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

oops, it worked at first, not sure why it did that, fixed now.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;43585254]Everything just looked so fake to me. LOTR had the perfect mix of practical and CG effects, but The Hobbit relies WAY too much on it, and it's really distracting. And it somehow looks worse than the original trilogy that was made over 10 years ago.[/QUOTE] For me it's that much of the CGI looks a bit tooo perfect(well not the gold obviously). It's too clean.

Prisoners - 8/10

Real Steel s'alrite/10

2001: A Space Odyssey - 4/10 I was really looking forward to watching this because I've always heard how great it is and to be honest I was really disappointed. The cinematography and visual effects were absolutely amazing and I have no idea how some of the shots were done in 1968. That said, the film was so incredibly boring I had to watch it with breaks in between. While the general idea of the story was nice it was ultimately lost behind painfully long shots of ships flying on a black background, not to mention the characters themselves were nothing special. I can understand why people like analysing the meaning behind it all and I appreciate the influence it had on the film industry but I just couldn't get over how drawn out it is.

Are you 10 years old? If so the film wasn't for you

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;43598013]Are you 10 years old? If so the film wasn't for you[/QUOTE] I'm loving the argument, very convincing.

ive not seen 2001 in ages but yes it is very very slow and long with minimal dialogue and action. its understandable a lot of people find it boring. Its a tough watch.

I was more entertained by the book.

I went to see American Hustle and I enjoyed it but the hype surrounding it and my expectations might have ruined it. The story just could have been played up so much better or interesting but the actual hustle was just...boring. I completely understand why that one guy on here hates it so fervantly. It really hooks you and never takes you anywhere. The pacing is a fucking abysmal mess. I have never seen a movie struggle so badly with one particular thing like this one. The acting was superb, the music choice was fun, and it really had everything going for it but something about it...something about it made me disappointed. Maybe im not smart or some shit but it seemed like a 7/10 that tricked people into being a 10 by having good acting with an ensemble cast and a pseudo true story along with being quite lengthy and draggy, which critics and "smart" movie goers seem to like for some reason. I dunno. 7/10. +1 for amy adams titties. -1 for J Law being really ridiculously stupid to the point of me being annoyed and pissed off whenever she got on the screen.

[QUOTE=Hobo4President;43597971]2001: A Space Odyssey - 4/10 I was really looking forward to watching this because I've always heard how great it is and to be honest I was really disappointed. The cinematography and visual effects were absolutely amazing and I have no idea how some of the shots were done in 1968. That said, the film was so incredibly boring I had to watch it with breaks in between. While the general idea of the story was nice it was ultimately lost behind painfully long shots of ships flying on a black background, not to mention the characters themselves were nothing special. I can understand why people like analysing the meaning behind it all and I appreciate the influence it had on the film industry but I just couldn't get over how drawn out it is.[/QUOTE] I agree with you, the space ship walz scenes were so boring and took way to long. The basic premise sounds incredible but the movie is way to long and can get really tedious. It gives me some serious goosebumbs at the end but overall it's really hard to get into the movie. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=PollytheParrot;43598013]Are you 10 years old? If so the film wasn't for you[/QUOTE] Sorry, you have to be a certain age in order to understand "art"!

"In A World" 8/10 Really well written funny little movie about the voices behind trailer voiceovers, what I liked most is how natural the dialogues off of the "work" scenes were, excelent artistic decision, excelent execution. Go watch it.

2001 space oddysey is Terrence Malick's best movie whatchu lot smokin

terrence malick is literally the opposite of Stanley Kubrick

[QUOTE=Hobo4President;43597971]2001: A Space Odyssey - 4/10 I was really looking forward to watching this because I've always heard how great it is and to be honest I was really disappointed. The cinematography and visual effects were absolutely amazing and I have no idea how some of the shots were done in 1968. That said, the film was so incredibly boring I had to watch it with breaks in between. While the general idea of the story was nice it was ultimately lost behind painfully long shots of ships flying on a black background, not to mention the characters themselves were nothing special. I can understand why people like analysing the meaning behind it all and I appreciate the influence it had on the film industry but I just couldn't get over how drawn out it is.[/QUOTE] that's the point of it though, the film is meant to rely heavily on what you see as opposed to just everything being hand-delivered to you through lines. i'm not going to go into degrading insults (you're too young, didn't get the film, etc.) but try rewatching with a more open mind, and interpret what you see for yourself. yes, the blue danube scene is a tad bit longer than it probably should be but i'm sure kubrick just wanted to fully use up as much of the song as he could. also you're meant to revel in the simplicity and beauty of the scene. so yeah, my .02

I mean it seems like people go into 2001 expecting to see epic space battles and Darth Vader and Spock Somehow they're surprised

i love the part where kurt fights spork

I like village people (I don't see them a gay band) and I just saw their awful movie 'Can't Stop The Music'. Though in all defense, it isn't bad as in terrible awful bad but like campy bad (so campy its fun to watch). I also like some of the music numbers

Shooter was okay I guess

World's Greatest Dad - 9/10

[B]12 years a slave[/B] Steve McQueen now has money and pretty much a pick your cast after his previous successes with Film 4 behind him. Some might have been wondering if those extra $$$ might lose some of the stripped down honesty of his other movies but it seems his ability to craft a film about divisive topics has not been lost. Hans Zimmer was a personal concern but his soundtrack didn't drown the film which was a big relief. Performances especially from Fassbender are first class but then again they always are. Pitt makes a short appearance and somehow he seems to carry off the role very well as the man of conscience and principle. The main star who plays Solomon I thought was very good, maybe a little over acted in places. Nice to see Paul Dano getting screen time as well. Some of the scenes were rather sadistic but it was a time where black people in the south were dehumanised and seen as cattle. McQueen never holds back in his films and this hit very hard when it needed to which is one of his strengths, knowing when to strike. Films about race can be a bit like films about WW2 where the Germans are always goose stepping murderers without any shred of humanity but Steve McQueen avoids the predictable stereotypes and gives us a well rounded story giving it balance. Overall this was a wonderful film and should put him in a similar league of Paul Thomas Anderson. For anyone wanting a fucked up double bill I'd recommend watching [I]Django Unchained[/I] followed by this to finish off, just make sure you don't watch them the other way round. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=evlbzltyr;43599355]Shooter was okay I guess[/QUOTE] No, that film is shit. [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("jdizzle" - Rusty100))[/highlight]

Robocop Love it every time I watch it. Just an absolutely fun movie to watch.

[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;43597700]Real Steel s'alrite/10[/QUOTE] Real Steel was cheesy as all get out but was actually pretty fun.

[QUOTE=Corndog Ninja;43600522]Real Steel was cheesy as all get out but was actually pretty fun.[/QUOTE] We get to witness the evolution of Hugh Jackman's attempt at an American accent.

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;43598013]Are you 10 years old? If so the film wasn't for you[/QUOTE] the amount of dumbs this got is appalling holy shit this thread has fucking awful taste

wolf of wall street you know a movie is good when it's three hours long yet you still want to see more.

[QUOTE=Scot;43602793]wolf of wall street you know a movie is good when it's three hours long yet you still want to see more.[/QUOTE] there is

[QUOTE=Pops;43598633]try rewatching with a more open mind, and interpret what you see for yourself. [/QUOTE] this could be said about each and every single film of all time.. 2001 is not the film I'll call "universally for everyone". It's not the most morally sound, challenging or the most life-changing experience, a film that doesn't move people isn't the greatest filmic experience, it's not even in my top 20-30. But if you guys want to ramble on about how childish it is to not worship the film, then that's ok. Solaris is better than 2001 imo;)

[QUOTE=AK'z;43603996]this could be said about each and every single film of all time.. 2001 is not the film I'll call "universally for everyone". It's not the most morally sound, challenging or the most life-changing experience, a film that doesn't move people isn't the greatest filmic experience, it's not even in my top 20-30. But if you guys want to ramble on about how childish it is to not worship the film, then that's ok. Solaris is better than 2001 anyway ;)[/QUOTE] I kinda agree with this. Although the 'try rewatching the film with an open' thing is something that could be said for every film, 'good' or 'bad', but it's not really bad advice. Some films can be harder to watch or digest for others and I'd say it helps if you decide to see it from a different perspective on a rewatch. It can either grant a more positive, negative or even a relatively similar opinion. Nothing bad can really come out of it and I'd think it's unfair to dismiss 2001: A Space Odyssey as a film that doesn't move people. And besides, the worshiping of 2001 seems pretty minimal here so far... Although I do have to admit, I did like Solaris better than 2001. Tarkovsky is great. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] But then again, Solaris is very different to 2001 so it's probably just preference for me.

[QUOTE=kimchimafia;43604092]t's unfair to dismiss 2001: A Space Odyssey as a film that doesn't move people.[/QUOTE] guess that came out wrong, i was only talking about films in general. Not that I was underwhelmed by 2001, it's a cracking film :)