[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo

Bowielee

Bowielee

ThatNickGuy said:
Thor: The Dark World

For starters, don't bother with 3D if you can help it. I just saw in 3D and barely noticed it. Not worth the extra money.

Overall? It was pretty damn good. Much better action sequences than the first one. It drags at points during the first hour, but it picks up considerably in the second half when someone else joins the fray.

REALLY great third act. The final action stuff is some really great, inventive stuff. It's surprisingly how effective they were able to weave a bit of comedy in between all the action, actually.

What got my interest was the first post-credits scene (one near the beginning, after all the important names and fancy art is shown; another at the very end, as usual):

Sif and some of the other warriors drop off the red thingamabob/McGuffin from this movie to a space dude called The Collector. They say that this and the Tessaract are two of the Infinity Gems, so want to give one to him for safe keeping since two in one place would be too dangerous.

Now, this is interesting to me because neither this McGuffin nor the Tessaract are gems. They're glowing thingies of energy; one a blob of matter, the other a cube. Though one would assume they can be...shifted...into the proper "gem" format for the Gauntlet that I'm sure we'll see in Avengers 3.
Click to expand...
I loved, loved, loved this movie.

I think it's been established that Loki was weilding the power of the Mind Gem in The Avengers (hence the mind control schtick). If they're going by the color scheme in the comics, the Ether is the Power Gem. I'm thinking that they will introduce one or more gems in Guardians of the Galaxy. All that's left is the Time Gem, Reality Gem, Space Gem, and the Soul Gem. If they introduce Adam Warlock in the GOTG, this would be a perfect opportunity to introduce the Soul Gem.
Also, Benecio Del Toro as the Collector... interesting choice
All I can say is, after Captain America, shit's gonna get crazy y'all.

Kurse and Maleketh were both great, if not a bit stock comic villiany.
 
Cajungal

Cajungal

Staff member
I finally found a Redbox that carried Insidious. I'd been curious about it for a while. It was a really cool story, but the end got a bit silly. That relieved me, though, because at first I'd been really scared. I scare easy.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Shawnacy said:
Brave wasn't terrible. It was just okay.
Click to expand...
filmfanatic said:
Brave felt like Pixar tried to make a Disney fairy tale film, but didn't quite get the skill and charm that Disney has built up over the years making such films.
Click to expand...
To me, Brave looked like it was designed to be aimed at t(w)eens, but some exec somewhere decided it needed more "kid-appeal" and so they stirred in the boys, the goofy witch, and other silly slapstick moments to appeal to the under-ten demographic, as if someone looked at the success of How to Train Your Dragon and tried to emulate its charmingly anachronistic style. However, without revamping everything else to match (the wardrobes, character models, etc), the dichotomy really stood out, and that degraded its impact.

--Patrick
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

ThatNickGuy said:
Beetlejuice

I honestly can't remember the last time I watched this, but it still holds up well. Admittedly, some of the special effects haven't aged well, but that's to be expected with some movies, especially ones that are 25 years old. Still, it's a ton of fun and you can tell everyone was having a fun time with the film.

Also, maybe it's just me, but Beetlejuice reminded me a bit of Trevor from Grand Theft Auto 5. He had the same filthy, jackass, sleezeball persona.
Click to expand...
I honestly think that the stop motion effects fit so well with the tone of the movie, that I couldn't see them any other way.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Bowielee said:
I honestly think that the stop motion effects fit so well with the tone of the movie, that I couldn't see them any other way.
Click to expand...
Oh no, I completely agree. I love it. But some of it and the green screen or editing effects (shrinking head at the end) haven't aged well.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Peter Pan: Not the Disney animated film, but the under-rated 2003 live action film. There's an exceptional level of thematic and emotional depth to this one that just isn't there in the Disney film. Plus because it's PG we get a bunch of kids talking about cutting people up--like real kids!

I'll take this over the old one any day.

On another note, this and Lilo and Stitch are movies I love, but left me feeling oddly out of sorts. I'm not sure why. Maybe too much love and happiness from these movies is getting to me and I need to watch something visceral and "mature" to feel right again. I need a Tarantino day!
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

Finally got around to seeing Avatar. Eh. Pretty much exactly what I expected. Yes, nice special effects, but I'm watching it on a 2D TV screen. Pretty much Pocahontas or, perhaps even closer, Ferngully, in Space. Neat enough movie, sure, but why this one busted records all over? No idea.

Also rewatched Sin City this evening. Still haven't read the graphic novel, still can't completely piece every bit of the movie together in correct chronology. That said, I still really like it.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Bubble181 said:
Neat enough movie, sure, but why this one busted records all over? No idea.
Click to expand...
Probably because it was the first 3D movie to actually make really substantive use of 3D. It wasn't just "Post-Process 3D" (like Burton's Alice In Wonderland) where the screen elements are digitally reworked from flat into something akin to the multiplane camera, nor was it merely a gimmicky "film it in 3D" motion picture filmed with a stereo camera (Like Treasure of the Four Crowns) just to capture binocular images for in-your-face effects.

In Avatar, even the visualFX were designed with 3D in mind. The one that really stands out in my mind is a scene in the control room where everyone goes about their business and the action is trained on the conversation between two characters. However, behind them, nameless extras work on semi-holographicish 3D screens. Screens which are all 3D from the POV of the person using them. Not us, they're not 3D for the people watching the film. As the camera pans around to follow the discussion, the parallax shifting and occlusion of these displays is clearly visible, which makes total sense since the information being displayed is supposed to matter to those workers, not the audience. It's a scene you kinda have to see in 3D in order to get. A lot of 3D is filmed* as though the action is taking place beyond a big glass window which is mounted far away up on the wall where the movie screen should be (like a big-screen TV), but I thought Cameron tried really hard to make it feel as though you were watching the movie unfold through a smartphone-sized rectangle hung right in front of your face.

--Patrick
*in my opinion.
 
bhamv3

bhamv3

Bubble181 said:
Also rewatched Sin City this evening. Still haven't read the graphic novel, still can't completely piece every bit of the movie together in correct chronology. That said, I still really like it.
Click to expand...
For a while, I considered Sin City to be the manliest movie ever made.

Then I watched 300.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Bubble181 said:
Also rewatched Sin City this evening. Still haven't read the graphic novel, still can't completely piece every bit of the movie together in correct chronology. That said, I still really like it.
Click to expand...
The movie shows: The Man 1, Hartigan 1, Marv, Dwight, Hartigan 2, The Man 2

Chronological order: Hartigan 1, Hartigan 2, Marv, Dwight, The Man 2 (The Man 1 is so disconnected from the other parts that it could fit anywhere)[DOUBLEPOST=1384083055,1384082961][/DOUBLEPOST]
bhamv3 said:
For a while, I considered Sin City to be the manliest movie ever made.

Then I watched 300.
Click to expand...
300 may be more manly, but I think Sin City has the stronger script, cast, and story (or stories) while 300 is a lot of posturing.

And both are getting unnecessary sequels nine years later :awesome:.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Zero Esc said:
And both are getting unnecessary sequels nine years later :awesome:.
Click to expand...
I'm actually a little excited for the Sin City sequel. The first movie covered three of the seven graphic novels, so there's that to look forward to.

Of course, the script is apparently being fleshed out by Frank Miller, which doesn't fill me with hope. Sin City is pretty misogynistic at points, but it's nowhere near as bad as Miller's more recent stuff. So a script written by "WHORES WHORES WHORES" Miller of today? I'm uneasy.

But I'm still anxious and hopeful enough to at least see how it turns out.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

ThatNickGuy said:
I'm actually a little excited for the Sin City sequel. The first movie covered three of the seven graphic novels, so there's that to look forward to.

Of course, the script is apparently being fleshed out by Frank Miller, which doesn't fill me with hope. Sin City is pretty misogynistic at points, but it's nowhere near as bad as Miller's more recent stuff. So a script written by "WHORES WHORES WHORES" Miller of today? I'm uneasy.

But I'm still anxious and hopeful enough to at least see how it turns out.
Click to expand...
This is my problem with it too. If this was 2007, not long after the first movie, and Robert Rodriguez was doing the heavy lifting while Miller was just on as peripheral + cameo, I'd be there opening night. But Miller thinks he's hot shit after The Spirit (despite no sensible reason to think this) and is having more control. Which sucks big time and I doubt Sin City 2 will be as enjoyable as the original ... at least not on purpose, because thanks to The Spirit's failings, it was fucking hilarious. Didn't even need a Rifftrax. Miller's perspective was washed all over that movie and it was fun to laugh at.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Zero Esc said:
This is my problem with it too. If this was 2007, not long after the first movie, and Robert Rodriguez was doing the heavy lifting while Miller was just on as peripheral + cameo, I'd be there opening night. But Miller thinks he's hot shit after The Spirit (despite no sensible reason to think this) and is having more control. Which sucks big time and I doubt Sin City 2 will be as enjoyable as the original ... at least not on purpose, because thanks to The Spirit's failings, it was fucking hilarious. Didn't even need a Rifftrax. Miller's perspective was washed all over that movie and it was fun to laugh at.
Click to expand...
Ugh, yeah. You know, I tried watching The Spirit a few years ago. Could only make it about 10 minutes before turning off that drivel.
 
Shawn

Shawn

The Spirit.... oh lord. I don't know why I thought that was going to be any good. The trailers looked promising. I mean it had that Sin City feel. The colors were perfect. The shots looked gorgeous. It was based on a concept that I could get behind. Yeah it definitely had it's cheese from the trailer, but that level of cheese was what made Sin City so awesome. I thought for sure that we were getting an awesome pulp-action super hero film.


...Then it was like watching a rejected Looney Tunes script.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Shawnacy said:
The Spirit.... oh lord. I don't know why I thought that was going to be any good. The trailers looked promising. I mean it had that Sin City feel. The colors were perfect. The shots looked gorgeous. It was based on a concept that I could get behind. Yeah it definitely had it's cheese from the trailer, but that level of cheese was what made Sin City so awesome. I thought for sure that we were getting an awesome pulp-action super hero film.


...Then it was like watching a rejected Looney Tunes script.
Click to expand...
I feel bad for anyone who saw that with high hopes. My friends also went thinking it was going to be like Sin City--had they consulted me, I would've warned them. Tragic.

By the time we rented it on DVD, we knew what we were getting and had a good time a la MST3k.
 
Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh

ThatNickGuy said:
There's a lot to like about The Shadow, though. It's not even remotely as terrible or unwatchable.
Click to expand...
I'm very sure if both films were examined side by side they'd be pretty comparable in issues.

Then again, maybe I just think that because I find them equally cheesy/weak films.
 
Frank

Frank

Liking Uwe Boll is inconceivable to me. His movies aren't just bad, but they're unforgivably boring too (with the exception of House of the Dead, which is hilarious).

And the only redeeming quality of Superman Unbound is this scene:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top