movies What's the last film you watched? And rate it!

:lol:

Ray, I find your nerdy-nitpicking to be kind of endearing, to be honest. Dude, there are a MILLION reasons to not like "Avatar", but the ones you chose to highlight actually just make it look like you've never really paid attention while watching this movie.

rayw said:
These are films about "What these jack@sses did in that situation", common effing sense be
  • An explanation that Jake was picked by the company because as a twin he was a genetic match to his deceased scientist brother - followed by an explanation from scientist Norm Spellman that the avatars are grown during the five year voyage to Pandora. Umm... doesn't Jake already have his brother's avatar waiting for him at Pandora? Genetic match? The reason we're switching jar head Jake for scientific Tom terrific?
  • Exactly what was it the company was going to pay a lot to "Jake the grunt who dissected a frog once" to actually doooooo when he got to Pandora?
Click to expand...

Jake's brother has never been to Pandora. Nor has Jake's brothers' avatar. Jake's brothers' avatar IS Jake's avatar. That's why Jake was picked. Because they spent all this money developing a new avatar (on Earth), for Jake's brother. But then Jake's brother died, and they had this expensive baby-avatar with no human pilot. Oh, wait a minute, Jake's brother had a twin -- Jake! So they are able to use Jake to pilot the avatar that was originally intended for his brother. The avatar isn't made from scratch, during transit, it just matures. But it was created on Earth. There was no avatar waiting for Jake on Pandora; the only avatar that he could use is the one that traveled with him, from Earth.

And it is very clear what they wanted him for. On the surface, they thought it'd be neat to have an avatar that is highly trained in security (they've already spent all this money on the avatar, might as well bring along the grunt who fits the avatar). Beneath the surface, they just wanted a spy. Send in a jarhead to hang out with all of the scientists, under the auspice of security, but report back to the military guys. The fact that he was taken-in by the Na'vi was serendipitous.

rayw said:
And now that I think about it, if the Na'vi clan was already familiar with Dr. Grace Augustine's avatar through her assorted schooling efforts wouldn't they also be familiar with Jake's brother's avatar? But they act like they've never seen him/it. And being twins, wouldn't a new "Jake avatar" look pretty darn close to the "Tommy avatar"?
Click to expand...

No, like I said above, Tommy had never been to Pandora, nor had his avatar.

Sheeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!
 
CF -
Makes perfect sense.
I feel like an idiot.


Unrest - 4/10
If you feel so inclined, watch it online for free: http://www.fearnet.com/movies/b14015_unrest.html

This is a good example of a $2.5m film where everything is done well by the numbers - but it still lacks SOUL! (rim shot, please!)
Looks fine. Sounds fine. Maybe the Devil's Advocate score doesn't shuck N jive with the docucam look, but, meh... big whatever.

I dunno.

It's missing something. I've seen more done with less, and what's here has all the parts for something good, but... it just ain't enough.

Maybe it's just too much ooga-booga crutching by on the violins and audio FX. Not enough ghost.
 
The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel- 10/10

Best film I've seen in a really really long time. The story was really moving, with some of the best actors in existence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDY89LYxK0w

One of the main reasons we watched it is because it's set in Jaipur, which is my girlfriend's town. It's shot in Jaipur and Udaipur so the locations are always beautiful- it gave us a really nostalgic feeling of being back in India.

The music was good too- you can tell Thomas Newman probably used sample packs for the bits with vocals and bansuri, but at least it was proper Hindustani! Most film composers seem to just guess at what Indian music sounds like, and then record a woman wailing some egyptian scales..
 
Last edited:
The Killing of a Chinese Bookie.

I'm a Cassavetes fan, so I liked it more than most would. Lens flare EVERYWHERE, Ben Gazzara is brilliant as always. Pace is glacial.. no wait it's slower than that, it's geological.

3/5
 
Tremors - 6/10
I've been on a PG-13 horror film tear for the benefit of my (near) 13yo daughter.
Knowing she liked.
Cloverfield required a lot of fast forwarding through the drama parts.
The Ring she liked.
The Others she liked.
Jaws she found very entertaining.
Tremors has so much profanity and vulgarity in it that it d@mn near qualifies for rated R for language alone.
Otherwise, she liked it. Good old fashioned horror with a li'l bit of humor.


PS, her first question was "how old was it?", reinforcing my conviction that studios largely make remakes for the double benefit of ($) introducing vetted material to new generation + ($) us 'old timers' can pay just to b!tch about how the original was better. (Insert demographic loathing here.)



The Gate - Well done & interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1SfwPPbkVI
 
Last edited:
500 days of Summer

Nice, cute movie. Liked the character development of the Man and the Girl. Non linear screenplay also helped to the cause[red]
8.4/10[/red]

The Amazing Spiderman
The best Spiderman movie till date. Realistic, sensible portrayal from Marc Webb.
8/10
 
Europa Europa -7/10 - very interesting premise. Lacked on somethings but good overall

Paradise Lost - 8/10 - very solid documentary about the crime. Was kind of strange to see people act like that
 
Chernobyl Diaries : I generously give this a 1/10, and that's for remembering to take the lenscap off when shooting it. It's one redeeming feature is that at least it's not Apollo 18. Saw this at dollar-night, and still felt cheated. :grumpy:

The Three Stooges : I lol'd. :blush:
 
The Amazing Spiderman. It's decent to pretty solid. Can't help comparing it to the first Sam Raimi Spiderman. It's not as good, despite having a great cast. But it stands on its own. And it's worthy in its own right, I guess. I have to say, yeah, the villian and the finale, er mmm, conflict felt rather ho-hum to me. But I liked the actor, Rhys Ifans. I'd like to see more of him (along with the rest of the cast).

It's sort of a breath of fresh air in how this Spiderman drops the tortuous, almost to the point of psychosis and, for me, eventually quite annoying obsession of Peter having to keep his being Spiderman a secret from everyone and not being able to be with the woman he loves blah blah blah etc. Interesting how in this reboot they go in pretty much the opposite direction and pretty much everyone who should know already knows. Might be nice for a change to see how that plays out.

And of course this Spiderman has something the others don't: Emma Stone. Who doesn't have a crush on her? =P

Maybe a solid 7.
 
Last edited:
I watched the Spiderman trilogy recently, in preparation for the new film.

(I'll be rating on the 0-100 scale)

Spiderman
An entertaining, solid picture. Worth the time just to see the final climatic fight between the villain and hero. Rating: 90/100

Spiderman 2
This was the only Spiderman film I saw in theaters. Doc Ock was spectacular, I thought, and the film had wonderful themes and performances. I love how it portrays America at the time. We were gun-ho about "going to fight them terrorists!" It shows that by providing us with the atmosphere of a NYC that loves Spiderman, instead of reviling him. Honestly, this is my favorite of the bunch. Rating: 95/100

Spiderman 3
I liked the CG and special effects...until the end. It was Oscar-worthy before then. I thought Toby did a great job as Spiderman in this film, despite some of the silly scenes he was asked to act in. Also, I like how this film portrays America nearing the end of the Bush administration: we were tired of the war, and just wanted to end it. We weren't even sure any more that it was terrorists that took down those buildings. We felt betrayed, and lied to. This film shows that, in that the people of NYC no longer like Spidey. Rating?:78/100

Good luck, Andrew Garfield. Toby's cemented in my mind as Spiderman, so it will be hard for me to accept you.
 
On the topic of Brave, did anyone else feel it was somewhat reminiscent of Brother Bear
(almost like a Brother Bear in the style of Jane and the Dragon)? I really enjoyed both films, and was kinda hoping to get some Phil Collins soundtrack in Brave, but alas.

I would second the tohughs on The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel - very good film.

The last film I watched? This one:

abraham_lincoln_vampire_hunter_poster_a_p.jpg


IMDb says: Action, Fantasy, Horror.

One glaring omission: Comedy.

Would have to be one of the stupidest films I have seen in a really long time. I mean, it waws fun sure. But stupid. A lot of the scenes are ridiculous, and the entire theater was laughing throughout.
And the correlations to history... Oh man...
Iit's a fun night out with your friends, and it is good to see vampires the way vampires are supposed to be (and not like Twilight), but it's hardly the Action, Fantasy, Horror summer blockbuster I was expecting. I also wasn't a huge fan of the cinematography.. though that's not to say that it was inherently bad/ Normally I love Caleb Deschanel, but in this one I just was not a big fan of the way it looked.

All in all, probably a 6.5/10
 
The Host - 6/10
Cultural gaps are one thing. The bizarre plot course in this was something different.
WETA did a fantastic job on the CGI. Otherwise... meh.

Case 39 - 4/10
Preposterous lame sauce.
I wonder if the actors that sign up for these have any idea of how a director is going to butcher the script.

The Marsh - 3/10
It's like Hallmark channel director FINALLY got to make his horror movie.
Again, I wonder if the actors have any idea how lame-ola these films are going to turn out.
And I've never seen such a nipply-shirt film. IDK what to make of it.
Women have nipples - so... do we hide them or let 'em pop because... well... women have nipples. Deal.
IDK. It was weird.

(John Carpenter's) The Thing - 9.5/10
A fabulous classic.
Disgusting and creepy through and through.

Taps - 9/10
A great execution of a terrible scenario.
I don't think I've seen this film in almost thirty years and could remember darn near every scene.
A good film.

The Son of No One - 2/10
A well executed typical indie film - material no studio wants to touch with a ten-foot marketing pole.
I understand that not every story fits the Hollywood mold. Cool. Fine. Whatever.
But that doesn't mean "every story needs to be told", especially not theoretical fiction of BS that never happened that's still "Yeah? That's all you gots? Pfft."
Keep movin'. You ain't missin' nothing.

Legend - 9.5/10
Studio release w/ music by Tangerine Dream.
This isn't for everyone.

"To make her one of us, charm her, woo her, change her spirit, hypnotise her, set her free, bring her to you!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWuToQn9VH4&
 
Last edited:
Scarface (The Howard Hawks, 1932 rendition)
-Around a 9, give or take a few tenths of a point either way.
--I loved this movie, but I see the reason why they remade it with Al Pacino. Its main character's acting lacks a little. Otherwise, it's a tremendous film and it's definitely ground-breaking for the time.

The Wolf Man
-8.5
--Lon Chaney did an excellent job, I thought. It's required viewing for film buffs.

Metropolis
-9.5
--As good as a silent film gets. It's got everything a silent film lover, or a sci fi lover wants. Sure to satisfy anyone in the genre. Possibly the best silent film.

Planet of the Apes
-9
--My personal favorite Sci Fi film of the 60s. Great acting, directing and cinematography.
 
Stalker and The Amazing Spider Man

Stalker- 1979
(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079944/)

Amazing dialogue. Great ideas of worth pouring out of the mouths of the character's. It also had very good cinematography but.... I found it lacking in substance and cohesion in terms of plot. Although a rough adaptation, it seems like they could have inserted more action. It was, however, very suspenseful at times.

7.5/10

The Amazing Spider Man

Can anybody say cheesy? I thought it was overplayed and the action sequences were, at times, a little bit dull. I think you can only toss Spiderman around as "The Lizard' so many times before it becomes monotonous. I was shifting in my seat most of the time in the theater just waiting for the movie to end.

DID NOT WANT.

5/10
 
PAradise Lost 2: Revelations - 7/10. A sequal to the original documentary. Was not bad but lacked some drama that the first had

The Tunnel 8.5/10 - fantastic premise and filled with suspense. Very happy I watched it
 
The Hunter

It maybe has little problems, but not too bad, not too bad at all. I didn't really want to spend all the time tonight to watch a whole feature, but I got involved enough that I didn't really want to stop it for the night...I had to watch it all the way through. That says something for a movie, I think. Willem Dafoe is top notch. The rest of the cast is good too. If you don't care for films that take their time and ask you to savor the journey, this one might not be your cup of tea. I think you could say it has John Sayles pacing. If you like John Sayles pacing, then, The Hunter's pacing should suit you just fine. Interesting choices are made and there are outcomes you might not expect, so have a little faith even when at the beginning you think you have it all figured out. =)

Maybe a B (or even a B+).
 
Last edited:
Following - 8/10

Considering the budget ($6,000, it grossed 7X that), and the other restrictions, it's a pretty amazing film. Completely enjoyable and a unique concept. And it launched Christopher Nolan's career, which alone makes it worth watching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top