Agree with about 99% of that. Pretty much my feeelings on it.
[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Saw it this weekend too. I was in and out of the room, because it was a bit mind-numbing. Franco is pretty terrible. He needs to stick to stoner roles. Raimi really got lucky with Spider-man. He should stick to B-movies. Army of Darkness is still his best, IMO.
Last night:
Gangster Squad.
Did you see the original, or are you shortening the name of Tarantino's latest movie?
Danny McBride is awesome.
Saw The Amazing Spiderman this last weekend.
Eeeeeeeeeeh. It wasn't a "bad" movie but so much of it is a retread of the last time that we got the Spidey origin story that it ultimately came off as kind of boring. Also, it wasn't much fun. I want my Spidey to be fun dammit, not all moody. I am looking forward to the next one, there's a lot of potential here and now that they aren't doing the origin story maybe we will get a really quality flick.
Saw The Amazing Spiderman this last weekend.
Eeeeeeeeeeh. It wasn't a "bad" movie but so much of it is a retread of the last time that we got the Spidey origin story that it ultimately came off as kind of boring. Also, it wasn't much fun. I want my Spidey to be fun dammit, not all moody. I am looking forward to the next one, there's a lot of potential here and now that they aren't doing the origin story maybe we will get a really quality flick.
Monsters University
Eh, just alright. The voice acting was good and the music was very good and fitting, but the story itself is just so predictable. Absolutely no surprises.
...I fear that we are entering a dark patch of time for Pixar. There's only so much good one can make before some bad (or in this case, mediocre) gets through.
Eh, just alright. The voice acting was good and the music was very good and fitting, but the story itself is just so predictable. Absolutely no surprises.
...I fear that we are entering a dark patch of time for Pixar. There's only so much good one can make before some bad (or in this case, mediocre) gets through.
I'm going to see it tonight, but one of my favourite reviewers (MovieBob) gave it a thumbs up...more or less. He said it doesn't have any kind of deep storytelling, but provides a lot of laughs. And I could really go for laughs right about now.
I think the issue is Lassiter lost most of his pull when his new classically animated films just kinda fell flat... so that, plus the fact that Disney knows how to do passable CG films itself now (see Bolt and Tangled), basically means that Pixar isn't the big dog it used to be. So now they have to do sequels to make cash because Disney doesn't NEED them anymore.
Monsters University
I liked it. It got lots of laughs from me and more than a few chuckles. Is it as good as the first? Heck no. It's lost the heart of the first - mostly due to the lack of Boo - and doesn't have any kind of message behind it like the first did about energy consumption.
But is it fun? Definitely. It's certainly less of a narrative train wreck than Brave, that's for sure. It follows the formula of a lot of university-set movies, especially the ones involving frat houses and borrows heavily from movies like Revenge of the Nerds. And honestly, it's probably one of the more solid, entertaining movies in theatres right now that least won't piss anyone off for borrowing too heavily from older source material (Star Trek) or not borrowing enough from older source material (Superman, WWZ). So, give it a go. It's not one of Pixar's best, to be sure, but it's still a fun flick worth spending money on.
EDIT: I should add that, while I did enjoy Brave when I saw it, it really was a narrative mess. You could just feel the re-writes where they chose to go one direction or another with the movie.
I liked it. It got lots of laughs from me and more than a few chuckles. Is it as good as the first? Heck no. It's lost the heart of the first - mostly due to the lack of Boo - and doesn't have any kind of message behind it like the first did about energy consumption.
But is it fun? Definitely. It's certainly less of a narrative train wreck than Brave, that's for sure. It follows the formula of a lot of university-set movies, especially the ones involving frat houses and borrows heavily from movies like Revenge of the Nerds. And honestly, it's probably one of the more solid, entertaining movies in theatres right now that least won't piss anyone off for borrowing too heavily from older source material (Star Trek) or not borrowing enough from older source material (Superman, WWZ). So, give it a go. It's not one of Pixar's best, to be sure, but it's still a fun flick worth spending money on.
EDIT: I should add that, while I did enjoy Brave when I saw it, it really was a narrative mess. You could just feel the re-writes where they chose to go one direction or another with the movie.
Honestly I loved the heck out of Monsters University. I also think it did have a good message to it about how everyone is different and we can all be good at the same things just in different ways and that is nothing to be ashamed of. It is definitely a message that will resonate to kids.
This week, I watched the entire Harry Potter series back to back. Prisoner of Azkaban is still my least favorite movie because it makes all the stuff about Snape in Deathly Hollows feel like it came out of left field. It also largely ignores what Lupin and Sirius actually had to do with Harry's father making their characters nigh extraneous, same with Tonks in Order of the Phoenix. (I won't even go into the house elf stuff) But, as I've said, because it was my favorite book, I know no movie adaptation probably would have satisfied me.
As a whole, I wish more movies put as much thought into developing interesting characters who actually evolve over time.
As a whole, I wish more movies put as much thought into developing interesting characters who actually evolve over time.
Prisoner of Azkaban could probably be forgiven for almost all of it's missteps if it didn't have the worst looking movie werewolf of all time.
I just watched Cloud Atlas. One yesterday, and once more today. I think I may watch it a third time.
Wow. If nothing else, this movie can be called ambitious. For those not familiar with the premise, it tells six separate stories in different eras, ranging from the 1800's to the not so near future, and then beyond. The same actors appear throughout the various eras playing different but connected characters, along with the same birthmark showing up again and again. Whether this is an indication of past lives or just artistic direction to show inter-connectivity is really up for interpretation, and some of the makeup effects are so good that you have a hard time spotting the actor behind the character. Yes, some people criticized the movie for having white actors play asian characters, but in the same vein we have asian actors playing white characters, black actors playing future people of indeterminable ethnicity, and Tom Hanks playing goddamn everything.
Some people will be confused, or annoyed that this long trek through the ages doesn't seem to have any specific destination to arrive at, but I really don't think that was the point of the film. This is a piece of art that seeks to evoke emotion and thought, to explore themes of freedom and humanity's tendency to make the same mistakes over and over, and to show how lives are connected throughout the ages.
If I had one complaint, its that each of the storylines were so compelling that I really wanted more of them. I'd happily watch a feature length movie set in the futuristic Seoul, which showcased some of the best cyberpunk sci-fi since Blade Runner. Overall, I really enjoyed this film, and I highly recommend it.
Wow. If nothing else, this movie can be called ambitious. For those not familiar with the premise, it tells six separate stories in different eras, ranging from the 1800's to the not so near future, and then beyond. The same actors appear throughout the various eras playing different but connected characters, along with the same birthmark showing up again and again. Whether this is an indication of past lives or just artistic direction to show inter-connectivity is really up for interpretation, and some of the makeup effects are so good that you have a hard time spotting the actor behind the character. Yes, some people criticized the movie for having white actors play asian characters, but in the same vein we have asian actors playing white characters, black actors playing future people of indeterminable ethnicity, and Tom Hanks playing goddamn everything.
Some people will be confused, or annoyed that this long trek through the ages doesn't seem to have any specific destination to arrive at, but I really don't think that was the point of the film. This is a piece of art that seeks to evoke emotion and thought, to explore themes of freedom and humanity's tendency to make the same mistakes over and over, and to show how lives are connected throughout the ages.
If I had one complaint, its that each of the storylines were so compelling that I really wanted more of them. I'd happily watch a feature length movie set in the futuristic Seoul, which showcased some of the best cyberpunk sci-fi since Blade Runner. Overall, I really enjoyed this film, and I highly recommend it.
I find Cloud Atlas is one of those movies that is a complete split: people either love it or they hate it. There's really no middle ground. I also find that the people that hate it are the ones that just didn't really get it.
I loved it. I bought it first day it was available on video.
I loved it. I bought it first day it was available on video.
I got it on Netflix, but I'm going to purchase it as soon as I can. This is a movie I want to own and watch again and again.
Finally saw Princess Bride today...and probably will see it fifteen more times this week because it was awesome.
And yeah the werewolf effects in Prisoner of Azkaban were DREADFUL, but to be fair the effects in the films as a whole were pretty bad.
And yeah the werewolf effects in Prisoner of Azkaban were DREADFUL, but to be fair the effects in the films as a whole were pretty bad.
Monsters Inc
The Incredibles
When I got home last night from Monsters University, I sat down and watched Monsters Inc, as well. And now, I'm halfway through watching The Incredibles
And you know, I will say this. These two movies are now 12 and 9 years old respectably. The story, the characters, the voice acting. It's all fantastic. The animation, while certainly still amazing, has aged a little bit. Faces and fabrics are a bit too glossy and hair, such as Edna's hair or Sully's fur, look almost frizzled, like someone tried to comb down hair after being filled with static electricity. It's not bad by any means, but compared to today's computer animated work, it does look a bit dated. The vast majority of the animation is still amazing. It's just little things that are more noticeable now due to today's animation.
Overall, though, they're both still phenomenal movies. Somehow, I'd forgotten just how good a superhero movie The Incredibles is. It truly belongs at the top of the others like The Dark Knight.
The Incredibles
When I got home last night from Monsters University, I sat down and watched Monsters Inc, as well. And now, I'm halfway through watching The Incredibles
And you know, I will say this. These two movies are now 12 and 9 years old respectably. The story, the characters, the voice acting. It's all fantastic. The animation, while certainly still amazing, has aged a little bit. Faces and fabrics are a bit too glossy and hair, such as Edna's hair or Sully's fur, look almost frizzled, like someone tried to comb down hair after being filled with static electricity. It's not bad by any means, but compared to today's computer animated work, it does look a bit dated. The vast majority of the animation is still amazing. It's just little things that are more noticeable now due to today's animation.
Overall, though, they're both still phenomenal movies. Somehow, I'd forgotten just how good a superhero movie The Incredibles is. It truly belongs at the top of the others like The Dark Knight.
Edna Mode is one of my favorite supporting characters in a film of all time. Plus I like to think the "NO CAPES" scene was a sly reference to that guy in Watchmen who got gunned down after his cape was caught in a revolving door.
I always felt like it had more to do with the difficulty of animating fabric like that consistently enough, all flowy and fluttery, that it still looked good. In the scenes where they are shown on the older heroes before their demise, they are almost always taught, or only willowy for a moment and mostly off screen.
Then, in knowing they'd have the limitation of not having something so iconic to heroes, they added that to the costume portion of the story, both giving us a memorable moment and hand waving away the need for them.
I don't know that it's true but I've always thought them a better studio for having done this if it was.
Yeah, it was the same with Vi's hair in Incredibles as well, getting it to stay straight and flat rather then bounce off each other and go insane because they were initially animating each strand. I remember watching a featurette on the dvd regarding her hair and what a break through for them it was to get it animating believably.
C.H.U.D.: Not too good, but I can tolerate a crappy horror movie from the 70s and 80s because there was a bit more work involved than the DTV shit that comes out these days. Speaking of which, I then tried to watch Hansel & Gretel only to discover the movie on Netflix was the Asylum knock-off. I honestly thought I'd go my life without those jerks fooling me, but it finally happened. But then, I switched to Amazon Prime, and I saw they had...
The Thing from Another World: I FUCKING LOVE THIS MOVIE. I hadn't seen it in probably 15 years. It's one of the best 50s monster movies. Lots of great dialogue and direction, the characters are fun, and the people who made it knew how little to show. I was able to understand and appreciate the adult humor and fast-play dialogue more now than when I was 12, so it was even better than I remember. Hell, the movie even shocked me once with a non-cheating jump scare. The guys had been poking around so much without the alien being in the room that I didn't except it to pop up at one point.
I'd still say I prefer the 80s re-adaptation of the short story (The Thing), but they're both excellent products of their time. Maybe I'll watch that one today.
And ignore its shitty prequel.
The Thing from Another World: I FUCKING LOVE THIS MOVIE. I hadn't seen it in probably 15 years. It's one of the best 50s monster movies. Lots of great dialogue and direction, the characters are fun, and the people who made it knew how little to show. I was able to understand and appreciate the adult humor and fast-play dialogue more now than when I was 12, so it was even better than I remember. Hell, the movie even shocked me once with a non-cheating jump scare. The guys had been poking around so much without the alien being in the room that I didn't except it to pop up at one point.
I'd still say I prefer the 80s re-adaptation of the short story (The Thing), but they're both excellent products of their time. Maybe I'll watch that one today.
And ignore its shitty prequel.
I still don't understand how the hell the thing in "The Thing" works. Does it not only copy it's victims but it also buds into new beings? Cause it's like they keep killing it multiple times only to find out it's someone else. The prequel at least threw some new facts in there, but I'm still kinda uncertain if there was rhyme or reason to anything and if the creature actually followed a set of monster rules.
Speaking of which, the D20 Modern game has a monster of similar type. They call it the Star Doppelganger. A large fleshy blob-like thing. Basically they say that it can absorb creatures which allows them to perfectly mimic them for 24 hours. As it absorbs it steadily grows in size, but it can split at any time and the body pieces become smaller Doppelgangers with a hive mind. They can also turn anyone into a doppelganger if they grapple them long enough.
Speaking of which, the D20 Modern game has a monster of similar type. They call it the Star Doppelganger. A large fleshy blob-like thing. Basically they say that it can absorb creatures which allows them to perfectly mimic them for 24 hours. As it absorbs it steadily grows in size, but it can split at any time and the body pieces become smaller Doppelgangers with a hive mind. They can also turn anyone into a doppelganger if they grapple them long enough.
I've been watching that movie for 10 years and only last night did I realize that explaining what the Thing does is kind of difficult because I was trying tell my wife how the 80s version differs from the 50s version. You're kind of mixing the two, so I'll lay it down:
50s Thing is a creature of vegetable cellular structure. By itself, it can drop seeds that will produce new Things when they're grown. Pretty simple.
80s Thing consumes and replaces you. Your cells are replaced by those of the Thing, cells which can operate on their own to form new pieces that are their own organisms. Because of how this works, there's a point of ambiguity in the movie as to whether a person who's been Thing-ized knows that they're the Thing. More than one person had been Thing-ized in the movie and it's hard to tell when it happened, because there's a point where it was wandering around the camp near the beginning of the movie and no one knew anything weird was going on. It could've been alone with anyone at that time. As seen when it gets
Bennings
the Thing needs time and seclusion while it's changing a person. It's almost more of an infection than an invader, except that each person who's been changed shifts to the Thing's cause, whether they know it or not. Obviously once threatened and spewing teeth and tentacles, the Thing consciousness is there.
In my opinion
At least Palmer knew he was the Thing before being discovered during the blood test, because he was busy accusing others of being the Thing, and when MacReady's about to test Palmer's blood, Palmer does a kind of "Well, here goes" face. I don't think Blair was made into a Thing until they isolated him, and after that he was clearly the Thing in mind because he was building the new spaceship. So the way I see it, once the Thing changes your body, it's the Thing in mind as well.
Discussing all this pretty much settles that I'm going to watch this movie at some point today. (Awesome.)
Shakespeare in Love: good god why did I wait over a decade to watch this?
2001: A Space Odyssey
Unbelievable production quality. Can't believe how good it looks. Actually not as mind-bendingly weird as I was led to believe though. But definitely awesome.
Django Unchained
Fuck. Yes.
Unbelievable production quality. Can't believe how good it looks. Actually not as mind-bendingly weird as I was led to believe though. But definitely awesome.
Django Unchained
Fuck. Yes.
BUT HIS EARRING WAS ON THE WRONG FUCKING EAR!
I wanted to stand up, yell fuck you at the theater screen and drive my car off a bridge.