Rate The Last Movie You Watched - April V3 - no tv shows - General

The Thing (2011) At first I planned to write how this movie could have been good if the 1982 version never existed. I had this thought when I was done with about the first third of the movie. Then it just went downhill and never got better. They turned the alien into a pretty stupid creature and the atmosphere was just not there. watch the 1982 version/10

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42422457][B]Apocalypto[/B] Meh, as a movie it was fairly good. Just...Mel Gibson's total disregard for history of any kind makes me want to barf. Its almost as if he's never read a history book before...ever. And this can apply to almost all of his movies. Disagree with me all you want but I universally hate almost all of his movies and Gibson as a person.[/QUOTE] This is a wrong statement and you know it.

Jurassic Park 3D 8/10 Well done 3D conversion that enhances the charms of the original film without overly detracting from it.

Yeah, all of Gibson's films have been immensely entertaining and very nice to look at. Even Passion of the Christ was aesthetically pleasing when it wasn't a torture film.

[QUOTE=Jedi_Rayne;42423639]Jurassic Park 3D 8/10 Well done 3D conversion that enhances the charms of the original film without overly detracting from it.[/QUOTE] Titanic had a great 3D conversion too. The shots looking down the ship as it sank were amazing, gives you a better idea of the scale.

[B]Hobbit (2012)[/B] Some dragon gets pissed off and pwn's some guys with beards. Was this crap really directed and put together by the same guy who made the epic LOTR films? 14 guys defy death with every turn and keep getting lucky. So many scenes where I was telling my TV to fuck off, so much light hearted crap that just took me out of the film. Why didn't Gandalf the Gay just call some [sp]eagles[/sp] right at the start and [sp]drop them where they needed to be[/sp]? Roll credits, end of film. At least it would have saved me a couple of hours enduring a kids film. [editline]5th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=AK'z;42422567]JFK was factually a load of bull, but the film itself was monumentally good. If you want to learn the facts, watch documentaries and not reinterpretations/dramatisations.[/QUOTE] This post is truth.

[QUOTE=jewnoser;42423744]14 guys defy death with every turn and keep getting lucky. So many scenes where I was telling my TV to fuck off, so much light hearted crap that just took me out of the film.[/QUOTE] its a fantasy movie based on a children's book. Granted not a stellar one, but it's still good.

[b]Dan Brown's [i]Angels & Demons[/i][/b] I found the movie mediocre at best. It is based around a serie of ideological homicides taking place inside the walls of the Vatican city-state, and it's up to an ex priest now expert symbologist to find a bomb before it goes off and blasts the city out of existence. The movie falls short by dragging for far too long and losing it's charm quickly. The final plot twist was fairly good, but I wouldn't suggest this movie to anyone, unless you're a A. Cospiracy nutter or B. crime fiction nerd. Once it was over I just felt like I could've spent my time in better ways. Perhaps in paper form it's better. 5.5/10 [QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42422457][B]Apocalypto[/B] Meh, as a movie it was fairly good. Just...Mel Gibson's total disregard for history of any kind makes me want to barf. Its almost as if he's never read a history book before...ever. And this can apply to almost all of his movies. Disagree with me all you want but I universally hate almost all of his movies and Gibson as a person.[/QUOTE] It's been quite some time since I last watched it, but it was mindless entertainment for what it was, nothing to wrap your head around- of course the movie was hystorically inaccurate, it was more of a 'what if' than else. But, you know.. that's just how fiction works in general. Just my opinion. Sorry for the OT.

Guys, I agree that his movies are entertaining-there's no doubt about that, but as a minor history buff they're almost insulting to watch. That's just my opinion. Nowhere did I say the movies were bad. Admittedly I came off a little strong in my post and I don't really mean that I hate all of his movies, just the fact that his movies are so inaccurate, when honestly, making them accurate would've made them more entertaining to watch

Watched paper Man again. 7/10. It's borderline pretentious but the actors save it.

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42423893]Guys, I agree that his movies are entertaining-there's no doubt about that, but as a minor history buff they're almost insulting to watch. That's just my opinion. Nowhere did I say the movies were bad. Admittedly I came off a little strong in my post and I don't really mean that I hate all of his movies, just the fact that his movies are so inaccurate, when honestly, making them accurate would've made them more entertaining to watch[/QUOTE] What did you think of Kingdom of Heaven and Gladiator? Those movies were riddled with historical inaccuracies. [editline]5th October 2013[/editline] Although it (the historical inaccuracies) was nowhere near as bad as Braveheart

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42423893]Guys, I agree that his movies are entertaining-there's no doubt about that, but as a minor history buff they're almost insulting to watch. That's just my opinion. Nowhere did I say the movies were bad. Admittedly I came off a little strong in my post and I don't really mean that I hate all of his movies, just the fact that his movies are so inaccurate, when honestly, making them accurate would've made them more entertaining to watch[/QUOTE] and now you learn historical accuracy doesn't always make a better movie in fact most of the time it doesn't or else braveheart would have been shit. being a history buff myself i learned to just leave that shit at the front door. that's why i can enjoy a viking film that doesn't have horns on their helmets more than one that does.

Gravity - Go see this/10 This was probably the best movie I have seen all year. I mean, that does set the bar pretty low because most films that came out this year (as with every year since, like, the beginning of cinema) were shit but this movie was amazing. The acting was top notch, the cinematography was amazing (that opening scene. Dayum) and the views were spectacular. My only regret was that we didn't sneak into the Captain Philips screening afterwards to (hopefully) have two good movies in a row.

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/The_Hunt_for_Red_October_movie_poster.png[/img] 4/5 stars and now i'm gonna go read the book.

[QUOTE=kimchimafia;42424876]What did you think of Kingdom of Heaven and Gladiator? Those movies were riddled with historical inaccuracies. [editline]5th October 2013[/editline] Although it (the historical inaccuracies) was nowhere near as bad as Braveheart[/QUOTE] Well sadly, I absolutely despise every aspect of Gladiator, the movie just pisses me off. As for Kingdom of Heaven, the movie would've been twice as good if they actually stuck to the source material. It was pretty epic though and probably the best modern "medieval" movie out there right now, but that isn't saying much. But I maintain that Braveheart is gross. And if you guys think you're the only people who hate me for hating Braveheart you aren't, just about every person I know irl calls me out on it

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42425606]Well sadly, I absolutely despise every aspect of Gladiator, the movie just pisses me off. As for Kingdom of Heaven, the movie would've been twice as good if they actually stuck to the source material. It was pretty epic though and probably the best modern "medieval" movie out there right now, but that isn't saying much. But I maintain that Braveheart is gross. And if you guys think you're the only people who hate me for hating Braveheart you aren't, just about every person I know irl calls me out on it[/QUOTE] dw your distaste for historical inaccuracies in [B]Gladiator [/B]and [B]Braveheart [/B]is understandable. Yeah, KoH would have been much better if it was more accurate to what really happened (the Templars are the main assholes...again, also lol at Guy of Lusignan being shown in Templar robes). However I'd let inaccuracies slide if it offered something really interesting and unique. [B]Amadeus[/B] would be one of my examples for that.

Polly, how did you feel about [I]Argo[/I]? It was mostly factual but played hard and loose with the facts now and again.

[QUOTE=jewnoser;42423744][B]Hobbit (2012)[/B] Some dragon gets pissed off and pwn's some guys with beards. Was this crap really directed and put together by the same guy who made the epic LOTR films? 14 guys defy death with every turn and keep getting lucky. So many scenes where I was telling my TV to fuck off, so much light hearted crap that just took me out of the film. Why didn't Gandalf the Gay just call some [sp]eagles[/sp] right at the start and [sp]drop them where they needed to be[/sp]? Roll credits, end of film. At least it would have saved me a couple of hours enduring a kids film. [editline]5th October 2013[/editline] This post is truth.[/QUOTE] If I had a dollar for every person spewing that eagle bullshit at every corner I'd be a very rich man. The eagles are no one's bitch. They help who they want, when they want, period. Quit bringing it up. And the Hobbit was a much better movie than you make it out to be and you know it, and its certainly a lot better than most of the drivel that exists.

[QUOTE=jewnoser;42420980][B]Kids (1995)[/B] Larry Clark should still be making films. He also did Ken Park which was equally as gritty as this one that came before it and this time we delve into the youth of a NY area who are a product of disfunctional society where girls are bitches and the days priorities are smoking blunks, skating and getting laid at a party. Clark avoids the usual glossy shots but reveals a dark section of youth who have no care for anybody other than their selfish needs and ego. The 2 main kids are fantastic as a pair of wasters, one of which is obssessed with having sex with very young girls who are still virgins. Chloe Sevegny and her fat nose was not so good because she looked like the only one who was acting. I don't think I've seen something quite this realistic in terms of fly on the wall grit. The manner of the performances remind me much of the small Brit flics such as 'This is England' because there really isn't anything to make this feel like fiction. The theme was interesting, the scenes were powerful and the film was great. Higthly recommended. I'll answer you with film> [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/09mbdOb.jpg?2[/IMG] '[B]Will you fuck me?'[/b] Hand job for the first person to name that character. [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("alt of jewdozer" - Rusty100))[/highlight][/QUOTE] thats not a hard guess at all, everyone knows buffalo bill. you just wanted to give out handjobs!!

[B]Reservoir Dogs[/B] Fucking incredible

[B]Jacob's Ladder[/B] This is my second time watching it. The first time around had a much bigger impact. This time, however, I noticed the details more. I really love this movie. That hospital scene is brilliant. Anyone looking for a good psychological horror movie, this is the one. 10/10 every time.

Das Boot is best German movie ever

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42425755] its certainly a lot better than most of the drivel that exists.[/QUOTE] in this day and age that's not saying much.. [editline]6th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42423893], making them accurate would've made them more entertaining to watch[/QUOTE] watch a documentary

[B]Scoop[/B], by Woody Allen a nice murder mystery. Very funny and intrigueing. The main problem though is that it's predictible, you can sorta guess how it's going to play out 20-30 mins in. And although scarlett johannson is extremely hot here and plays a sex crusader, her acting is nose twitching at times. Definetly not one of her best roles. Still a good watch. 7/10

Can anyone recommend me some good quirky movies?

[QUOTE=elih595;42428530]Can anyone recommend me some good quirky movies?[/QUOTE] Being John Malkovich.

[QUOTE=elih595;42428530]Can anyone recommend me some good quirky movies?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=KlaseR;42428556]Being John Malkovich.[/QUOTE] [B]Adaptation[/B] is also good

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;42425755]If I had a dollar for every person spewing that eagle bullshit at every corner I'd be a very rich man. The eagles are no one's bitch. They help who they want, when they want, period. Quit bringing it up. And the Hobbit was a much better movie than you make it out to be and you know it, and its certainly a lot better than most of the drivel that exists.[/QUOTE] I had no idea people had been dropping that crit around but I guess that proves its a pretty big gripe with the film. That aside I just didn't feel the film. On the topic of historical accuracy I agree with you to a point. It depends on what they change and why. I saw Conquest 1453 recently about the Turks victory at constantinople and it was a historical disgrace because they genuinely were out to make a propaganda film. Gladiator had its tweeks to make it more exciting. I wonder if Gibson hates the Brits? He's made 2 anti English films so far and both were dogshit. Loved passion tho. [editline]6th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Rusty100;42425867]thats not a hard guess at all, everyone knows buffalo bill. you just wanted to give out handjobs!![/QUOTE] Wrong again, its me in a wig telling you to fuck off. [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Alt of jewdozer" - Rusty100))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=elih595;42428530]Can anyone recommend me some good quirky movies?[/QUOTE] Moonrise Kingdom

Mel Gibson owns as an actor and as a director, Apocalypto owns hard and Road Warrior is one of my favourite films ever Starship Troopers- 4/5 Really impressed by this actually. I expected just a solid gory action flick but instead I got a clever and political satire. This isn't a war film, it's an anti-war film and a damn good one. Lots of satirical elements and political statements throughout. This film is just... So fucking solid in absolutely every aspect. It's smart, funny, well directed, performances are solid, great CGI that holds up very very well today... I frickin loved this goddamn movie. It was brilliant. From Dusk Till Dawn- 3/5 Well, this is pretty much two films in one. Takes a definite turn around the halfway point :v: Caught this as it's the last piece of Tarantino's filmography I hadn't seen (well except Four Rooms but I hear it's shit, it's on netflix so I might watch it at some point). And I need to see those CSI episodes he wrote and directed because my friend says they are by far the best in the series. But yeah this was a fun film. Clooney was good, Tarantino was not very good but he was funny. I fell in love with the film when the two were arguing while the liquor store blows up and the shot where we look at clooney through the hole in Tarantino's hand. So good. Overall I enjoyed the first half more but not because I wasn't a fan of the total genre switch. It was cool and stylish but I actually enjoyed the first half a lot, second half was enjoyable and fun but not as good. Also this film is even worse than Death Proof for how blatant Tarantino's foot fetish is-- Sucking whiskey off Salma Heyek's foot during a dance. Day Of The Dead- 2/5 Eh. Some cool ideas but overall this film was just really quite boring and the characters quite annoying. Nothing happened a whole lot of the time and it was just drama with shallow characters, which means there is no real drama. The special effects were really good. I get the whole "people are the monster" thing that Romero tries to tell. I did think that Bub was a great character and I did really enjoy the interactions between him and the scientist. But tbh, to me the scientists were doing more bad than good. The soldiers weren't in the wrong if you ask me- Rhodes was just trying to stop all his men dying. The scientists were making no progress and all Logan did was cut up zombies and mess with them. Even with Bub, nothing he was doing was actually useful. Sure he found out zombies are primal and that they kind of can learn really slowly. That's no good when the human race has become a minority. And then it's even more of a kick in the teeth at the end when [sp]They just fly away and go to some island anyway. Making the whole thing pointless. They could have all just flew away and no one needed to die.[/sp] An interesting film but ultimately too damn boring for me to say it's actually good.