Rate The Last Movie You Watched - This Thread Took 12 Years To Make Edition - General

[QUOTE=Killuah;48981699]The only thing that irks me is knowing that the movie is largly made of premade setups and scenes. [editline]25th October 2015[/editline] Event Horizon 6/10 Horrible shlock with awesome effects. A movie right out of that sweet spot before CGI was replacing most effects.[/QUOTE] Event Horizon is a cult classic for a reason. I'm still hoping this day that they release the uncut version, even if it ends up being a standard def extra on the next blu-ray release.

First Blood (1982) This is my first "real" Rambo movie. I say "real" because my only other experience (that I remember) is the most recent one that I think came out in '06. Anyway, just pure top notch 80's action which is all I wanted. Loved the guerrilla stealth attacks, I need more of that in movies. Good ending, especially because of Stallone's performance with the Colonel. 7.5/10 Any of the other movies worth watching?

nope, first blood is as good as it gets. the other movies are incredibly 80s and funny to watch though from what i remember. but no dont waste your time

The other Rambo movies are fun shlock but not nearly as good as the first one.

watch them, but always remember that first blood is in a league of its own.

First Blood is a rather different beast than the rest of the sequels, it actually has something on its mind other than a ludicrous body count (fun fact, Rambo doesn't actually kill anyone in First Blood, the only death is accidental). It's a character study on a wounded Vietnam vet just as much as it is a good action movie, and that alone puts above the sequels, which are more or less just cheesy 80's action movies. Which is not to say they're not worth watching, but if you want something more substantial from your action movies besides guns and explosions, you won't get those from the Rambo sequels. Besides, Commando is pretty much as good as cheesy 80's action movies get, so just watch that instead.

Rambo 3 is a less fun Commando imo [editline]26th October 2015[/editline] way more patriotic, but less fun

On the weekend I saw Troll Hunter and Willow Creek. Troll Hunter was alright, I did like watching it, but it definitely could have been better. I didn't really care for any of the characters except for Hans, the troll hunter, so I didn't feel much when [sp]Kalle died[/sp]. It also didn't really seem like the characters were in any particular danger at any point to me. But overall I did like the different trolls and the stuff that they were doing with them, and the fact that it got to the point rather quickly without a waffling introduction. It didn't do anything too terribly wrong, nor was its found footage-ness detrimental (and while it isn't normally something I care about, I did find the bogus sciency-bits a little painful). Willow Creek I was a bit more on the fence about. It too was a found footage movie, but its about this couple that goes looking for a bigfoot. In the beginning, it seemed promising, as the initial introduction did establish the kind of relationship between the two rather well. However, the introduction to the whole premise, and basically the before-shit before the scary bits were supposed to start dragged on for too long, about 45 minutes. Normally I don't mind long intros, even in horror movies, but after a point, nothing much was happening in the introduction. Even though it did try to establish those creepy little things that indicate something is off with the whole ordeal, they were sparse and also not particularly interesting or engaging, and this was 45 minutes in a 1hr 15 minute horror movie mind you. Once the creepy shit starts, the movie pretty quickly goes into a long scene [sp] where the couple are in a tent and being terrorised by supposed bigfeet. This scene takes around 15 minutes and is a single take, which is impressive from the whole acting.technical aspect, however, the whole thing relies on jumpscares as the tent gets knocked and the creepiness of the sounds the bigfeet make, however, these sounds aren't too creepy and very quickly become boring. The next chunk of scary bits is better, and I did find it creepy and somewhat scary at points. This was mainly because it wasn't taking place in a fucking tent where the creepy shit is sparse and cheap. There is a reveal of what the bigfeet look like, which normally I don't care for, however in the context of the scene it worked, especially because the bigfoot itself looked rather creepy and they didn't spend too long staring at it, as that would have ruined it too. After that, the remainder of the movie is the two running away and screaming and being murdered by the bigfeet. This scene could have been better as it relied on sound only, but the sound wasn't too creepy or visceral or unpleasant.[/sp] Overall, I didn't particularly care for the movie, because although it was capable of being creepy, and it could very well have been scarier, the whole thing waffled when it shouldn't be waffling, and the scary bits weren't dense or scary enough. This might have been better if it was the length of a short film, or at least, a film shorter than a feature, which is what it's supposed to be. Both of the movies I saw on SBS On Demand, if anyone from Australia wants to watch them.

Goosebumps 7/10 I was really worried about this movie when the first trailers were released, but thankfully my worries were diminished as it's actually a very well made film that i think goosebump's fans and new fans will enjoy, any monster from any of books you could think of is in this film even if it's a small part or in the background they managed to cram as much of them in here as possible. The main actors for the film actually did a pretty good job for the roles they were given and knocked it out of the park especially jack black as r.l stine. Alot of love was put into it despite some of the negatives i had with it. Positives Pretty much any goosebumps monster you can think of is in this film. The Chemistry between the main star's of the film The Pacing felt very much like a goosebump's book Danny Elfman's score Negative's Pointless love interest sub plot's Some of the cgi looked wired in some places The side character's were just mostly there for the monster's to terrorize.

[QUOTE=Carlito;48984642]On the weekend I saw Troll Hunter and Willow Creek. Troll Hunter was alright, I did like watching it, but it definitely could have been better. I didn't really care for any of the characters except for Hans, the troll hunter, so I didn't feel much when [sp]Kalle died[/sp]. It also didn't really seem like the characters were in any particular danger at any point to me. But overall I did like the different trolls and the stuff that they were doing with them, and the fact that it got to the point rather quickly without a waffling introduction. It didn't do anything too terribly wrong, nor was its found footage-ness detrimental (and while it isn't normally something I care about, I did find the bogus sciency-bits a little painful).[/QUOTE] i liked the movie, but you're right, probably the weakest part was, [sp]"oh shit, our cameraman died!..." followed by them promptly shipping another cameraperson in by train[/sp]

[QUOTE=AltF4 All Day;48983893]First Blood is a rather different beast than the rest of the sequels, it actually has something on its mind other than a ludicrous body count (fun fact, Rambo doesn't actually kill anyone in First Blood, the only death is accidental). It's a character study on a wounded Vietnam vet just as much as it is a good action movie, and that alone puts above the sequels, which are more or less just cheesy 80's action movies. Which is not to say they're not worth watching, but if you want something more substantial from your action movies besides guns and explosions, you won't get those from the Rambo sequels. Besides, Commando is pretty much as good as cheesy 80's action movies get, so just watch that instead.[/QUOTE] Its interesting that the rambo series is exactly like the rocky series 1st movie is really actually a fantastic movie that people forget because the sequels are typical over the top 80s action extravaganzas. The sequels to both series are completely foreign in their feel and nature.

I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey for the first time the other day and it was really really wild. For 1968 this was so fucking crystal clear and everything was so beautiful. I can't believe it was made so long ago. But the ending was what got me. I think the ending was so mind fuckish that I'm going to have to deduct a point and a half. 8.5/10

SPECTRE - meeeeeeeeeh. felt really weird to me. like the script was rushed or wasn't finished. some nice ideas that weren't really developed. The most obvious twist in the history of cinema! Waltz was pretty good though. Didn't really feel like Hans Landa which was nice. Pretty solid action. Snow sequence is way too short, and didn't include skis or a Union Flag parachute. I like the references to other 00's. Solid Bond. Better than Skyfall, in my opinion. (I don't think Skyfall was very good.) Solid probable send off for Craig, and it does tie up all of the emotional loose ends. Full circle from Casino Royale. The next gen of Bond is all set up with the new M, Q, [sp]Blofeld[/sp] and Moneypenny. Now all we need is a new Bond.

casino royale best bund

[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;48988949]SPECTRE - meeeeeeeeeh. felt really weird to me. like the script was rushed or wasn't finished. some nice ideas that weren't really developed. The most obvious twist in the history of cinema! Waltz was pretty good though. Didn't really feel like Hans Landa which was nice. Pretty solid action. Snow sequence is way too short, and didn't include skis or a Union Flag parachute. I like the references to other 00's. Solid Bond. Better than Skyfall, in my opinion. (I don't think Skyfall was very good.) Solid probable send off for Craig, and it does tie up all of the emotional loose ends. Full circle from Casino Royale. The next gen of Bond is all set up with the new M, Q, [sp]Blofeld[/sp] and Moneypenny. Now all we need is a new Bond.[/QUOTE] Were you at an advanced screening or something?

[QUOTE=Yogkog;48989202]Were you at an advanced screening or something?[/QUOTE] it was released in the UK on Monday m8 [editline]26th October 2015[/editline] and i liked skyfall a lot so i do look forward to Mendes at the helm again.

[QUOTE=Yogkog;48989202]Were you at an advanced screening or something?[/QUOTE] Perks of being British.

The only Sam Mendes joint I've seen is American Beauty which I really liked Is Jarhead worth a watch?

Just got out of Spectre, pretty solid. Not the best, certainly not bad. Might write a review, since it felt super rushed because they seemed to have cut a lot and it also seemed to have an bit of an anti surveillance, NSA and all that kinda message. [editline]26th October 2015[/editline] The movie released today here BTW, I went to some fancy screening with the DB10 outside and a bunch of old rich white guys with their Astons in tuxedoes because my dad sold them their cars. Honestly I expected it to be fancier, judging by the fancy Aston and all the dudes in ties.

[QUOTE=cheetahben;48989320]The only Sam Mendes joint I've seen is American Beauty which I really liked Is Jarhead worth a watch?[/QUOTE] In answer to your question, yes. and only Spike Lee makes joints.

[t]https://filmgoersguide.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/hill_ace-high-1968.jpg[/T] Ace High 7/10 preeeety good, beginning of the comedy era of spaghetti westerns but still serious enough to be a good western with a twinkle in its eye.

Dawn of the Dead - 8/10 When I last saw this movie a few years ago, I thought it was frigging awesome. As it turns out, it still is. Who'd a thought it?

[QUOTE=Samson0722;48988712]I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey for the first time the other day and it was really really wild. For 1968 this was so fucking crystal clear and everything was so beautiful. I can't believe it was made so long ago. But the ending was what got me. I think the ending was so mind fuckish that I'm going to have to deduct a point and a half. 8.5/10[/QUOTE] that's the power of 70mm film. also, if you think that ending's mindfuckish, wait until you see christopher nolan's attempt at it.

[QUOTE=dilzinyomouth;48988634]Its interesting that the rambo series is exactly like the rocky series 1st movie is really actually a fantastic movie that people forget because the sequels are typical over the top 80s action extravaganzas. The sequels to both series are completely foreign in their feel and nature.[/QUOTE] The Rocky series is 10 times better than the Rambo series, it's almost offensive to compare the two. The only real weak/bad Rocky movie was Rocky 5 and it was still better than Rambo 2 or 3 (or that trashy 4th one). Rocky 2 was more of a "Rocky 1: Part 2" than an actual sequel. Rocky 3 is more of a sequel to the first movie than the second. And the 4th is...well, really damn good and the best example of 80s Cold War films but still being a Rocky film in the end.

Men in Black III Not as good as the first, but miles better than the second. Worth a rental. [sp]The one thing that I'm glad is that they didn't make Andy Warhol an alien, just a MIB agent who was throwing out random ideas.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Pops;48989441]that's the power of 70mm film. also, if you think that ending's mindfuckish, wait until you see christopher nolan's attempt at it.[/QUOTE] Interstellar's ending wasn't mindfuckish though, just really shitty.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48989892]The Rocky series is 10 times better than the Rambo series, it's almost offensive to compare the two. The only real weak/bad Rocky movie was Rocky 5 and it was still better than Rambo 2 or 3 (or that trashy 4th one). Rocky 2 was more of a "Rocky 1: Part 2" than an actual sequel. Rocky 3 is more of a sequel to the first movie than the second. And the 4th is...well, really damn good and the best example of 80s Cold War films but still being a Rocky film in the end.[/QUOTE] You completely missed what I'm saying. I'm not talking about personal preference for the films, I'm talking about how the first film in both series is something of a serious character study with good scripts (rocky especially) while their sequels are 80s action extravaganzas, good or bad that will come down to your personal preference. i.e the sequels both diverge from the theme and feel of the original markedly. Rocky 1 is nothing like the sequel and likewise First Blood is nothing like Rambo.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48989892]The Rocky series is 10 times better than the Rambo series, it's almost offensive to compare the two. The only real weak/bad Rocky movie was Rocky 5 and it was still better than Rambo 2 or 3 (or that trashy 4th one). Rocky 2 was more of a "Rocky 1: Part 2" than an actual sequel. Rocky 3 is more of a sequel to the first movie than the second. And the 4th is...well, really damn good and the best example of 80s Cold War films but still being a Rocky film in the end.[/QUOTE] this is the same series where a story which was originally a grounded underdog story has the same character gets in a over-the-top fight with hulk hogan, a russian superman, and gets his brother-in-law a talking robot for his birthday. it also has the second film focus on a rematch between creed and rocky despite them explicitly promise on not doing a rematch at the end of the first film. it's a cheap retcon to have rocky fight another time with apollo but have him win despite having a bad eye which is never mentioned again in the other films. the rocky series isn't the worst, it has some good movies, but the rest are completely different to the first one both in style and tone. the only one that's really similar is rocky balboa and that's basically a remake of the first one but instead of being poor and uneducated, rocky's old.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48989892]The Rocky series is 10 times better than the Rambo series, it's almost offensive to compare the two. The only real weak/bad Rocky movie was Rocky 5 and it was still better than Rambo 2 or 3 (or that trashy 4th one). Rocky 2 was more of a "Rocky 1: Part 2" than an actual sequel. Rocky 3 is more of a sequel to the first movie than the second. And the 4th is...well, really damn good and the best example of 80s Cold War films but still being a Rocky film in the end.[/QUOTE] every rocky and rambo sequel is offensive because they totally disgrace the good original ideas. in a perfect world thet would have made them and just called them something else. they go from tortured vietnam vet to vengeful one man army killing machine and underdog, brain damaged boxer to I MUSTT BREAK YOU. and the caricature of rocky you see in family guy etc. without a doubt came from the sequels when the brain damage stuff just started to become cheap sideshow

rocky and rambo are the most boring films to discuss