectively, and Albert Brooks' charisma allows him to steal the show in any scene he's in.
Oh yeah, did I mention the soundtrack in this film was Godlike?
-
New Ghost in the shell seems to want to draw from multiple older GitS sources while still making sense as one film.
Ghost in the shell: a stand-alone? Complex!
-
My all-time worst post
-
The first step is to recognize you have a problem
-
My all-time worst post
I hate this.
-
Ghost in the shell: a stand-alone? Complex!
No, money down!
-
I went and saw the new Beauty and the Beast. Very beautiful movie with good acting and nice re-renditions of the old songs. I was skeptical about Luke Evans as Gaston but he works shockingly well, even if Gaston is somehow more evil than ever. I was actually grinning like a stupid fool during some of the ~love~ scenes, and the Gaston song just hit me with such a wave of happiness. I love that there is a controversy about the gayness of a man who sings a song about the greatness and amazingness of another man.
-
The only correct reaction to all that is "uh, which version of the movie did you watch that LeFou wasn't ALWAYS gay?"
-
Re Children of Men: Ahh yeah, fair. Missed that. And yeah I saw it a few months back, it was absolutely fantastic and hard to watch.
-
Time will tell. A movie like GitS I put very little stock in previews and the like - whether the film itself is adventurous, the previews are gonna go broad appeal to get butts in seats.
I rarely even watch trailers these days. My misgivings about movies tend to derive more from looking at the director's and/or writer's resume on IMDB and going "Uhhh nope," which is principally where my skepticism comes from in this case. To Soppy's question: sometimes I think it's not so much a wary studio being afraid of alienating an audience with a too-faithful adaptation, or an unsympathetic studio deliberately dumbing it down, so much as it is just a very poor combination of director and story. Sometimes you get a showrunner who just does not grok the heart of the material he's been asked to adapt and does a hamfisted job of bludgeoning it into a more recognizable shape.
Anyway mostly posting here instead of anime topic because this one's vaguely on said topic already, so: currently rewatching 2nd Gig and Steve Bannon literally is just Goda without the cheeky I'm a Virgin shirt.
-
I recommend Raw. Saw it at an early screening with the director. Cool stuff.
I just saw this. It's interesting but I didn't think it was great. I think maybe it would be different if I saw it with a theater full of the squeamish. This thing is filled with subtext though, and it's kind of nuts that this is a debut. There's a ton of talent out there right now.
-
Oh that's too bad. I was really impressed by the cinematography and leading actress.
I couldn't handle the finger scene but the rest was fine
My girlfriend loves Jarmush movies so I think that's it, I'll never love anyone else but her. We watched Ghost Dog / Broken Flowers / Only lovers left alive / Coffee and Cigarettes recently plus Paterson in December
-
Oh that's too bad. I was really impressed by the cinematography and leading actress.
I couldn't handle the finger scene but the rest was fine
My girlfriend loves Jarmush movies so I think that's it, I'll never love anyone else but her. We watched Ghost Dog / Broken Flowers / Only lovers left alive / Coffee and Cigarettes recently plus Paterson in December
Oh, no, I don't think it's bad or anything but lots of the reviews were saying it's amazing and I didn't think it was that. It's worth seeing for certain people and it is technically strong (again it's impressive that this is her first film), it's just that I didn't like it as much as most critics/film twitter did.
Ha, I think you named all of the Jarmusch films I actually like. I really can't stand some of his older stuff but I think what he's been doing recently has been his best (Only Lover Left Alive is excellent).
Also these days I am pretty satisfied if my partner is willing to watch movies with subtitles since that means I can infect her with all my awful recommendations.
-
Ghost in the Shell- Eh. Not very good but not awful. It alternates between flowing pretty well (most of the middle) and being pretty awkward (the beginning). The ScarJo casting never really bothered me for a couple reasons. The real problems with whitewashing are in the REST of the movie, with the characters who are you know, supposed to be full blooded human and not just a brain transplanted into another body (And let's not get into the dumb cultural appropriation arguments given that the entire concept of cyberpunk can, you know, be attributed to William Gibson). The problem with the movie is that it's really shallow. Instead of digesting and simplifying the themes, it just mostly goes for the easy out action movie route and bluntly tries to bull-rush through the anything resembling the issues the source material was trying to bring up. In the end, it just moves from Point A to Point B and until maybe just past halfway there's no reason for you to care at all.
The script is just awful. And the one thing that I think it does well is probably 100% unintentional. There was a whole thing about the trailers where people noticed they kept calling her "Major" and not "the Major". This ended up not being as much of a problem in the movie, but there are still instances where people call her Major (without the The) as if it were her name, and considering it, it actually really works in terms of taking away her personhood by referring to her rank as a name rather than a name. I guess it still works with the The in there, but eh.
ScarJo's body language and speech cadence really is successful at hitting that uncanny valley of not quite human (or at least, someone not quite used to their body), but this is never, ever brought up in the movie at all. Even a throwaway "The speech and movement issues will go away in time" or something would've really helped.
It goes pretty all in making it an original story using the Oshii movie’s setpieces as flagstones, with a hodgepodge of other stuff. The SAC team is mostly there with an okay movie-original character. Mixing the geisha sequence from the first ep of SAC with the opening of the movie worked . The burning sequence from SAC 1st Season is there for little to no reason. Kuze gets grafted onto the Puppetmaster to make for a more Hollywood-esqe type plot. Some of the stuff they kept in was also weird. The diving sequence they kept in, and was nice actually, but there’s no weight to it. It’s… mostly internally consistent, but just kind of a mess too, if that makes sense.
The visuals were fortunately on point. But it made me realize something: This movie should've been made 10 years ago. One of the reasons the original GitS was a thing is because the action sequences weren't something you could do with live action at the time. And while a couple of the ones here are shot for shot (the river fight is still impressive, I'll admit), they just don't have that Oomph they should have because the effects are old hat at this point.
Beat Takeshi being the only one speaking Japanese is really fucking weird.
As for the twist... So they sort of lampshade the whole whitewashing thing with the Major by having her actual past be: She was a Japanese teenager named Motoko Kusanagi who ran away from home, and Hanka electronics was collecting runaways to experiment on. They gave her a completely different appearance, altered her memory to better camouflage what they've been doing. Which works in and of itself. Motoko Kusanagi isn't even her real name in the manga, but one given to her after the cyberization. It's officially unknown what her original name, race, or even gender was. Not sure if they did it in response to the controversy or what, but yeah. The real problems are still with the other characters in the movie. I guess that just goes to show how far it actually deviates. Same spirit, I guess. Just… not as good.
-
Just saw Deirdre and Laney Rob a Train - it was a pretty great movie. 4/5.
-
So they sort of lampshade the whole whitewashing thing with the Major by having her actual past be: She was a Japanese teenager named Motoko Kusanagi who ran away from home, and Hanka electronics was collecting runaways to experiment on. They gave her a completely different appearance, altered her memory to better camouflage what they've been doing. Which works in and of itself. Motoko Kusanagi isn't even her real name in the manga, but one given to her after the cyberization. It's officially unknown what her original name, race, or even gender was. Not sure if they did it in response to the controversy or what, but yeah. The real problems are still with the other characters in the movie.
lol what
their response to the white washing controversy was to take it as a challenge. Just fuckin' wow
-
I wonder if they understand that Motoko Kusanagi is a name that is obviously fake, that no real Japanese person would have. Actually no I don't.
(according to the footnotes for the original US edition of the manga, anyway. not like I would know.)
-
That twist sounds fucking terrible.
-
The ScarJo casting never really bothered me for a couple reasons. The real problems with whitewashing are in the REST of the movie, with the characters who are you know, supposed to be full blooded human and not just a brain transplanted into another body (And let's not get into the dumb cultural appropriation arguments given that the entire concept of cyberpunk can, you know, be attributed to William Gibson).
I'm more familiar with arguments about racism, which I find relevant, than cultural appropriation. What are folks saying?
Re: Her Voice- I am far from a ScarJo fan. In complete honesty I'm tired of her as the go-to for nerdy action, which uses her for sexual appeal and empties her characters of dimensionality. But I can imagine she'd have enough practice thinking about robots/AI with Her, which was a good movie for lots of reasons.
-
So I haven't seen it so it doesn't handle it, but the original anime is very very much about post WW2 Japanese tech boom and the social response to it. So going into it there was a lot of concern that it would be westernized and kind of kill the central theme about it and just make it cool shootbangs. Which can be cool and you can do in cyberpunk, but why use the license for it other than gross commercialism (I mean, ofc).
And Sopko, on the line that Cyberpunk is Gibson and a line of thought on that being appropriated? Eh (though this might not be what was meant?). If you were going down that line I am not sure of which direction I would most want to chase down hardest, forward or backwards. If GitS riffs on a western thing and does it on its own thing with it, I don't see how "taking it back" or what would more feel like "doing Cyberpunk ROGHT" is particularly good. But really Neuromancer starts in Japan for a reason, Gibson was kind of a weeb before anime made it cool. Cyberpunk has an external view on the tech boom of Japan as outsiders holding up this Japanese exceptionalism and technophelia are hand in hand there. GitS is very much a reaction to that as well.
Which on reflection the latter might have been what you are alluding too.
Edit oh yeah I came here to post about a movie everyone else has seen
Logan - A Western told through the lens of a modern Super Hero movie, that is based on a comic book movie, that directly quotes old westerns thematically and literally. Instead of the good guy wearing a white hat and the bad guy wearing a black hat, the good guy wears a white singlet and the bad guy wears a black one.
It was good, I had fun and I got to watch Patrick Stewart swear like a king.
Edit edit - I am a garbage person and forgot to credit how good Laura was. Holy shit like, start to finish, everything about that was good. Acting, scripting, choreography. Eeeevvvveeeeryyyythiiiiing.
-
So they sort of lampshade the whole whitewashing thing with the Major by having her actual past be: She was a Japanese teenager named Motoko Kusanagi who ran away from home, and Hanka electronics was collecting runaways to experiment on. They gave her a completely different appearance, altered her memory to better camouflage what they've been doing. Which works in and of itself. Motoko Kusanagi isn't even her real name in the manga, but one given to her after the cyberization. It's officially unknown what her original name, race, or even gender was. Not sure if they did it in response to the controversy or what, but yeah. The real problems are still with the other characters in the movie.
lol what
their response to the white washing controversy was to take it as a challenge. Just fuckin' wow
I was genuinely amused, though not necessarily for reasons the filmmakers might've desired. That said, I think it's premature to assume it was done as reaction to controversy without statement from the writers supporting that. Given how central a plot point the amnesia is, I suspect something along these lines was always the plan. Which is part of of the problem with the main plot: animated GitS got plenty of mileage out of presenting its cast with subtler reasons to ask questions about where the edge of humanity bleeds into something else, but there's no room for suggestion and doubt with the Chekhov's gun of amnesia hanging overhead, waiting to be resolved in procedurally obvious Hollywood fashion. Where does the newborn go from here? Nowhere, there's nothing left to explore.
I'd agree "shallow" is an apt descriptor for the movie in general. It looks great, and obviously a lot of effort went into the visualization of this future, but little attempt was made to understand it. Scenes and characters from other renditions of GitS are mashed together without any real thematic coherence. The only moments that felt like they had any dramatic weight to me were "We never needed your consent" and the bit with the mom. A good actor can only do so much with a poor script. GitS is material that needs an auteur to succeed and we got director-for-hire work. There's negligible investment in the themes or psychology that could make it feel like GitS in more than name. It wasn't an abomination or anything, I just walked out concluding that it was an okay thing to stare at for a couple hours but one which failed to engage me critically on levels much deeper than coolly assessing what adaptation choices were made of material very familiar to me.
None of this is helped by the fact that the villain is such a blank. What's your actual long-term plan here, guy? I question the practicality of your open air office.
But it made me realize something: This movie should've been made 10 years ago.
I was struck by this sentiment for a different reason: this isn't the kind of future that Hollywood invests in anymore (perhaps with good reason, considering box office returns). It's a very busy future, visually. While there's certainly a dystopian aspect to it, it's also at least a future in which humanity kept on going bigger: more outrageous technology and fashions, grand glass cities, etc. This no longer seems to be the viewing preference of American audiences (unless it's tied to venerable recognized properties like Star Trek or Star Wars). We now prefer more immediately recognizable, day-after-tomorrow dystopias, grim and grimy places all too easy to believe in given the course of current events. We no longer possess the vision or optimism to entertain anything more, and so we careen helplessly towards exactly that fate.
(I loved Logan too but man am I getting tired of settings where everything is just bleak shit for everybody.)
-
Without digging to deep into "modern day is our dystopia", well I think there is a reason for it right Ciddy? You mostly write dystopia about the future you see coming more than the one from before (unless you are doing retro futurism ala Fallout, which still ends up being thematically about modern problems).
80s dystopian stuff wasn't like more optimistic, just more bombastic because the technological progress was so much more pronounced. Technology is super impressive when Moore's law is like literally visibly taking place. Rampant corporate greed was finally hitting full swing with your General Motors/Dunlap stuff or Reaganism and the birth of Neo-liberalism.
Compare it to now and a lot of those things have been chugging along for 20/30 years and society didn't collapse, we don't live in corporate owned Arcologies either as rich owners or middle class indentured servants, we don't live in a surveillance state where you get arrested for what people predict will be the crime you commit.
So what is the running theme for the modern dystopia? Everything pretty much just keeps going as is, nothing hanged and something key to society functioning and progressing completely breaks down.
Trying to think of the modern utopian equivalent and not heaps comes to mind. Is it your stuff like The Martian? Is it dumb super hero movies where tits and explosions saves the day from fairly unproblematic villains? Do I seriously. It watch enough cinema to know what the cultural Zeitgeist is? Definitely that last one.
Wsit - note the examples given for what we don't have in modern society that is actually in 80s near future dystopias were deliberately picked to be what they are.
-
It's possible I just don't know what the fuck I'm on about after a week of not enough sleep because Ringed City. I'm rereading that paragraph and not knowing what I was talking about either.
-
(http://www.nerfnow.com/img/2046/3209.png)
-
WARNING: ANIME
So has anybody seen Your Name yet? It was so gorgeous. It gets the beauty in the smallest parts of our lives. The plot is for teenagers but it got pretty complicated and emotional.
Music was very distracting shit J-pop. But there were only 4 songs.
-
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=328.msg192872#msg192872
You probably didn't see it because it was where such filth should be contained, the anime topic.
But yes! Your Name was shockingly good, it's recommended. Although I see that for the US market they changed it to just "Your Name" rather than "your name." with the pretentious lowercase and period. Of course <hipster glasses>, I saw the subtitled version, so can't comment about the English/French/whatever dubbed version.
-
Oh yes.
I saw it dubbed (subbed wasn't available, but dubs are less of a problem for animated movies IMO)
French dub was good but really felt aimed at a teenage crowd. Room was full of teenage kids and they all cried a lot (my GF did too so it has to be good) and even watched the credits.
Breast jokes were A+ perfect IMO
-
I haven't seen it yet, BUT: your description is pretty much what Shinkai does all the time in his other movies (and it is still deeply weird to me to hear about him in any remotely mainstream movie context).
-
Breast jokes were A+ perfect IMO
As one of the RPGDL's resident prudes, I agree with this too! Rare footage of tasteful breast jokes that are still funny. Yes.
-
WARNING: ANIME
So has anybody seen Your Name yet? It was so gorgeous. It gets the beauty in the smallest parts of our lives. The plot is for teenagers but it got pretty complicated and emotional.
Music was very distracting shit J-pop. But there were only 4 songs.
I just saw this and was surprised that it worked on me. Like the rest of Shinkai's movies, it's really beautiful and has a level of detail that is on par with Miyazaki (I don't know why this is but he's really good at animating cellphones, which doesn't sound like much but it impresses me for some reason). There's a sequence in the middle of the movie that is really amazing, and as always Shinkai renders natural backdrops extremely well. I always thought that Shinkai's animation far outstripped the actual content of his films but this one was really good. The anime music video interludes don't really work for me (maybe it'd be better in Japanese?) which is a bit of a bummer since they are played during propulsive emotional moments.
Also the word boobies is in uttered in one emotional moment.
-
Berlin Syndrome - just got out of a free session of this that a friend won preview tickets too. A super artsy well made twist on a horror standard. Pushes it really far on the Psychological Thriller stuff. Really really good to watch in a cinema if you want to watch an audience get played like a fiddle. The tension is really fucking strong and people bite right where they are told too. Great escalation.
Highly recommend and spoiler text for what it is a twist on if you want to know extended lead up to what ultimately is your I Spit On Your Grave revenge flick. Cash in all your raw cheap horror violence for just constant tension and good character work.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: It's hilarious and that's all you need to know.
-
I watched the first movie as a case study for my media course. I thought it was quite solid despite myself not being a huge superhero movie fan. Might try to watch the sequel when it is released on DVD. I like to avoid cinemas if I can.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy barely qualify as Super Hero movies if you ask me. In fact, if they weren't from Comic Books, let alone Marvel, I don't think anyone would consider it a Super hero movie, more just "Space Adventure with a bunch of idiots" (which is really the charm of both movies all things considered.)
Heck, when you think about it, besides Groot, none of them even have real super powers, or even special tech (like Iron Man or Batman) that would relegate them as Super Heroes. Just Space Weapons and bad ass action skills, which are par for the course in their given setting.
This is more me thinking outloud than actually complaining about calling it a "Super Hero movie." All things considered, being part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe means its basically impossible to remove that classification from the movie, just interesting that if it wasn't related to Marvel at all, I don't think anyone would call it a Super Hero movie.
-
Guardians of the Galaxy barely qualify as Super Hero movies if you ask me. In fact, if they weren't from Comic Books, let alone Marvel, I don't think anyone would consider it a Super hero movie, more just "Space Adventure with a bunch of idiots" (which is really the charm of both movies all things considered.)
Kinda reminds me of Star Wars in that aspect. Maybe that's why I enjoyed the movie.
-
It's not superhero-y at all, but it's really comic-book-y. And great. The new one is, too! The comedy is more front and center than in the original, and I don't think it's quite as good, but it's still a hell of a lot of fun, and I was cracking up constantly. Really strong character development, too, which I did not expect.
-
We're getting a new Hellboy movie... but not the way we wanted it. (http://thehypedgeek.com/hellboy-movie-reboot-without-guillermo-del-toro/)
-
Huh..
On a whim I watched your name with the fiance.
We liked it.
-
Guardians Vol 2: The sentimentality was pretty heavy-handed. But I really like the reimagining of Ego that they did. Also appreciate all the little nods to Marvel's cosmic setting that only comic readers would get.
-
Wonder Woman: was good, not great. Way better than anything else DC has put out lately, but that's a low bar to hurdle. Plot is way too similar to Captain America (1), just with higher power levels. Lot of little missed opportunities also, like they could have had Charlie redeem himself by shooting Ares in the eye to distract him
But forget the Wonder Woman outfit, Gal Gadot looks amazing in a coat and hat.
-
Captain K: The WW movie was in a weird spot due to all of the feminist expectations around it. I think a plot point like the one you suggest would work fine in most movies, but it was unusually important that WW needed to basically solo the fight, and win. Moral support or solving other problems are fine, but if there was even a hint that WW only won thanks to a guy's assistance, or if she didn't "Really" win, people would complain it undercuts the side message of feminine empowerment, and not without reason. I think that once there's enough female-led action movies that are also good, they can relax this, but for this particular movie, WW having outside support would have been problematic. Incidentally, if I'd been in charge, I'd have been on the side of write it to be not-really-win. Ares would just refuse to fight her and say he's more of a politician / businessman these days, not a direct warrior, and all these humans are much better at war and peace than I ever was, good luck corralling them. It'd get across the point that some battles aren't won on the battlefield.
-
A fair point.
-
Way late about this, but Gourry I watched the 3 Before movies in 3 evenings in a row. Great experience all around, watching the actors age that way was a Boyhood-like experience. I loved the evolution between each opus and felt each improved significantly upon the last one. Midnight was meandering at first but had a really emotional and difficult second half. We had to stop it for 10 minutes at one point.
I also watched Remastered HD The Thing in a theater during a film festival. It hasn't aged very well and wasn't anywhere near as suspensful as I expected. Then again I don't really appreciate most pre 90s movies in general so whatever
Trainspotting was next and oh boy it was amazing as ever
-
Way late about this, but Gourry I watched the 3 Before movies in 3 evenings in a row. Great experience all around, watching the actors age that way was a Boyhood-like experience. I loved the evolution between each opus and felt each improved significantly upon the last one. Midnight was meandering at first but had a really emotional and difficult second half. We had to stop it for 10 minutes at one point.
I also watched Remastered HD The Thing in a theater during a film festival. It hasn't aged very well and wasn't anywhere near as suspensful as I expected. Then again I don't really appreciate most pre 90s movies in general so whatever
Trainspotting was next and oh boy it was amazing as ever
yessssssssss
The Before series might be my favorite movies. Before Sunset is my favorite but Midnight is fucking devastating. It's interesting to rewatch them at different times in your life because the way you relate to the characters changes. When I was young and touring Europe, young doofus Ethan Hawke was kind of relatable and looking back you recognize that he's a doofus. My favorite is Before Sunset right now and that might be because that's where I am in life and there is some wistfulness with decisions made in the past that make sense (and the movie holds up really well and has a perfect ending). When I get older I will not be surprised if Midnight is the one I like best (or relate to the most at least).
I appreciate Linklater a lot because he is the director who best addresses our relationship with time. If there are more Before or Boyhood films I will be completely on board.
Not really looking forward to any summer movie releases other than Baby Driver and Atomic Blonde, which appears to be John Wick with Charlize Theron.
-
Baby Driver: This will be Grefter's favorite movie ever.
The Michael Myers scene is the hardest I've laughed in some time.
-
I plan on watching Baby Driver as soon as I can, love me some Edgar Wright. I decided to use the fact that the movie was coming out to rewatch Hot Fuzz. Still my favourite comedy to this day. Everything from the writing to the suprisingly fleshed out characters is top notch.
-
Spider-Man Homecoming: Guy in a chair!
-
So...they ran out of money? That seems unlikely.
-
Dunkirk is intense as fuck. I saw it on IMAX and it isn't just the size of the screen but the sound design that shines through in that format. I'm unsure where it ranks for Nolan films but I think it's pretty high up there.
-
Yeah. The oppression of the action and sound design was almost too overwhelming at times, I can't imagine what it must have been in IMAX. People were in tears despite almost 0 tangible attachment to the characters beyond seeing what they're seeing. I've never seen it.
Nolan was my favourite director as a 20-25 year old guy, having rewatched Memento recently I think it aged very well. It's maybe too convoluted for its own good, like all his movies (except maybe Interstellar and Dunkirk, but Dunkirk still does have the whole week / day / hour thing I didn't really understand until after leaving the theater - I thought the movie just had a random ass timeline)
I expect all his older movies are still good, except for Batnolan 1 and 3
-
I don't know if it's convenient, but I try to would watch it in IMAX if possible. It's really overwhelming and that is the intent. Each bullet fire makes you jump and the sounds from the bombings just surrounds you. The soundtrack also really works well in that format because you can hear every fucking tick of that watch.
Lately he's made films that have some nakedly emotional moments, and that is true of Dunkirk as well with the arrival of the civilian fleet of boats, lying to Ciaran Hinds about the kid surviving, Tom Hardy shifting to reserve fuels to shoot down the last plane, the commander staying behind to save the French, soldiers talking about home, reading the Churchill speech at the end .
Nolan is really popular among dudes in their 20s, mostly for the Batman films. Begins and Dark Knight are quite good and the most I've ever liked superhero movies but Rises is kind of a turd. The ones that still stand up to scrutiny are still Memento, The Prestige, and Inception (I'd add Dunkirk here). The Prestige is still my low key favorite of his. I also did not hate Interstellar like a lot of people do.
-
I'm weird. I'm not a huge fan of Inception, I think the writing on Dark Knight was weak (saved by amazing performances from Ledger and Eckhart), but think Rises hits some really good notes (but is otherwise dragged kicking and screaming back down to turdville).
-
I'm disappointed by Baby Driver, it's a stylish movie but not terribly clever or inventive compared to Shaun of the Dead / Hot Fuzz. It's too pulpy
-
Went and saw Atomic Blonde last night. Good fun, good action scenes, pretty crazy and twisty plot. It was nice to see John Goodman after watching Roseanne the day before.
-
Blade Runner 2049: saw this with the fam yesterday. It's good! I really liked the music, which was reminiscent of Hyper Light Drifter, often overwhelming the action with electric, alien sound. I assumed HLD picked that up from an 80s sci fi movie, but I didn't think the original Blade Runner did that. Maybe it did and my memory is failing me. The cinematography uses stark light contrasts and frequently is filtered into one color plus black. Shots were sometimes uncomfortably far away from the action. The total effect is oppressive, makes the characters seem like ants. Good.
What wasn't so good was the villain, who was too much of a baby eater to make an impact. Is this all this Jared Leto fellow is good for? He sucked. I have mixed feelings about the movie's heavy reliance on elements of the original, but the plot overall was solid, if occasionally poorly executed. When a character has to have flashbacks of what people said so that the audience can connect the right dots, it betrays that the director doesn't have a lot of faith in the plot to make itself known. The movie does that a couple times, and I wish it hadn't (even though one of the times pointed out a major plot point I hadn't figured out at that point).
Also, the movie went out of its way to demonstrate that in the future women are still treated like garbage, and it was a bit over the top. Like, point taken! You can stop throwing women in the refrigerator now! Also also: don't future police stations have security cameras? For goodness' sake!
Anyway, good movie, and I'm probably underestimating it because I was neck deep in the Nier: Automata final act when I went to see it. And Nier:A is a lot less compromising and a lot more impactful than the movie was.
-
I also saw this over the weekend. Broadly the same impressions. Good movie: mostly quality performances, amazing sights and sounds, story hits all the detective beats effectively. The movie has a lot of ideas to throw at you, and not all of them work, but I always respect creative ambition even when it's not 100% successful (we all know I have a soft spot for flawed but adventurous productions). I'd recommend that people see it, just like I'd recommend any science fiction movie that's interested in doing what science fiction is really for, asking searching questions about the nature of humanity, instead of just using futureland as an excuse to blow shit up. Like its predecessor, it deserves a better reception than it got. There's a fair amount, narratively, that could've been patched up better, but most of it holds together on its own without needing to build off of an established property. As far as unnecessary, decades-late sequels go, it is on the better end of the scale (it's no Fury Road, but what else is?)
Blade Runner 2049: saw this with the fam yesterday. It's good! I really liked the music, which was reminiscent of Hyper Light Drifter, often overwhelming the action with electric, alien sound. I assumed HLD picked that up from an 80s sci fi movie, but I didn't think the original Blade Runner did that. Maybe it did and my memory is failing me.
2049 pays dutiful homage to the venerable Vangelis soundtrack on more than one occasion, but it is also doing its own thing. The descent into oppressive noise is its main original contribution, and this can be extremely claustrophobic and effective with theater surround sound blasting it at you. Prime example: the scene where the guy finds the thing (you know the one). It just feels like someone's world has been pulled out from under them. Sound team did a man's job, sir.
And yeah, movie looks amazing, brilliant visual stylist director checking in. There is some straight-up Drakengard scenery happening later on. Who builds a city out of giant naked lady statues? Yes, I'm spoiler-tagging scenery, because it's disarming enough when it happens that I don't want to ruin it for anyone.
What wasn't so good was the villain, who was too much of a baby eater to make an impact. Is this all this Jared Leto fellow is good for?
Pretty much. I think the issue was more with the philosophy of the character as written than with the performance, though. One thing I did like about him: just how off he was, visually, while interacting with anyone else. It's the eyes. Not the weird sheen they have to them, but the way he never seems to be looking directly at whoever he's talking to. Eventually you realize, oh, he's blind, and those technoglobule drones that float around his office making alien dolphin noises are how he sees. I appreciate it when a movie lets you pick up on your own details that are not entirely obvious, but still fairly apparent when you think about it for a minute, without taking time to exposit them at you. (As you pointed out, this narrative is not always that considerate elsewhere.)
I don't consider him the villain, though, at least not anymore than Tyrell was in the original movie. The antagonist of importance to the narrative was Luv. She gets way more screentime and takes an active role in ruining things for, well, pretty much the entire rest of the cast. There's probably something being said in the fact that the movie's most eager killer also cries the most, but I dunno what exactly. Compare with Roy in the original film: the replicant with observable motives is the protagonist's opposing force, not their creator who just wants to make a buck (or uh EXPAND THE LANDMASS through slavery).
Also also: don't future police stations have security cameras?
A thought that I had while watching this movie.
I think the main sticking point is just: did it absolutely have to tie in directly to people and events from the original Blade Runner? And the answer on a production level is probably, "Yeah, otherwise people wouldn't be suitably nostalgic." The movie's smart enough that I don't think having to pay homage totally derails the narrative or proves an irredeemably compromising distraction, but I also think the story could've stood on its own without ever providing a direct connection to the original movie, and maybe have been better for it. Harrison Ford feels like he belongs here, though. This didn't feel true when he had to come back for Star Wars. That felt phoned-in to me, but Deckard looks, talks, and even moves like a broken old man who goes on living only because he doesn't know how to do anything else. It helps the last third of the movie land successfully when the "Look, it's a sequel!" arc could've proven terminal. The only time this aspect of the movie proved too intrusive for me was when Leto floated the whole "Deckard, maybe you're a replicant too because that was THE PLAN ALL ALONG," theory, because just no, god no, okay? I don't care how much Ridley Scott likes to tell people these days (unless he changed his mind again, who knows) that Deckard was always meant to be a replicant. The idea makes no sense, and the suggestion was only ever of value in the original film as a means of making you question whether the hunter was actually any more human than the hunted.
The police chief's relationship with our totally not Kafakesque protagonist Agent K* is so weird. It reminds me of this bit from Top Ten, when a woman admits that her old robotic servant was the best confidant she ever had. The implication is the same: because he's property and therefore subhuman, I know he'll never betray me, so I can feel confident communicating in a more direct way than I would feel comfortable doing with an actual human.
(*Jesus, someone even calls him Joe)
-
Harrison Ford feels like he belongs here, though. This didn't feel true when he had to come back for Star Wars.
Agreed on both counts
The police chief's relationship with our totally not Kafakesque protagonist Agent K* is so weird. It reminds me of this bit from Top Ten, when a woman admits that her old robotic servant was the best confidant she ever had.
The police stuff in the movie also gave me a Top Ten vibe, but for me it was the obvious n-word stand-in racial epithet. (in Top 10 they call robots "clickers." subtle it ain't.)
-
Ragnarok: Fucking great. They went the full comedy route and it works. It really works.
-
Ragnarok: Pretty great. Definitely worth watching. The comedy was spot on, but the dramatic parts felt really flat. Hela was a bore.
-
"Why are you handing me the melt stick? He just interrupted me. That isn't a capital offense."
The middle two-thirds or so of the movie when they're on trash planet is very entertaining. I don't think the movie ever sold me on caring about the Asgard bookends, but it's fun as long as it's committed to going full Kirby and being as outlandish as possible. There's a gruesome execution which is played almost entirely for laughs, which is a thing, let's just call it a weird thing, but I guess Jeff Goldblum had to do something awful to ground the mostly buffoonish facade of his dictator character. This is quite possibly the ugliest alien planet yet designed by humans, but it was obviously on purpose (Thor even comments on it). I guess it just makes me smile that bizarre little corners of the Marvel universe like this can now be the centerpiece of a movie.
Rock dude stole the show anytime he said anything.
-
So one other thing I noticed in the movie is that the music where the title appears in the beginning sounded like they were referencing this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_sQpTTyRmo&list=PL3410309E74D97664&index=17) melody. To me it did, at least. I hope it's true because it would be awesome.
-
It would be awesome, but I'd be very surprised.
-
https://boingboing.net/2017/11/07/thor-cast-surprise-fans-wi.html
Thor: Ragnarok spoilers. Also: awesome.
-
Ragnarok was great. I'll give Marvel this one. I agree in that a lot (but not all) the dramatic beats fell flat, but I actually rather liked Hela. Not sure if just really low bar for Marvel villains though.
-
I just liked her outrageous headdress, which advertised more style than she generally conveyed in character.
-
Agreed on the headdress...thing. I thought the weakness with her was basically that she has a point about Odin and the history of Valhalla aaaaaaand it’s not resolved or even reckoned with in any meaningful way.
-
"Burn it all down" is about as reckoned as you get methinks.
-
You have a point, Hela, but you're also awful so who cares? is not exactly what I would call reckoning.
-
Agreed on the headdress...thing. I thought the weakness with her was basically that she has a point about Odin and the history of Valhalla aaaaaaand it’s not resolved or even reckoned with in any meaningful way.
Agreed. She has style, Kate Blanchett gives her charisma, they establish her as a genuine threat pretty well. Her first scenes are great! Dagger spam pretty awesome. Her motivations are pretty valid. After that, yeah. They just... don't use her in any meaningful way. But at least she had better screen presence than pretty much 90% of other Marvel villains.
-
Speaking of villains, Loki was perfect. I can't think of a single thing I'd want changed about his role. I'm surprised he wasn't more prominently featured in previews and the like.
-
So one other thing I noticed in the movie is that the music where the title appears in the beginning sounded like they were referencing this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_sQpTTyRmo&list=PL3410309E74D97664&index=17) melody. To me it did, at least. I hope it's true because it would be awesome.
It seemed more like they were just going for the 70's scifi synth type sound.
Also, I couldn't really take the movie seriously when Immigrant Song came on for the fight scenes. Because it was used very prominently in the first Destiny live action commercials, and they are shot in very much the same style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZyQK6kUdWQ
-
Immigrant song worked for either of those fight scenes, or for the trailer. Using it in all three? Loses its punch that way.
-
So one other thing I noticed in the movie is that the music where the title appears in the beginning sounded like they were referencing this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_sQpTTyRmo&list=PL3410309E74D97664&index=17) melody. To me it did, at least. I hope it's true because it would be awesome.
It seemed more like they were just going for the 70's scifi synth type sound.
Stop denying my reality
-
So one other thing I noticed in the movie is that the music where the title appears in the beginning sounded like they were referencing this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_sQpTTyRmo&list=PL3410309E74D97664&index=17) melody. To me it did, at least. I hope it's true because it would be awesome.
It seemed more like they were just going for the 70's scifi synth type sound.
Stop denying my reality
What's wrong with running away from reality if it sucks?
-
Girl's Trip. I can dig it. It had some legitimately funny parts, but I'm generally not a fan of Haddish's obnoxious-style humor so there were several comedic moments I was just exhausted by--- anyway, gonna see what skin products they using bc I know brown melanin is p cool but i wanna glow like that when I'm 50 damn
-
Everyone should watch Lady Bird ASAP.
-
Yay, finally got to see Thor: Ragnarok!
The movie is just -fun-. Like, the cast is having fun. The setpieces are fun. The dialogue is fun. The villains are having fun. Korg the New Zealand Rockman is fun. Cate Blanchett is fun. Like... her character was written kinda horribly... but it doesn't matter because Cate Blanchett can out-act everyone else in the movie without even trying (and I actually quite respect most of the other actors!) so the character gets a pass on charisma alone.
There's nothing really meaningful about the movie. No deeper human identity to latch onto. It was just funtime fantasy action. And that's okay. 5/5 fun movie. 0/5 meaningful movie. I hadn't watched any trailers, so the Hulk's little cameo was a nice surprise.
Does anyone know what that spaceship in the stinger was?
-
The marvel people have confirmed that it belongs to Thanos
-
Cate Blanchett is fun. Like... her character was written kinda horribly... but it doesn't matter because Cate Blanchett can out-act everyone else in the movie without even trying (and I actually quite respect most of the other actors!) so the character gets a pass on charisma alone.
Written kinda horribly and -still might probably be in the Top 5 Marvel Villains-?
Vulture in Spiderman: Homecoming (Michael Keaton is a boss)
Loki (Avengers)
Red Skull (Captain America)
... Obediah Stane? Uhhh. I'm blanking. Not sold on Winter Soldier Bucky. Ultron had some charisma but not quote Cate Blanchett level. Ronan is L-O-L. I do love me some Justin Hammer, but he's not quite the main villain there. Oh wait! Guy Pierce is kinda good and the twist with the Mandarin I loved. So yeah, I'd put him here.
Only one I haven't seen is Guardians 2. So... holy shit, she might actually make that list.
-
I might well put Guardians 2's villain in the top 3 myself, so hard to say.
Anyways Djinn, Thor 3 was totally about something, its just that thing was not really the core narrative thrust during the entire Skaar interlude which was, y'know, like half the movie.
It's really quite grim. There is no escaping the legacy of your bloody imperialist past. Any attempt to defend the home you built on the plundered riches of the past only strengthens those that wish to revive it, for they draw far more strength from that plunder and the pillaging that acquired it than you will defending your home. The only solution is to cast it all aside, and let and those who would attempt to revive the bloodied past be burned.
Really what cinches it is the self-proclaimed Revolutionary (and director-insert) is an ineffectual farce. No, you can't revolt and overthrow the reactionary throwbacks glorying in the bloody past. They can only burn.
-
I'm a big fan of Zemo from Civil War, but I know not everybody liked him.
Marvel villains are more miss than hit. Agree with Vulture being the best though.
-
So since we are getting closer to Infinity War, is it time to pimp out the first Adam Warrock album that was his concept album all about it with the serial numbers filed off?
Because I am totally down with doing that. The War For Infinity is fucking dope. (https://adamwarrock.bandcamp.com/album/the-war-for-infinity)
-
I'm a big fan of Zemo from Civil War, but I know not everybody liked him.
I thought he worked very well for being an understated manipulator with very personal goals. Came out better than most MCU villains for being so different.
EDIT: I rarely enjoy hip-hop, but I can endorse Infinity Gauntlet reimagined as a rap battle.
-
Star Wars The Last Jedi
Pretty good! I liked it, it has a lot of great moments, the cinematography knows both how to make visual jokes as well as make things DRAMATIC. Some good plot twists, too, at a low level - lots of nice head fakes.
My main complaint is that I'm not really a fan of where they decided to have the plot go from here. It's kinda like Apollo Justice deciding that Phoenix got disbarred then sat around playing card games for 7 years. Even to the extent that plotline was well-done, it's kinda not what I want.
Stuff I liked:
* Basically any time Finn is on the screen. Really, just maybe do some spin-off series called "Adventures of Finn."
* Actually acknowledging the cost of these crazy missions was pretty cool, too. I wish they hadn't turned it into pop philosophy in the very end by Rose, but still. Progress.
* I like that after setting up a Bond-esque casino sequence, they rip the parachute cord off, remind the audience that the kind of people who come here are probably scum, and then chill out with the underclass & the rando-guards. And ignore doing what they were supposed to. That was sweet.
* Rey's parentage. Thank you, TLJ.
* The rogue turning on Our Heroes. I like that not every random scalliwag you pick up is actually Han Solo. Makes Han stand out more.
* Snope's plotline was also pretty awesome.
* Luke's no-selling of the laserfire. Okay that was pretty amusing.
Nitpicks / plot ideas I didn't like:
* Opening crawl: "Despite blowing up the First Order PLANET in SW7, the First Order reigns, the Republic sucks, etc." I'm not a fan. It made sense in Empire Strikes Back because the Empire *started out* as ruling the galaxy, they could recover from losing the Death Star. The First Order should not already be the new Empire ruling everything, and if it was supposed to be, they shoulda done SW7 differently. I think the writers are still absolutely terrified of being like the prequels where Our Heroes are The Man, and want to go back to scrappy rebels against impossible odds, even though this devalues the achievement in Return of the Jedi. And more generally, the idea that the First Order might be in trouble is plenty dramatically interesting: they've got their backs to their wall, time to pull out every scuzzy trick in the book and get creative and skirt ethics. An even fight would have been fine too! Instead it's the super-tiny resistance vs. the omnipotent First Order. Meh.
* The setup for the casino town sequence was pretty random. "Call Maz-Kanata, get a very vague recommendation that doesn't even mention a place, have a convenient shuttle that the bad guys wouldn't notice?" I get that it's more intense if the characters aren't sure what they're looking for, but this was maybe TOO vague.
* How did Mr. Wheeler-Dealer codebreaker guy find out about the "cloaked" transports? That discussion is one that Poe is in, but I don't recall any indication it happened with, like, a live mike or something.
* For that matter, not a fan of "cloaked" stuff at all. It's kinda stupid and didn't seem to work anyway.
* I always assumed there was some invisible rule that going to warp speed doesn't work as a military option, because (reasons). Considering that it does, and does big in TLJ, then why weren't people doing this throughout the entire movies? It should be utterly standard operating procedure to ram your ship into the enemy fleet once it becomes too difficult to salvage, and suicide traders would be a major weapon of war. Really, don't open that jar, TLJ. Yes, it makes sense this should work, but then there should be all SORTS of knock-on effects on fleet security, and big huge ships being absolute liabilities. (Hell, why not just suicide a few X-Wings at light speed into StarKiller Base's weak point in Ep. 7? Why not evacuate the supply ships, then turn them around on the enemy fleet?) It's especially true since Star Wars has always been clear that wimpy little ships can go to light speed too and travel long-distances, and even in STAR WARS physics, that's gonna hurt. (Sopko says that warp interdictors are standard with any large fleet in the EU for how they addressed it there... much like Starkiller Base, it's an okay piece of plot for a movie where the twists have to be understood on the spot, but makes no sense in setting where people who've lived within it think about this issue longer than 2 hours.)
* Did they kill Phasma off? I hope not! She was fun.
* I like to think of the Star Wars universe as being huge and with lots of possibilities. Yes, Our Jedi save the day as usual, but the galaxy is a big place, lots of things to do for both the Empire & Rebels. Why they decided to "reset" down to the Resistance being 20 guys in a cave on a single ship, I'm not sure. I'm not sure that's really the stuff of legends like Luke, that's more like a band of space mercenaries.
* This might yet happen, but HAVE SOMETHING, ANYTHING that happens to the First Order stick, please! Like. If in Episode 9, the galaxy is in chaos as both the First Order AND the Republic have fallen apart, that would be fine by me, and a refreshing change-up of the Star Wars formula - get back to the idea that the Empire/Republic was really big, and it wouldn't be shocking if the Inner Worlds acted like the Outer Rim sometimes and devolved to their own fiefdoms.
But yeah, basically, if I was in charge, I would not systematically destroy and dismantle all the famous original Star Wars characters and reduce the Resistance to rubble. They can all go off over THERE off-screen and have crazy adventures, and we can focus over HERE on what Our Heroes are up to, and they are LOCALLY outnumbered and outgunned for whatever reason, but the Republic still exists, they're dealing with their own problems, etc.
-
* Basically any time Finn is on the screen. Really, just maybe do some spin-off series called "Adventures of Finn."
I mean, there's already one of those in comic form for Poe, so it's really overdue at this point. Welllll, I guess he did end Force Awakens in a coma, so it'd have to be set after this movie and they wanted to hold off until it came out.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi-
I'm not sure if this is what I want from my Star Wars. But I have to acknowledge that this is the Star Wars the world needs.
- The failure to establish the nature of the New Republic absolutely bites HARD in this one, and is easily it's biggest failing. Like, here's the thing- it's easy as shit to figure how this all went down, flows naturally from the series history, and is backed up by one of the Despair moments in the ending. See, sure, Star Killer base was a huge investment for the First Order, but... they also took out the Republic's current capital and all assigned defensive fleets right?
So let's set that up. The Galaxy went GENERATIONS with more or less the Jedi and local policing forces for defense. The militarization of the Clone Wars and the later expansion into Imperial militarism was a massive aberration that left the galaxy scarred and distrustful of centralized authority.
That was the whole of the New Republic's forces. Aside from Leia's Resistance, which had always been a tiny plausible deniability force whose size as seen in the film is entirely sensible, there WAS no organized military force in the galaxy, not one that could fight even the displayed fleet the First Order has in the film.
- Honestly on that note the vast red shirt casualties (seriously, they quote about 400 survivors getting off their base in the opening. Generously, the Falcon has 20 people on it. 95% casualties? Holy fuck.) got to me a bit. You don't really need to kill off that many people to set up the story you want, and you can do a bigger victory than "well they weren't TECHNICALLY annihilated" and still reinforce the theme you're going for.
- I know you wanted a Trust Women thing but uh guys? When you have someone who you employ because they're dedicated, defy the odds, and are always looking for a way to win, unless you WANT them to go behind your back and do what they think needs done, you KEEP THEM IN THE LOOP. How hard is that. C'mon now. Not that Leia stunning the fuck outta Poe wasn't fun in a vacuum.
- I know you were going for backstab% in the end but... really? You telegraphed Billy Lee Williams that hard and denied us? the balls, so blue.
- Killin' off Snoke? Fuckin' awesome. Actually that entire scene is the climax of the movie, both in Kylo overcoming his master and in him then assuming control.
- Hux is such a PERFECT nazi puke. Bully, taunt, threaten, exterminate those weaker than him, but he's also an idiot who has no idea how to use the tools at his command and is actually good for little else except being a weapon for wiser, more nuanced villains to point at those he needs exterminated.
- Luke's last stand is so utterly perfect in both narrative and thematic terms that... I don't want to say any more, even here in the spoilers.
- So yeah like, obviously they're doing a changing of the guard generational shift thing here, which is natural. They've blended it into this "burn down the old ways, democratize the power" bit, which makes sense thematically but I don't really think works logically, and doubly so in Star Wars, where yeah the Force is in all living things but the ability to sense, communicate with, and manipulate it really is something not just anyone can manage.
- At the same time, we live in a world where all our institutions are burning themselves down. We do need fiction that suggests that people, protecting one another, forming new bonds and forging new paths, is a very real way forward.
- Really though I think this film is something of a rehabilitation for the prequels. And perhaps a refutation of the Kreia View of the Force. The 'Chosen One', forced into being by the Sith, becomes their downfall. Born into a world without Jedi, his heir realizes the 1000 generations of folly of the order; the Force was never 'theirs', and by trying to be the only path for the Force, they not only created a blind spot for the Sith to exist, but rendered them unable to fight them when they revealed themselves. Between them, they bring balance by removing use of the force from blind duality, and allowing the next generation to hear it clearly and discover (or rediscover) deeper wisdom. I think Rei's scene in the dark side cave is super illustrative; she immerses herself in it, can see in a straight line how her actions cause the future, she is in control... but it holds no answers for her. The darkness will always exist, will grant power and certainty, but all that you'll find is yourself. No future, no past, just your ego. In the wisdom of the Force, the Darkness will never truly triumph because it can never be anything but a mirror.
So like large stretches are deeply troublesome/unsatisfying on a narrative level, but the exceptions are amazing and the thematic resonance is very high. Not as much sheer joy as Force Awakens (seriously, the backlash there is tiresome, your nitpicks should not get weight over the sheer fun of it all), but lots of good stuff and leaves one big question that's so easy to build the next episode out of.
-
Star Wars - The Last Jedi
Pretty great. Definitely belongs in the conversation for best Star Wars movie.
I could watch an entire movie of Rey and Kylo Ren psychic-talking to each other, holy crap those scenes are charged and the actors sell them well. Basically any scene where one of those two is on screen is amazing. Luke is excellent as well. When the story decided to be about other characters I often found myself wanting to get back to them, for all that there was some pretty good stuff elsewhere too. But yeah, the core characters are so good, and there are multiple key scenes with them which wonderfully on both a narrative and thematic level.
The movie completely sheds one of TFA's flaws of feeling derivative. "This isn't going to go the way you think," indeed. It retains the other of being weak at setting work (Snowfire's complaint about using light speed as a weapon is something I agree with; that doesn't feel well thought out). So it goes. Still excellent.
I could probably say a lot more but that works for now. :)
-
fuck yeaaahhh
#teamkylo
-
Star Wars - A Failure To Communicate
I mean I liked the movie that probably should've been the subtitle instead, hey maybe tell people what your grand escape plan entails before hand so people don't get dumb ideas into their head except considering how contrived the First Order is in general they'd probably have been listening in instead, stupid contrived space nazis besides it would've meant less pewpew and someone probably would've been upset over that, as well as other, less annoying examples, and hey they did fix the overly derivative of original trilogy stuff problem The Force Awakens had.
Also birds.
-
Star Wars - I liked it a great deal. The high points more than make up for the low points. Kylo Ren and Luke were perfect. Rey *could* be perfect in retrospect but I'm gonna have to render a grade of incomplete pending the next movie (pretty much how I felt about Kylo after TFA). More words later.
-
Star Wars - Count me in the "didn't like it" category. Just as TFA was a copy of A New Hope, this pulls too heavily from Empire Strikes Back. Even if it was a matter of "Hey this happened in ESB, watch us emphatically not do it! Totally different!" I will retroactively give them bonus points if Benicio del Toro *doesn't* become a good guy in the third movie. But you know he will be.
Adam Driver was great as usual, and also Mark Hamill.
-
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle- Yes yes I know. With all the action and drama movies I watched this year, I have to say, coming to a nice family friendly comedy movie is a bit weird, especially since I rarely post my inputs. But I do have to say, this movie was actually pretty good. The fact they got...the cast to work the way it did actually fits. And goshdarnit Jack Black as a teenage girl really sells it. The audience was laughing a lot. And I have to admit, it had its parts.
They reference the first movie interestingly enough (like several times with Alan's house in the game and the board game itself in the start of the movie), and Jonas was an interesting characters to have in the movie. Also Dwayne acting like a scaredy cat is hilarious. The twist with the lives makes me wonder what would have happened if someone actually FAILED. I was bloodthirsty for death dangit! But PG-13 so nope...so sad but oh well.
-
Watched some movies on the plane ride home.
Lego Batman: This is the pure essence of joy distilled in movie form.
Logan: A dark mirror of the above. This movie is hard to watch. It has a lot of emotional weight and it's well-done, but it is not a happy film.
The sheer contrast between these two movies that both technically fall under the 'Superhero movie' genre is staggering. People that are burned out on superhero movies clearly aren't watching -enough- of them. I think there's an argument to be made that there's more variety in this genre than most.
-
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (aka the 2011 sequel w/ Robert Downey Jr.)
I seem to recall a somewhat lukewarm reception to this movie - that it was too derivative, more of the same, etc. Having watched it now, I get that criticism, but it was still good! There are definitely more pointless action scenes than strictly necessary for a Holmes movie - plenty of "and then we fought psychotic mooks out of a video game for 10 minutes" - but it's got a solid core.
Notably, I think it manages to be a solid modern adaptation / update of Moriarty, who is a character who survived Doyle's books well, but doesn't necessarily make TONS of sense. The movie keeps the idea that he's a Respectable Professor that Holmes can't just ask Lestrade to go arrest him, and keeps his hands personally clean while his minions blow shit up. Anyway, because of this, there's an excuse for Holmes & Moriarty to have chats where they rag on each other. Good times! (The movie also remembers that Colonel Moran is more of a sniper and less a random tough.)
Also, Holmes's deductions are sufficiently bullshit to count as Holmesian, but not so bullshit as to be totally ludicrous. (Well, maybe one of his gambits.) And while still sporting a huge ego, one of the main climactic scenes has him trusting Watson & female-lead to figure stuff out without him, which was nice.
A solid B+.
The Accountant
This is the Matt Damon is an autistic vigilante superhero film. He does the accounting books of various criminal enterprises and then possibly murders all the embezzlers, or something. So a very, very shooty accountant.
It's actually a pretty good movie, but I feel like the narrative errs too far toward portraying the guy who goes on killing sprees at the behest of a mysterious computerized voice too sympathetically. Same with Mr. Father of the Year who raised him; the movie acknowledges it'd have to be a weird childhood that trains someone to become Batman, but maybe isn't quite harsh enough on the dad.
There's one major plot point I didn't understand (not sure if I can call it a plot hole when characters in the movie puzzle over it too), or at least wasn't quite resolved. The main company that Matt Damon does the audit for in the movie has a fairly high-placed embezzler. So... why was the best of the best even hired to conduct this audit at all? Couldn't the bad guy have just, you know, not done the audit, or hired Cousin Bob, or something? Would need less of an action movie if you did that!
I might be slightly biased because the novel Rule 34 (recommended by LadyDoor and Grefter as well!) features a bit of a similar character, an autistic-but-smart fellow who finds an organization happy to give him orders to find crime syndicates in trouble and turn them around, possibly with bullets if necessary. And... he's a bad guy. An interesting bad guy who's being taken advantage of and manipulated, sure, but still a bad guy. Not all that different from Matt Damon's character, really, except Damon is actually MORE violent but also is portrayed as having all of his killings as reasonably justified against people we are assured are all killers too, so no big deal. Meh. (But read Rule 34, it's good.)
-
Last Jedi: Good but not great, mainly because it's just too dang long. There's no big scene that I actively disliked, but there are two third acts in this movie and that's a problem. Still, my main problem with TFA is how predictable the whole thing was, so I give Rian Johnson lots of credit for going in some unexpected directions and drawing an interesting contrast between how the Jedi and the Sith (or whatever Snoke and Kylo are supposed to be) work.
Also, my comments about unpredictability notwithstanding, it's weird how accurately this Twitter meme (https://twitter.com/incorrectswqs/status/863241227919122432) predicted half of the movie.
-
The world did not deserve Carrie Fisher and that's why we lost her last year.
-
Black Panther: lived up to the hype
-
Yeah, Black Panther was pretty rad.
It does a few things really, really right that a lot of actiony / comicsy movies get wrong, I thought. (Or heck, media in general, literature / theatre / video games qualify too.) Spoilers!
* Ever since ancient myth, people really, really love pulpy secret hidden family members & such. Especially secret hidden royalty. Wouldn't it be awesome to find out you're really a Prince in some far-off country? Well, fine. But... Black Panther remembers that this generally means something *awful* happened. T'Challa is quite clear: his father screwed up and did a terrible thing by just abandoning this kid to his fate. So many stories get this wrong and just let the previous generation off the hook for abandoning some kid and raising him/her in isolation. Plus, in this story, the foreign interloper who returns and is made king is... a completely terrible ruler who never should have gotten close to the throne, and it was a weakness of the system that let him take it in the first place. Very often, in fiction, the wish-fulfillment surprise foreigner who becomes ruler is great at it, which can happen, sure, but it's only fair to include the reverse too.
* Both audiences & writers also really love to throw secret hidden awesome stuff into the normal world. Hey, there's secretly Harry Potter wizards doing cool stuff in the shadows or whatever. The thing is, the immediate implication is that... why don't they share all this cool magic / tech / whatever with everyone else? Just why are they hidden anyway? The best answer: because they're uncaring isolationists. Harry Potter is actually a good example of *owning* the implications: the stodgy core of magicians don't care about Muggles and view them with uninterested disdain, the villain hates them, and the sympathetic Dumbledore and Harry think this is stupid and there should be more integration between the worlds. Cool. The Black Panther movie does the same thing: it has sympathetic characters who believe that Wakanda should have been more interventionist. Maybe not "start World War III interventionist" like Killmonger wants, but certainly "share the bounty" interventionist.
* Plenty of ink has been spilled on the feminist side of Black Panther already, but specifically for comic book movies, I'm impressed that they had multiple solid female characters with agency. They had opinions, they had plot arcs, they mostly skipped heavy-handed "I have something to prove" chips on shoulders, they didn't go around dressed in swimsuits. Marvel tends to do its female characters right in general, but there's generally not too many of them around; Black Panther largely fixes that with three pretty major parts for 'em.
And the one thing that doesn't really work (but is more nitpick than major problem):
* Killmonger's plan for getting into Wakanda… doesn't really work. It's less overcomplicated than some movie plots, which is something, at least. The comparison is something like… If there's a bounty out for some Wild West criminal, he gets captured, Killmonger blows up the jail and breaks the bounty out, then comes back and tries to cash in the bounty, except that the same sherriff that caught him before is right there. As a plot to win over (W'Kabi ? the guy whose parents Klaue blew up), this should utterly fail. The Black Panther already caught him, and you BROKE HIM OUT so you could turn him in yourself (and caused a bunch of collateral damage). You (should) get zero credit for this, I'm sorry. Maybe if they'd made it so T'Challa was going to send Klaue off to the Americans and W'Kabi didn't believe he'd come back. Or make it so that W'Kabi was already in tune with Killmonger's ideological argument, and Killmonger doesn't bring Klaue into Wakanda and claims someone else did it (to further the idea that T'Challa is incompetent). Something. I was also a little confused as to what went down at the airport… what caused the breakdown in relations? I *think* that what was supposed to happen was Killmonger wanted Klaue to guide him to Wakanda first, then backstab him later, but Klaue immediately freaked out, hence the shooting, but still. Seems like such a distant hope that you might as well kill him by surprise earlier; he certainly wouldn't have been able to stop at right after he was "rescued" and unarmed.
Also, I kept expecting the explosion in the news at the start of the film to get investigated, or for there to be some shocking revelation about who really perpetrated it. The weird things that happen when you didn't see Captain America 3 first, I suppose.
-
I think that's all correct, yeah.
The whole thing feels like a celebration of the normalness of black people, while also being a celebration of the black experience as distinct from the white majority. That's a hell of a balance, and a testament to the ability of a director and cast to create characters who feel real enough that you can step into their shoes. When Killmonger is in Wakanda, he, the guy with that familiar American accent, feels every bit a foreigner. Pretty damn impressive. Also: he was a really compelling villain and I'm honestly not sure if he would be more compelling if his plan, which as SF points out does not make a lot of sense, made more sense. He feels like a force of nature, propelled by a violent maelstrom of emotion, and if his methods are all over the map, well, so is he.
-
Well. His plan elsewhere was pretty darn competent! (If anything, too competent... similar to how the Joker pulls off multiple complicated terrorist attacks within a week in The Dark Knight, for someone who has very little warning that his time to strike is now, he manages to pull off a major robbery, a jailbreak, and find his way into Wakanda in like no time at all). I especially liked him burning the magic herbs. He still ends up looking okay, it's more everyone else who looks odd for shrugging at that stunt.
-
Well. His plan elsewhere was pretty darn competent! (If anything, too competent... similar to how the Joker pulls off multiple complicated terrorist attacks within a week in The Dark Knight, for someone who has very little warning that his time to strike is now, he manages to pull off a major robbery, a jailbreak, and find his way into Wakanda in like no time at all). I especially liked him burning the magic herbs. He still ends up looking okay, it's more everyone else who looks odd for shrugging at that stunt.
Per Snowfire's nitpicks...
In terms of his plan vis a vis Klaue, it works more or less because they can't really prove it was him. Yes, if they could prove that Killmonger broke Klaue out of prison just to deliver him to Wakanda himself for the cred, sure it falls apart. But they couldn't, and T'Challa knows this. His people are already mad at him for failing, so he couldn't just go "you're the guy who broke him out" without some kind of definitive proof. So he stakes his chances on combat.
The breakdown at the airport seemed pretty much like you said. This was Killmonger's plan all along. Ross said it himself that he was trained to overthrow regimes at times of instability and changes in power. He probably had plans the whole time and bided his time, and seeing T'Chaka's death announcement at the UN put it into action. He had to have planned on the Black Panther attempting to move on Klaue during this, and it was part and parcel in his plan to discredit T'Challa and seize the throne. At the airport, as soon as Killmonger mentioned Klaue taking him to Wakanda and then not taking No for an answer, Klaue knew he was a dead man either way, because he's certainly not handing over a live Klaue to Wakanda to tell them of Killmonger's role in everything.
Parts of it are totally a Xanatos Gambit on Killmonger's part, but they're way more calculated than those normally are. Even if BP doesn't attempt to grab Klaue, KM can still just shoot him later and arrive on Wakanda's doorstep. He might be more trusted in general since there isn't the looming cloud of the breakout, but T'Challa also wouldn't be in temporary disgrace, letting him win over more people so easily. But again, I really think the Vibranium heist was all about luring out BP (and Klaue really) in the first place.
I think it's okay that his plan post-takeover doesn't make a lot of sense. Like Jim said, it's about him being a torrent of emotions than anything. But in political science it's been shown that most revolutionaries don't make good rulers. I do wonder how he viewed his father giving Klaue the ability to go in and attack his people though.
Putting Killmonger aside for a moment, one of the other things that struck me about the movie was the invocation of tradition and it's selective application. Both T'Challa's side and the people who go over to KM's side (Like General Okoye's husband, whose name escapes me) are guilty of it. Especially in the latter's case, where in the beginning he's your standard traditionalist, but when it suits his goals (Klaue's death) he totally is fine with going along with both T'Challa going out and grabbing Klaue, and then later KM's agenda. This one issue actually really works on fleshing out all the characters in general, seeing where they break on it and for what reasons.
But yeah. Solid movie is solid. Most solid Marvel movie in a long time, with one of the best villains. It didn't completely revive my MCU Love, but I'd totally go see another Black Panther movie.
-
Black Panther: was good. Not sure what they're going to do for a sequel, since Klaw and Killmonger are dead, and M'baku the Man-Ape is a good guy. They're going to have to scrape the bottom of the barrel for villains.
-
I saw a really good idea floating around to, if the Fox merger comes about, use Dr. Doom. The plot would be an international conflict between two formerly reclusive nations and their leaders as a theme. That would be tits.
-
I've seen it suggested to poach (pun intended) Kraven from Spidey's stable. I'm not sure he makes an entire movie, but he's something to work with and fits in Panther's overall vibe pretty well.
-
Yeah, I agree a sequel seems tough. I think they could make a spin-off just fine, but a straight-up sequel... don't do it in Wakanda, and you miss out on a lot of what people liked about this movie. Do it there again too much, and the isolationists start to look right for all these new crises popping up.
Allegedly (well, according to Wikipedia) the director of Black Panther originally wanted Kraven in the movie in some early drafts, but it never panned out. Anyway... I dunno. The "problem" is that if you want to write a story about some sort of unauthorized shoot-to-kill safari on vibranium-empowered rhinos, that sounds... awesome. Heck the rhinos are already used as soft antagonists in Black Panther 1! Totally seems like more some kind of RPG boss monster than rare animal being killed for quack Chinese medicine. Plus, isn't Kraven already portrayed kinda sympathetically by Marvel? Maybe Squirrel Girl is skewing my perception here, of course.
-
I'd wager a sequel could build on Wakanda's extraterritorial actions. They've been entering other countries with impunity, have spies embedded in major cities, and now they're on a charm offensive that other nations would be foolish not to look for ulterior motives in. And if they knew about it, other nations would be unnerved to say the least that Wakanda's...unique...method of succession nearly created global chaos. A trust deficit is justified and then some. There's plenty of room for conflict between them and other countries' state-appointed superheroes and the like. Basically the South Korea stuff from the movie if after our hero tore up the streets of Seoul, South Korea had the ability and inclination to start a diplomatic incident.
-
Saw Black Panther in LA. It was cool. I have my Black Studies version and my casual moviegoer version. I prefer the first, since the movie's definitely meant to use fantasy as a way to catalyze conversations between AFAMS/Black Africans about the slave trade, cultural embrace/rejection, how black folk can reproduce white supremacy, ignorance etc (IE, Killmonger used scarification to memorialize death when that is, in fact, a type of body modification about beauty).... etc. I'd honestly say more, but, I've learned since my time here...
But anyway, I've crushed so hard on MBJ for years it was great that his big reveal carried that kind of excitement that used to follow "evildoers." So well done. But Killmonger definitely should have read some Audre Lorde, smh... Shoutout (in a vacuum) to folk I've seen around Atlanta running the gamut for this film and shoutout to the High Museum in a very important scene about racist cultural imperialism and shoutout to that white curator who probably capped as an art historian whose whiteness is parodied and just did.not.get.it. Shoutout to art interpretation needing more relevance.
-
Saw Black Panther in LA. It was cool.
.... etc. I'd honestly say more, but, I've learned since my time here...
Haven't seen the movie, but I was genuinely curious about your thoughts on it. You're one of the only people I know who extensively analyzes black representation in pop culture beyond a general surface level and I'm curious why you'd cut yourself off here?
-
It just has everything to do with me. My approach to "nerd" culture's always come from a position of sociocultural and racial interests and I've pressed this in all-white gaming communities whose interests aren't that. Then I realize how often I am the only black female who speaks on certain things. It's a type of exhaustion I brought on myself by still staying. But I have talked about it in chat. So what I mean is I'd rather not poster child anything in a thoughtful response in a vacuum that only sucks up tidbits of dust.
-
The Shape of Water: Was surprised to see this was still running at my local theater, figured I'd take advantage of the opportunity while it lasted. It's Guillermo Del Toro in darkly whimsical Pan's Labyrinth mode, so it's worth watching. Sally Hawkins is unbearably cute.
The movie is also powerfully unsubtle in utilizing the social ugliness of the early sixties, but the past couple years have convinced me that there are some things it's sometimes better to be unsubtle about. There may be some small award warranted for prompting an expression of complete vomitous disgust from me via dialogue alone*. That said, I have trouble imagining an epilogue that doesn't involve Zelda and Giles going to the slammer; when the MPs find you standing over the cooling corpse of a murdered fed, I dunno how you spin that to Uncle Sam, even if you didn't personally kill him.
(*For reference, it's when Strickland says he thinks he'd prefer a woman that couldn't talk, which is even worse in context than it sounds out of it.)
-
Isle of Dogs: Oh my god this movie.
I could ramble a lot about the obsessive attention to detail applied to the scenery in this movie but it's really shorter just to say "It's a Wes Anderson movie," so fucking see it.
-
Ready Player One- It turned down the dystopian elements (And some of the social criticisms attached to that) in favor of a really pretty adventure. I dug the movie, visuals were great. Was worth the headache to see it in IMAX.
-
Get Out: I just lost it when the car door opened and it said AIRPORT SECURITY. Great stuff all around.
-
Infinity War - I predicted exactly 0% of this movie. It is wonderful. Please go see it in the theater before it gets spoiled for you. You need to experience this firsthand.
-
Deadpool 2: Not as good as the first one. Victim of all-the-good-jokes-are-in-the-trailer syndrome. Nice to see Juggernaut outside of X3.
-
I had the exact opposite experiences honestly. Infinity War felt mostly predictable but still better than most Marvel, and Deadpool was just as good as the original and the best jokes/easter eggs weren't in the commercials.
I got the dirtiest looks when I started laughing like a loon during the whole Take On Me bit
-
Yeah I was probably a bit harsh, there is some really funny stuff like the retcon at the end. But I still think it's a big step down from the original.
-
Incredibles 2: I think overall I didn't like it? I mean the production value is good, and the same elements are there from the first film. But the plot is too similar to the first film's. And the villain is really dark and kind of detracts from the enjoyment of seeing superheroes be super. The raccoon is the best part for sure.
-
Okay first off I have been MAJORLY lazy when it comes to movies, as I go to them but then forget to actually post my likes and hates. I will try to be a bit more on point for these things for now on.
Antman and Wasp:
Where do I begin? It was the best magician movie eve-what? It's a superhero movie? Oh...well. Um. This is awkward.
Basically, seeing as I never SAW the first movie (to be fair, I never watched the first two Thor movies or Civil War either), I did read up a LOT of the summary, so I'm (mostly) caught up. The previews I first saw for it do not betray the movie premise. And from what I've seen, the plot was very um well. I don't know how to say it really, but it was different. At least to me. A lot of the plot points I didn't really expect (and I should have since there's been parts of these on the shows I watch). The villain was sympathetic and everyone's flight was a bit too much high stakes. I do have to admit the action was good for a movie like that. Though I kept cracking up at some of the parts of the movie (and apparently someone else did too...even on parts that wasn't all that funny.)
My only real gripe here would have to be the ending which (SPOILERS) Janet seems to have Quantum powers now, not that it saved her or her family since Thanos nuked them and had Antman trapped in the Quantum Zone. With Hank nuked, Bill's the only one that has that knowledge which begs the question: what happens to those killed? If they were truly erased then what they made would have been removed as well. This is clearly not the case because what I thought happened was that when they were "culled", they were erased and what they had would slowly disappear as well as memories of who they were. The ending gave me more questions than answers.
-
Mortal Engines: Holy cow, that was a bad movie. You may have seen a preview of this and thought, "well the plot looks dumb but those setpieces sure are cool!" and you'd be right! But you'd be underestimating just how insultingly bad the script is. This is a movie where a citizen of a country that just used a superweapon looks toward the camera and says "what have we done?" Like, that's the line. The whole line. It's far from the only cliche. If you look up this movie's TvTropes page you will miss exactly none of the subtlety and craft that went into the script. Because there is none. The preceding superfluous sentence is an example of how the script is written. There is a character who dies late in the movie. Over the course of about 30 seconds she tells you that her codename is a reference to how she was born in slavery, and that she has vowed never to be enslaved again, and that if she should die her ashes should be scattered to the wind, and that she is taking off now to avenge her deceased friend. Spoilers: She Dies!! Argh. (Sage called this Chekov's Gun Collection. I call is the Garden of Death Flags. Take your pick.)
It's such a shame, because those setpieces really are cool. Woulda made a great videogame.
-
Spider-Verse is absolutely fantastic and everybody should watch it. It's both the best Spider-Man movie ever and just a masterpiece of visual design. And I want some fuckin' sequels, dammit.
-
I'm pretty sure they've already green-lit a Ghost Spider spinoff!
So movies are a thing. Spider-verse is the best of them, go see that. Oooootheerwiiiiseeee...
Aquaman- so this is kinda a Looney Tunes sketch of a movie but they make that work? It's not good exactly but it's fun and they wrote around their limitations pretty well.
Bumblebee- So it turns out there was a very simple secret to making a good one of these: put an actual director of animation in charge of your movie that's predominantly about cg animated characters. Bee exists! He interacts with people! He emotes! I mean the shrunken cast and color and the 10 Minute "This is literally all I EVER wanted from these movies" opening are all great too, but yeah, 90% of the movie is Bee and Hailee Steinfeld hanging out, Bee actually BEING there matters most.
Mary Poppins Returns- Couple utterly killer songs, there's some moments, and can't say it's bad. And... well, y'know, I guess asking more of this project would just be setting unrealistic expectations.
I dunno how they found the cryopod for the original Jane actress forever preserved at age 30, but damn.
-
Mary Poppins Returns is the Force Awakens of musicals. Highly entertaining but carefully treads the exact same path as the original, which in a movie that's not part of some larger story makes it somewhat disposable when the original is still available. Very fun to watch, some of the songs are stellar, but overall it's well-made fluff.
-
Spider-verse: It was good, but the animation was seriously seizure inducing. That kept me from properly enjoying it. If I had seen it in 3D I would probably be in a coma right now.
Best line was from Aunt May: "Ugh, Liv."
-
The Favourite: this world needs more movies where Rachel Weisz wears 18th century riding dress
-
Solo. Caught this on Netflix.
It's surprisingly good! Not as good as Rogue One, but a lot better than Last Jedi. No idea why this movie got such negative press.
-
Oscar noms are out. (https://oscar.go.com/nominees)
Best Picture (and other top noms)
Black Panther
BlacKkKlansman (Directing, Writing - Adapted, Supporting Actor)
Bohemian Rhapsody (Actor)
The Favourite (Directing, Writing, Cinematography, Actress, Supporting Actress x 2)
Green Book (Writing, Actor, Supporting Actor)
Roma (Directing, Writing, Cinematography, Actress, Supporting Actress)
A Star Is Born (Writing - Adapted, Cinematography, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor)
Vice (Directing, Writing, Actor, Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor)
Roma is a Netflix original. Black Panther is the first superhero flick to get a Best Picture nod. BlacKkKlansman is an early favorite because Spike Lee managed a Best Director nomination for it, too. Roma's also notable for being a Best Foreign Language film nominee on top of it. Black Panther is also the only Best Pic nod without any other top award nominations.
Best Animated Picture (studio)
Incredibles 2 (Pixar)
Isle of Dogs (irrelevant - a Wes Anderson pic)
Mirai (irrelevant - Mamoru Hosoda pic)
Ralph Breaks the Internet (Disney)
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (Columbia/Sony)
So Spider-Man won at the Golden Globes which is a pretty good sign, but there are not 1 but TWO Disney/Pixar movies in the mix. They've won most of the time they're nominated so that's a pretty big nod to tradition. Still, by all accounts those two pics just weren't as strong as previous Disney-Pixar entries have been. I am happy to push Mirai for the sake of it, because it's anime and because I like the other stuff Hosoda's done, even though I've never seen it. Isle of Dogs is Wes Anderson so that's got its own cult, too, nevermind the film itself. But after all that... Spider-Man was just really, really good. I hope it wins.
In other news, the U.S. government is still a flaming pile of shit and it makes it hard for me to care too much about this and consider it a lot more of a pointless distraction or highlight of our Hollywood-centered lives and attention spans than a celebration of the arts but, well, here we are.
-
Spiderman was *really* good, just saw it last night.
-
Alita Battle Angel: This is how you do a live-action anime. It's very faithful to the feel of the 1990s anime (I never read the manga so can't compare). There are story/detail changes but the overall feel of the thing is right on. Having said that, old anime isn't to everyone's tastes, and I'm not sure how well this will play to the masses. But I thought it was great.
-
Glad to hear it. The OVA is a great adaptation of Alita as it existed at the time, though in the many intervening years the manga has gone in a somewhat different direction (though the body horror-slash-dark-comedy has been pretty constant).
-
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse: Yeah this one was good, watch it.
BlacKkKlansman: This was also good! The last half is very Hollywood'd up, but that's not necessarily even bad, since phone conversations only go so far on the cinema drama-o-meter. Interesting & scary stuff, but it's also a funny movie, so don't underestimate that side - makes the depressing drama part go down better.
Battle Angel Alita: Confirming this was good, I liked it. I think I still slightly prefer the 1993 OAV? But this was solid regardless, and had some great action scenes. (Note that if you're cheap and haven't seen it yet, you can easily find the OVA on YouTube and the like, go check it out - it's short, just two episodes.)
My major thought I'll leave here - in the original Battle Angel OVA, the overarching "villain" is society, which is terrible and warps even good people to evil. For example, there's a defense system on the pipes that lead up to the floating sky city. There's no indication that anybody is using it specifically against Alita & someone else when they end up there for reasons, it's just there to shoo away intruders or trash in general. It's a faceless, uncaring evil that doesn't care if you live or die so long as the factories send up their goods. In the movie, there's an evil mastermind who is out to screw you personally, and is pressing "deploy" on the defense system button (among other things) to fuck with you. This is far more common in cinema - have a nice hatable villain & all - but I prefer the original slant, actually. Cthulhu doesn't know your name, he just swats you away like a fly.
More spoilery thoughts:
* They kinda didn't let Dr. Ido do any cool fights? Pretty sure he's the one who takes out Vector in the OAV. There's just fewer fights in general so I can see wanting to give most to Alita, but still.
* Not a huge casting complaint, since they did cast Marshesha Ali & all, but a little odd that for a Japanese anime, the one East Asian guy is a bit player who gets disassembled for parts in his one minute on stage.
* The only blood we see is dog blood? Weird. Oh well, cyborg violence worked well enough.
* This is more a change than a complaint, but kinda odd that Chiren basically got all of her villainous screentime cut. She's an antagonist most of the time in the OVA, but she doesn't really do a heel-face turn so much as a neutral-face turn in the movie.
* I liked the original ending more than the movie ending, but that goes to what I was saying before about writing in the EVIL MASTERMIND. I guess they're stuck with the movie's ending if you write this kind of character in, but easier just to dispense with that entirely, or at least push it further into the background.
-
Captain Marvel: There's a lot of politics about this movie. Is it a feminist attack on men? Is it a vehicle of empowerment for women? Is it a paint-by-numbers product of the Marvel assembly line? Turns out it's not really any of that.
It's just a good movie. Tells a coherent story from nonstandard perspectives. Has good fight scenes you can follow. Has a neat twist. I really enjoyed it. They even made me like the Kree, and the Kree are probably the most boring alien race in fiction.
It's not an overtly feminist movie. The feminism comes from women being equally good at their tasks as men.* The only thing that really screams that they may have had a feminist agenda is their choice of songs.
*One of the best scenes has Nick Fury getting out of a locked room with his brain, then Carol gets into another room with brute force. Nice gender reversal.
-
Alita: Basically agree with SF's take but I want to expand on some points, mainly fueled from having just reread the manga.
Alita: her big silly eyes really got in the way of an otherwise great performance. it's a shame that the movie is to manic to really capture her single-mindedness and determination, which is to say that the motorball stuff, while technically extremely awesome, really does distract from the Hugo and Zapan stuff. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that the motorball stuff is wasted, thematically, by having Alita still be all about Hugo while it's going on. I mean I get it, why do an Alita movie if it's not gonna be about motorball? But mashing it into this other plotline is a disservice. (Jashugan is such an interesting guy in the manga! I wanted him to be in the movie more than a cameo!)
Hugo: boy did they do a great job with him, he's such a twerp, it's great. I was a little taken aback by what a heartthrob they made him - looked like he'd just strolled out of Twilight or something - but it totally worked. I wish they'd kept the part in the manga where his older brother wanted to go to the city in the sky and created a balloon to take him up there and then got blown up by its anti-aircraft guns (which really drives home that faceless indifference SF wanted to see) and then later on Hugo found a dude on the street selling his brother's hand as a spare part, so he paid the guy to swap out his hand for his brother's, before taking up his same quest to get to the city. It's such a creepy, great encapsulation of what the world is like. But having him be just a little bit more shallow in the movie also works.
I'll disagree with SF on one issue: I thought Doc Ido was fantastic in the movie and wouldn't really change anything about him.
My biggest problem with the movie is the extent to which it wastes Destiny Nova and also the guy who is a slug with a head, whose name escapes me. He's so dull in the movie, it is a crime. In the manga, he is from Zalom but lives in exile on the surface as a mad scientist. He creates slug-with-a-head not to be some ideal pawn but because it amuses him to give this person a body befitting his karma, and letting him loose on the world to do what he will. He is SUCH a fantastic mad scientist, I can't think of any better honestly. There's this amazing scene in the manga where Alita infiltrates his lab and sees this merry-go-round, and it's live horses with poles stuck through the middle of them, forced to run in circles. One of the horses snaps the pole, runs free, and dies of bloodloss seconds later. Then Nova gives a lecture on the danger of trying to break free of one's lot in life. THAT dude is a great villain.
Anyway that may seem like a whole lot of complaining but I did enjoy the movie, and the action is pretty much all great. One review I read praised the intelligibility of the fight scenes, how easily you can follow the action, and that's certainly a strength. The worldbuilding is pretty good too, though everything is a little too clean.
-
Us was legit solid. I was expected a movie for a white gaze a la Get Out, which is something I would not watch again for things beyond that. It was mostly a boring and poorly paced film IMO. But Us? If Nyong'o doesn't win anything, and if this film doesn't open the doors to her playing more than supportive, demure or traumatized characters of Black womennnn, boooooy..
-
Shazam: Quite a bit more serious than the trailers would lead you to expect. Considering it's mostly child actors, they do pretty well! Little girl is ridiculously adorable, as is her adult version.
-
Saw the new Godzilla. I was pleased! I could maybe call the previous one a better movie in a number of ways, but this was absolutely all the giant monster beatdown action that my inner child was looking for. Mothra was so pretty I almost cried.
I do miss that classic Ghidorah ululation, though.
-
Also saw Godzilla. A bit unfortunate that the monsters other than Godzilla and Ghidorah feature so briefly. But those two monsters look amazing. The "new" monsters are super lame. A mammoth? Sorry I don't remember the Japanese movie "Godzilla Fights a Fucking Mammoth".
Endgame: So my physique is pretty similar to Endgame Thor's. I told my wife "Bet you didn't know you lived with the God of Thunder did you?" Without missing a beat, she retorted, "Yes, I hear the God of Thunder all the time. *farting noises*"
Detective Pikachu: This was pretty disappointing. The angle with Mewtwo was pretty Farfetch'd. But the pokemon look great!
-
Rewatched the 2015 Mad Max movie. It holds up brilliantly on a rewatch; great visuals and the story delivers well enough.
-
Also saw Godzilla. A bit unfortunate that the monsters other than Godzilla and Ghidorah feature so briefly. But those two monsters look amazing. The "new" monsters are super lame. A mammoth? Sorry I don't remember the Japanese movie "Godzilla Fights a Fucking Mammoth".
While he never fought a Mammoth, he has fought completely lame shit before. A giant lobster, a giant condor that didn't even have a name just "Giant Condor' and it was like 1/10th his size, and Preying Mantises all come to mind.
Hell, one of the original titans is a Giant Spider, which there was a giant spider Kaiju in the Toho-verse in the form of Kumonga, so while technically original, it's still got a precedent.
Really, there's only 2 completely new monster concepts in the movie: The Mammoth and the huge turtle thing that we never get a good shot of.
The other two were the aforementioned Spider and MUTO Prime, which was a derivative from the first movie's villains.
That said, it's easy to explain why they made a bunch of new monsters, rather than tapping into Toho's huge well:
Licensing issues.
They got the rights to the 4 we saw in the movie, and King Kong is in public domain from my understanding. The rest...yeah. I imagine if they make movies after Godzilla vs. Kong, they'll do try to get like Gigan, Mechagodzilla, ANguirus or something.
-
Spidersmans- Talked about (along with literally everything else) here: https://cmdrking.blogspot.com/2019/07/in-which-ck-talks-about-marvel.html
-
I agree with Winter Soldier being rated as lowly as you have it. But wow, that is a really low spot for Infinity War.
-
I liked Spider-man. Tom Holland is my perfect Spider-man. Jake Gyllenhaal played his role perfectly. The mindfucks were mindfucky in a way where you knew it was happening but you knew as much as the PoV character you experienced it with, which was great (though maybe not if you get carsick). The ending, mid-credits, and post-credits scenes were succinct HEY LOOK WE HAVE MORE MOVIES, START WONDERING WHAT'S COMING UP NEXT and included the only cameo that was 100% required for this series to continue.
But Tom Holland is what sold it. He IS the next Iron Man because, like RDJ, I just can't imagine another actor playing his character (and this with several other attempts having already been made!).
-
Far From Home: I really dislike the angle of Spider-Man being the next Iron Man. Wasn't terribly crazy about it in the previous movie, with the supersuit and all. And as the overall theme of this movie being entirely about filling Iron Man's metal boots, it just wears thin. Mysterio is serviceable, but there's nothing in the movie that really demands him (or anyone else) to really show any acting range. Unlike the Holland/Keaton scenes in the previous film.
Also Zendaya may be the prettiest person alive.
-
I deep-dived into my "Watch Lists" and finally got to "I, Tonya." It's a pity it took me so long– its overhaul of the mockumentary premise for a drama did not lose any steam throughout the entire film. As well, having a woman redneck lead a film about rednecks's othering by upper-class white folk was quite an interesting lens that would've lost something had it otherwise rehashed redneck othering through the tragic white male figure. It's a good film!