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

[b]Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation - 9/10[/b] This franchise keeps getting better and better. I REALLY enjoyed watching it.

[QUOTE=Dahaka32;48480274][b]Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation - 9/10[/b] This franchise keeps getting better and better. I REALLY enjoyed watching it.[/QUOTE] The opera and underwater scenes were the best

The Man from UNCLE 7/10 Pretty good film, lots of fun. Quite a few issues with the shaky-cam and the reveal of "surprises" almost immediately after they're set up. And the villain was really weak. Essentially, "this is the villain because we said so" The 60s atmosphere was fantastic.

[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;48475844][B]The Descent[/B] - 9/10 fuck. if you haven't seen this go into it totally blind [sp]hehe[/sp] that ending was incredible[/QUOTE] you better mean the full ending, not that cut-off shit the US release got but yes I fucking love that movie

[QUOTE=Rusty100;48476362]make sure you watch the original uncut version of the descent. the american ending sucks[/QUOTE] the american ending is literally just them cutting the film short lmao, what an absolute joke. literally the same thing they did with Brazil. [editline]18th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;48477055]Dog Soldiers - 8/10 Still a great movie, still a lot of fun. Also, best 'about to be killed off' line ever.[/QUOTE] also same director as descent. sucks only that directors first two movies are any good. i really loved them but holy shit Doomsday is a disaster. haven't seen centurion but i haven't heard good things.

just watched inception again, great film the effects are fun to watch but the whole concept is what takes the show for me, any dull scenes are excused in my book because i spent so much time thinking about the mechanics of it all that i didnt even notice them i really enjoy the love story woven in, because i felt a real emotional connection to the characters. it didnt matter that i didnt know much about them, Cobb's suffering really hits me hard. would recommend for anyone who wants a cool, unique film to add to their watched list. you really cant go wrong with it.

[QUOTE=No Party Hats;48484134]just watched inception again, great film the effects are fun to watch but the whole concept is what takes the show for me, any dull scenes are excused in my book because i spent so much time thinking about the mechanics of it all that i didnt even notice them i really enjoy the love story woven in, because i felt a real emotional connection to the characters. it didnt matter that i didnt know much about them, Cobb's suffering really hits me hard. would recommend for anyone who wants a cool, unique film to add to their watched list. you really cant go wrong with it.[/QUOTE] I thought the characters were pure cardboard

[QUOTE=gary spivey;48484159]I thought the characters were pure cardboard[/QUOTE] let me correct myself, i felt a connection to the suffering he was going through. It seemed like a very real possibility within the universe the film lays out, and it's a very scary idea. The characters really only served as thin vessels for that idea, but it did the job imho

[QUOTE=postal;48483536]the american ending is literally just them cutting the film short lmao, what an absolute joke. literally the same thing they did with Brazil.[/QUOTE] The weirdest thing about that is that, because of the sequel, the US ending is now canon.

Alright, time to see if Rise of the Silver Surfer is as bad as people say it is. Pray for me.

it is, don't worry.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;48485342]I like to think that the sequel never happened. The Descent was one of the best horror movies of the past 25 years and the US ending takes all the power away from it.[/QUOTE] the sequel was 100% pointless plot-wise anyway it's not like anything actually important happens that you need to acknowledge it

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;48485366]Alright, time to see if Rise of the Silver Surfer is as bad as people say it is. Pray for me.[/QUOTE] THIS WAS A MISTAKE! Painful from start to the last 30 minutes, then it becomes downright torture as the movie loses the last shred of restraint it had. This sucks so unbelievably hard it could teach porn stars a few lessons. For once, you can trust everyone on this. This is honestly just as awful as everyone says.

Pandorum 8/10 Its a good movie disguised as a generic bad movie. It has wannabe Predators and creepy twists. I would have given it a 9, if it had Ryan Gosling instead of the identical blond guy they used instead.

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;48485818]THIS WAS A MISTAKE! Painful from start to the last 30 minutes, then it becomes downright torture as the movie loses the last shred of restraint it had. This sucks so unbelievably hard it could teach porn stars a few lessons. For once, you can trust everyone on this. This is honestly just as awful as everyone says.[/QUOTE] just remember it's somehow still better than the reboot

Coherence: 9/10 My mind was suitably blown. Amazing film, deserves way more recognition than it currently has. Ostensibly sci-fi, but it doesn't let that get in the way of the storytelling. Would definitely recommend watching.

So I read in another thread a few things about [I]Man on Fire[/I] (the 2004 version I assume) being a lot like Max Payne 3, so I'm curious. Is it a good film? I've rarely seen such a gap between average critics rating and audience rating. Also just watched [B]Cape Fear[/B] (Martin Scorsese, 1991). In the movie genre of revenge/plotting/manipulation (you know, like [I]Oldboy[/I]), this one is great. Very good actors, very tense. It doesn't become too predictable either, so that's good. [B]8.5/10[/B]

the man from u.n.c.l.e. if the action sequences were as well-finished as the costumes and the characters, it would have been great. sadly the movie suffers from quite a few modern action-flicks tropes which ruin the overall atmosphere (the car chase at the begininng was really good tho). but i enjoyed it, it was fun.

more like The Meh of U.N.C.L.E. am I right my bros

i think that's just a thing with guy ritchie films. the man has style completely covered, substance needs a bit of work.

[QUOTE=Pops;48489640]i think that's just a thing with guy ritchie films. the man has style completely covered, substance needs a bit of work.[/QUOTE] I dunno, when they split the screen to show both main characters going through different parts at once kind of really bothered me. Like, who am I suppose to be watching? Most of the time they were moving and doing the same thing at the same moment just in different areas, but I felt it took away from the film a bit. Still confused on why Illya Kuryakin didn't know what a [sp]aircraft carrier[/sp] was.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48489990]I dunno, when they split the screen to show both main characters going through different parts at once kind of really bothered me. Like, who am I suppose to be watching? Most of the time they were moving and doing the same thing at the same moment just in different areas, but I felt it took away from the film a bit. Still confused on why Illya Kuryakin didn't know what a [sp]aircraft carrier[/sp] was.[/QUOTE] apparently they did that in the old tv show a lot. it was a little annoying to kind of have to choose who to follow, but i think they generally did the same thing, or it added up well enough anyway that when they met up you were like "oh ok". also, maybe [sp]russia didn't have any? idk[/sp]

[QUOTE=Loadingue;48486732]So I read in another thread a few things about [I]Man on Fire[/I] (the 2004 version I assume) being a lot like Max Payne 3, so I'm curious. Is it a good film? I've rarely seen such a gap between average critics rating and audience rating. [/QUOTE] I like it, personally. Denzel and Walken both give good performances, and I do like how Tony Scott approached everything. Compared to Max Payne 3, there's some basic plot and location similarities (they're both bodyguards with alcohol problems, the people they protect get kidnapped/there's a rave and a slum) and Max Payne 3 really did seem to be inspired by the cinematography, subtitles and all.

[QUOTE=Pops;48490039] also, maybe [sp]russia didn't have any? idk[/sp][/QUOTE] Russia definitely had some, it was the early 60s. And they've been used around the world since the the mid 1930s, he had to have heard of them before, let alone seen at least a picture. He's in the KGB for crying out loud :v:

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48489990]I dunno, when they split the screen to show both main characters going through different parts at once kind of really bothered me. Like, who am I suppose to be watching? Most of the time they were moving and doing the same thing at the same moment just in different areas, but I felt it took away from the film a bit.[/QUOTE] I liked the idea but there was just way too much motion during those scenes and no contrast between each little box. It didn't help when they split it into six different scenes. I also wish that the [sp]island assault scene hadn't been in split screen. They prepare for this whole invasion thing and it just kind of loses momentum because we're blazing through these scenes of the brits blasting baddies with no sound and in no time Solo's already reached the bomb room[/sp]

[QUOTE=Pikmonster;48474878]Ant-Man 9/10 pretty funny I guess, I wouldn't mind watching it again.[/QUOTE] what "i would rate it as being a near perfect movie. it was ok"

[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;48490295]what "i would rate it as being a near perfect movie. it was ok"[/QUOTE] This is why people don't like number ratings. If we could all learn to agree on a standard things would be so much better

Number ratings are fine, but they don't convey proper tones and context. I give them an 8/10.

yeah yeah number ratings whatever birdman - 10/10

I was able to watch The Thing (1982) for the first time, boy was that a eerie movie.