Battle Royale - 8/10, waaaay better than The Hunger Games
what? I heard it was a really good movie
-nvm-
[QUOTE=Billy Maize;35879472]Rango (2011): 2/10
The worst movie experience I've had in a long, long time.[/QUOTE]
You either love it or you hate it, i thought it was great.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;35879744]what? I heard it was a really good movie[/QUOTE]
The concept and visuals are interesting which is probably why most people enjoyed it. But the entire Hunger Games themselves are lackluster. Most of the time when fighting is going on it's difficult to tell whats going on, at one point two guys with the same color and outfit are fighting while the camera is shaking about, no idea what's going on. An injured dude paints himself into his surroundings while injured, perfectly with no mirror for reference, some characters and killed off screen and it's just like "yeah they're dead now, you care right?" There's an entirely forced emotional scene that goes on for too long. I could go on but in short it could have been executed waaaay better with little effort. The only character I cared about was the main one and that wasn't by much.
Battle Royale on the other hand made me give a shit about even minor characters. It had an engaging story and cool battle scenes. Generally it was a more mature film which is really what was missing from The Hunger Games, I mean it's a movie about teenagers killing eachother and they went for a PG-13 rating.
I wasn't referring to your post but ok
also yes, I agree with every single thing you said about the hunger games. I didn't like it as much as everyone. in fact, I was just talking about that a few posts above yours
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;35879195]I've heard about the shaky-cam, but I don't think it'll bother me too much. The Blair Witch Project didn't bother me at all.[/QUOTE]
Shaky cam does not bother me at all, I was able to follow Blair Witch and Cloverfield easily.
I guess I'm just lucky.
[QUOTE=Billy Maize;35879472]Rango (2011): 2/10
The worst movie experience I've had in a long, long time.[/QUOTE]
I liked Rango. The story was a little bit lame but a lot of the visuals were surprisingly nice.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;35880395]I wasn't referring to your post but ok
also yes, I agree with every single thing you said about the hunger games. I didn't like it as much as everyone. in fact, I was just talking about that a few posts above yours[/QUOTE]
Oops, oh well, Rango wasn't a bad movie at all.
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;35880525]Shaky cam does not bother me at all, I was able to follow Blair Witch and Cloverfield easily.
I guess I'm just lucky.[/QUOTE]
the thing with those movies is that the shaky cam was always there, so it added to the tone of the film. in the hunger games, however, there's a very steady, wide shot of the competitors, when suddenly it turns shaky for no discernible reason, not to mention it was badly made.
for example, in cloverfield, shaky cam during that part [sp]when the girl is attacked by one of these giant flea things[/sp] fit really well, because they didn't need to show what was happening. it was a horror movie after all, not a movie where a set number of people fights to the death. you don't NEED to see the monsters, but you really want to, but it's like a real recorded video, and the whole thing sort of fits well together.
The same doesn't apply to Hunger Games, because it's a TV show about people dying, you're SUPPOSED to see them die. I know why they did the shaky cam, but it really fucked up the atmosphere for me.
The Avengers: 8/10. Lots of fun with pretty entertaining characters.
Thor
I'm sort of basing off my review on the [url=http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag/thor-the-hangover-part-ii-and-x-men-first-class/]Half in the Bag[/url] one, and I recommend you see it. Not only do I love these guys, they make some pretty good points, and I agree with most of them.
First of all, yes, it really is like an 80's fantasy movie. Not because it has an 80's feeling, but because pretty much everything in it reminds me of that kind of movie, you could even say the script was made in the 80's, but adapted to our time. Anyway, the movie opens up with your generic "hey, look at the cool effects we can create" intro sequence, a brief explanation of the story, and after a while, it cuts to Thor, in the present, [sp]being made king[/sp]. After that, the story continues by showing the events that lead to everything else after [sp]Thor does a major fuck up, and is banished from Asgard.[/sp]
The way the story was told didn't bother me. In fact, the beginning was my favorite part of the movie (as with most Marvel movies), mostly because it was so serious, and it managed to keep that tone, even though everyone was wearing shiny superhero armor and colorful capes. But not long after, it breaks that feeling by going back to what I mentioned before. I'm sorry for bringing it up so much, but the whole thing with the effects, with humor being created from Thor using his medieval manners in modern times, and generally just cheesy writing [sp](Oh, this guy is telling me that he's a god from another dimension, I better believe him and not question that AT ALL)[/sp] remind me way too much of an 80's fantasy movie, it's almost like they did it on purpose.
The acting is good, the effects are good (but overused), and the characters are just fine, I simply think that these elements that were out of place couldn't keep me concentrated in the actual story, because you simply can't take it seriously when the flow of the movie is constantly interrupted by unnecessary things. I think that the movie was pretty good, but it could have been really much better.
Also, it has the best after-credits scene of all the movies that lead to the Avengers
The Avengers: Cool/Yes
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;35881751]Where the Wild Things Are- 9/10
The last 30 seconds of this movie added an extra point onto an already great movie. It just felt like the perfect ending to it.[/QUOTE]
Did you watch it because of today's news?
In Time
8.5/10.
I don't know why critics say it wasn't a great movie. I loved it.
The story makes me paranoid and various parts of the movie made me actually sad.
[QUOTE=jaykray;35883407]Did you watch it because of today's news?[/QUOTE]
What happened? I loved that film.
Melancholia (2011) - 7.8/10
Visually this movie is absolutely stunning, the acting is very very good, the first half was a bit slow (more then a bit actually) but damn this movie is powerful.
And depressing as fuck.
Blade
blade owns
JESUS CHRIST EVERYONE JUST CAN'T STFU ABOUT THE AVENGERS
ok
Scent of a Woman
Al Pacino never was as much of a badass as he is here. He's blind, and he loves the female.
He ends up as the role model by the strength of his strong, humorous character. He's genuine, but also has a lot of pain in his heart. That's the connection I like about this movie.
The guy who played Robin from Batman is here too, and he actually has a great performance.. shame his career took a nosedive.
Worth watching, it's the type of movie where it takes its time, but not overly that requires a lot of effort to warm to the conversations. With this, I felt at home with each character and it worked truly well.
Apart from the Pacino aspect of the movie, it's also about a college feud which was pretty okay to the plot. I've seen this stuff a ton of times, but at the end when Mr Pacino helps the kid out by standing up against the "school disciplinary courts", is pretty stunning and natural.
One of his very best.
I just started watching "Hell on Wheels". It's not a movie but a TV series and I must say it's pretty entertaining. Anyone else watching/seen it?
[QUOTE=jaybuz;35885022]What happened? I loved that film.[/QUOTE]
Maurice Sendak, the author of Where the Wild Things Are, died yesterday aged 83.
Rampage - 7/10
Sooo much shakycam.
Just watched Cowboy Bebop episode 5. It cemented it as my favourite anime, and perhaps favourite show. Almost everything about it is perfect. That soundtrack... That scene...
[video=youtube;XJjnbhSTuqQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJjnbhSTuqQ[/video]
[video=youtube;LzFSsZo7rfA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzFSsZo7rfA[/video]
I will give the episode a 10/10 and the show so far a 9/10
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - 9/10
Thought this was a fantastic film, the acting and the cinematography of the memory erasure sequences especially stand out.
Also between this and Titanic I have the biggest celebrity crush on Kate Winslet.
[QUOTE=Buttman;35887568]Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - 9/10
Thought this was a fantastic film, the acting and the cinematography of the memory erasure sequences especially stand out.
Also between this and Titanic I have the biggest celebrity crush on Kate Winslet.[/QUOTE]
watch The Reader and Revolutionary Road, she's brilliant in them.
[QUOTE=Parakon;35879742]Battle Royale - 8/10, waaaay better than The Hunger Games[/QUOTE]
It really isn't fair to compare them when one is a gory japanese action horror movie while the other is a teen book based upon it.
[QUOTE=Scot;35889312]It really isn't fair to compare them when one is a gory japanese action horror movie while the other is a teen book based upon it.[/QUOTE]
They are compared because they are basically the same concept in different wrapping paper.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;35889729]They are compared because they are basically the same concept in different wrapping paper.[/QUOTE]
As I said, maybe that's because The Hunger Games is based on Battle Royale.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
