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

anyone know some movies like In the Mouth of Madness?

The Poughkeepsie Tapes 2007 Based on real events about a serial killer dressed up as a cop. I recommend to find this movie on Youtube. 8/10

[QUOTE=evilweazel;44821870]Godzilla 11/10 watch it :^)[/QUOTE] Listen to this man for he speaks the truth. 11/10 indeed.

[QUOTE=AK'z;44824290]please tell me that's not the black girl from Star Trek. please[/QUOTE] Yep. And I think Jason Issacs played one of the neighbors.

thats the most baffling thing I've ever heard

Wait, wasn't this supposed to be a TV series?

I heard it was a three part miniseries, but I guess it came out all at once.

[B]Captain America: The Winter Soldier[/B] The title is a bit misleading. Overall fun action flick with some pleasant fight choreography. [sp]Did Hydra want to kill good, bad or people that would oppose Hydra?[/sp]

[QUOTE=Marden;44826490][sp]Did Hydra want to kill good, bad or people that would oppose Hydra?[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Mostly the third, with a bit of the second. The idea was world peace via pre-emptive strikes, the helicarriers would kill anyone who would potentially "disturb the peace" or "cause trouble".[/sp]

Alpha & Omega 2010 Great animation but too rushed. The memories of being in Alpha & Omega AMV contests back in 2010 when I was 36. 7/10

[QUOTE=Doctorhooves;44827259]Alpha & Omega 2010 Great animation but too rushed. The memories of being in Alpha & Omega AMV contests. 7/10[/QUOTE] Can you tell us like, some things about you? How old are you? Where are you from? Why is everything you post more confusing than a fucking riddle?

[B]Charlie Countryman (2014)- 6.5/10[/B] A reasonably solid film. I watched it because it stars Shia LaBeouf, and as I'm sure some of you know I'm a fan of his. I watched it because I thought it was cool to see him in a starring role that isn't Transformers, and I gotta say he's very good. The best part of the film. He's not, like, absolutely amazing, but he's strong and proves once again that his hate as an actor (I won't defend him as a person since hes kind of a weirdo lol) is unjustified. He doesn't cash this in at all and does have some really brilliant moments but the film and direction isn't quite good enough to carry him to his potential. Give him time. He never overacts, never underacts, he encaptulates his character totally well. He's an actor I expect will come on to do some great stuff, even if he's not yet. I see his potential, which is the main reason I like him I think. Not so much for what he's done, but for what I reckon he's going to do. He was strong in this and really strong in Nymphomaniac (despite his Americ-engli-stralian accent ) and he's absolutely one of the American actors whose career I'm interested in. I genuinely think he's going to become a great, great actor when he gets the right stuff to work from and for that reason, along with his great charisma and charm he brings every time he's on screen, I'll continue to watch every film he does because I do think there'll be greatness soon. The film's a surprisingly well balanced mix of romance, drama, crime, action and comedy, without ever straying into too much of any of these to the point of creating tone issues like so many action-comedies do, especially ones that try to throw in a love story. In this, the love story is the forefront, with bits of comedy being thrown in but subtly and never really laugh out loud stuff when it's out of place. There's some gags but it's separate from the dark stuff, thankfully since I do think it'd have suffered the film otherwise. It's slightly strange, just enough to not come off as generic and boring even if it does at times fall into cliché. The character motivations are at times questionable/slightly unrealistic (but never enough to break your immersion). The film comes off as a bit of a fantasy, and I think they knew it. The hallucinations of Charlie's recently deceased mother (thankfully she only appears twice and very briefly each time, she never overstays her welcome and never appears when not necessary. Technically the film could have worked without her but we know that it's not real, Charlie's kind of messed up, so we can accept that he'd hallucinate) help bring this idea across as well as some lines of dialogue (as if to give the idea that Charlie lives in an idealised world, one where he wants to be something he's not- once again contributing to the idea that Charlie isn't quite "normal". he has one other vision of a dead person that is relevant to the plot.) The film was quite stylish, not wholly original but not generic. Shia gave a good performance as the lead and Mads Mikkelsen was a cool villain. I must commend the film on the soundtrack as well which was really great. Visually it's a nice looking film, slightly unrealistic in a fantastical sense (Ties in with Charlie as a character) A film I'd not necessarily go out of my way to recommend but had someone expressed interest I'd tell them to give it a watch as it's an enjoyable ride with a strong lead.

Alone (2007) About a 7/10 It's a horror movie about a woman who used to be a siamese twin along with her now deceased twin sister. She and her boyfriend have to visit her mother who is very sick, and when they go back to her childhood home, weird things start to happen, as we can already guess. The movie is kind of dark, as in the filming was either edited out to be darker than usual or just was really dark when they filmed it, which kind of helps you in shitting yourself. I'll be honest, I saw the movie "through my hand" since I'm a huge fucking pussy and went deeper into pussy syndrome after the first few scares. It has the huge "monster out of the closet" scares we all know, but I feel like it tries a bit too hard when delivering the only things it gives you. Even though I say this, don't think for a second that this isn't scary. Theres a reason I saw with a hand in front of my face, but that might just be me. Half way through the movie, I just went "NOPE". The reason why I feel is that it tries too hard, is because it just delivers creepy faces after a few seconds of building up tension with those "What was that? Better check it out" moments. The only moment when you could say that it has a more "run for your life" moment is also another time to pop up with creepy faces. Still, imo, its a pretty solid film. Pretty well done although not really all that tense, for all but the one part with the creepy faces. All of this is wrapped with a twist of which you might start to suspect about halfway through like I did, which I kind of liked and I guess gave the whole thing a reason to happen. (in horror movie land ofc) I gave it a 7 since I found out what the twist was. Maybe I'm being mean about it, or maybe horror movies have just started to get stale in stories. But I give them one thing: the movie never broke out of pace and never delivered some half-assed out of nowhere scary shenanigan like, for example, Sinister. They give you the spirit cards at first and you stick with them through the whole movie, instead of giving you something which you can't really tell if its a boy or a girl, and then they half assedly give you the answer with some sort of awful cliche where you can go "oh its going this way...". They stick to what they showed you, never give you any extreme cliche, and they deliver it with a easy to understand story with a twist that you MIGHT find out about sooner or later into the movie. Word of advice, if you don't like watching creepy faces popping out, you better be ready to watch this. I assure you, it has some messed up shit every now and then. And as I said, saw another movie before this one. Sinister (2012) 5/10 A horror movie about a washed up writer that takes his family to live at a house where a family of four was all hanged except for one of the kids that mysteriously disappeared without a trace, in hopes of writting a book that sells while struggling with the fact that he used to help the police with cases for actual justice. The problem about reviewing this movie is that I will probably spoil quite a few bits of it. It starts off well. The lead finds a box with several rolls of film that he thinks are simple home made movies, with simple harmless titles and at first, simple footage of a family having a good time in a barbecue or a pool, but as he goes further into each movie, he finds the murders of said families recorded in the film. During analysis of the films, he finds an odd figure that is in each and every one of the films he saw, always "watching" on the background. After doing so, weird things start happening around the house. His kid who used to have night terrors starts having them again and just keeps getting worse, and his daughter, who used to draw harmless things on the wall, starts drawing how each murder happened. The movie goes... Let's say, well, during these parts. You might start suspecting of a few people who come on screen and start thinking, as I said before, that the movie will go a certain way with the story, but ultimately, it really doesn't... Halfway in, they hand you what you could call a reveal. A very cliché reveal aswell, that even new writers would frown upon for obvious reasons. What I mean with reveal, is that the movie pretty much reveals what kind of horror movie it will be, and after that, the cat is pretty much out of the bag. You'll just be waiting to find out about what happens in the end, which is a bit "meh", for lack of a better word. Or maybe thats the best word I can say about it. Meh. A simple, short and stubby little word that should be enough to tell you how fast the movie seems to rush itself to the end with everything. You basically find out who the mysterious figure really is, and imo, won't enjoy what they made it out to be, and all of the creepy stuff(which isn't really ALL that creepy) comes out of the woodwork in the most "Hey Bob, we're here and we're dead. Boo btw." kind of manner. Theres even one part when you might seriously question yourself if they got a comedy writer to make the details in the movie, since even amateur writers could have done better. But its not all bad. Again, it might be because horror movies are starting to get stale, repetitive or just predictable,but you will most likely understand a bit of the story and about the murders after a few minutes of it or at least until the characters give out the information. Besides that, it wasn't a bad story overall. I feel like they could have went a different way with things and not going for some kind of hellish evil from another realm in the most cliché'd way of handling things, but the story still worked out I guess... You'll only find out about the whole thing almost near the end. Despite all this, the movie had some pretty good effects and even acting. I honestly thought the snuff films were really nice in a VERY macabre way, and the whole movie was good, right up to the part where they decided to do the cliché way of handling things and taking on a faster pace. Plus there aren't many moments to jump at. You might even laugh at some stuff. I sure did... I give it a 5 for the obvious. It wasn't really all that scary, and at a certain point, it felt like they threw out the window what could be a cool story, and just went "DEMANS!" The whole mystery about the violent murder films and the mysterious figure were all dumped in favour of the story of the boogeyman. They could have done more with it, but they got lazy... One thing that I enjoyed was the films though. Without them, the movie is actually kinda dull. Viewing the murders from a snuff cam view (two of them in particular) is probably the best part of the movie, since its realistic stuff from fucking nightmares. No ghoulish stuff about it whatsoever, they feel like actual snuff movies. Also, the bloody walls effect on the very end was maybe, again, one of the best parts of the movie. I know thats not in course to what I would have wanted out of the story and much more fitting to how it is now, but well... The only way I can explain this is that the movie was a bit dull to the point that watching a weee nice effect in the end of the movie made it a little better...

Godzilla 4/5 Fucking loved it.

[QUOTE=xBackfire;44827590]Can you tell us like, some things about you? How old are you? Where are you from? Why is everything you post more confusing than a fucking riddle?[/QUOTE] because its probably a subtle troll acount

Godzilla 6/10 The love story feels forced and I can understand the need for filler when you can't have giant monsters fighting for the entire duration of the movie, but by god I was half sleeping for the first 45 minutes. Everything past that was 8/10

Godzilla [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SAg1zUCwBc[/media] Good for people who violently hate large cities, also good for people who violently like cutting away from the action to focus on little kids Reminded me a lot of Rise of the Planet of The Apes, in a good way. And while I do think Rise is a better movie than Godzilla, they are both super good reboots of classic franchises. Godzilla felt like a love letter to both the modern cloverfield inspired monster movies, and a love letter to the old G-zilla flicks at the same time. [sp]The entire ride home me and my friends were just laughing at how nothing any of the humans did made any difference, and simply by letting the monsters duke it out, they would have saved themselves a LOT of trouble[/sp] 8/10, -1 point for some slight pacing issues and the spoiler'd bit above, and another -1 point for not using the song posted above. Overall really darn fun.

So, the last movie I saw was Neighbors. Except not really, it was Godzilla, but I still need to think about that one. I'd say 7/10. It had some funny moments, and the relationship between Rogen's character and his wife was cute. It's not particularly outstanding, though, and I don't feel like there's really much else to say about it. Maybe, the development of the head of the fraternity could have been a little better? I appreciate that they tried to add a little depth to his character, but it seemed pretty rushed. [QUOTE=Hoboiam;44830875]Good for people who violently hate large cities, also good for people who violently like cutting away from the action to focus on little kids[/QUOTE] I never understood that whole thing. I mean, the Japanese kid was somewhat understandable, since the main character is involved, too, although it was ultimately unnecessary other than to try to make him look more heroic or something. But the one little blonde girl was weird, since the camera focused on her and her family for a few shots, making it feel as if they would be important. But then they duck into a coffee shop and are never seen again. I think I'll post a proper review of this movie later. I just need to think on it.

[B]Godzilla[/B] 7.5/10 I enjoyed it, the cinematography was great and the monters also. I agree that the main problems are cliche' characters and not enough Godzilla (and cranston). But it still stands up as a fairly unique modern monster movie and it did a good job at telling a coherent and realistic story (for the most part).

[B]Trolljegeren[/B] A great variation of the row of handheld camera movies. Funnier to Watch if you have been raised in Norway like me. 10/10

Requiem for a Dream im so sad so very very sad

[QUOTE=Doctorhooves;44832768][B]Trolljegeren[/B] A great variation of the row of handheld camera movies. Funnier to Watch if you have been raised in Norway like me. 10/10[/QUOTE] well, maybe not a 10, but i certainly appreciate your selection

[B]Godzilla[/B] (2014) Spectacular. It's a monster movie that is simple, well put together.. and unique enough that it becomes more than the average joe flashing lights and flying saucers. A moment where Godzilla [sp]appears through the fog, and the music is quietly endearing, I think it's japanese[/sp], made me feel in awe. Which didn't happen a single time during that Pacific Rim thingamajig. Took my nephew and he adored it, there's details he won't understand.. not even I understood some of the jargon. They waffle on and on sometimes about weapons and technology that only a true nuclear war nerd would get anyway. The dude was at the edge of his seat constantly and ultimately, it's one of the better high budget action malarkay pics for me as of recent. Some might be underwhelmed by lack of complex plot instructions and cliches but for me, that really isn't what the movie is trying to give. The performances aren't much to brag about either and maybe some of the cliche'd elements were weak such as things involving [sp]children[/sp], which could have been better. I think it's good blast of popcorn and bass goodness though. Gareth, you did it m8.

shrek the effects really haven't aged well, and it's also a lot less clever than i remember it being. still, it's a good children's movie. akira great film, without a doubt. kept me interested through the whole thing. as a fan of more down-to-earth sci-fi, though, i must say i'd probably have liked it better if the second half wasn't as surreal godzilla pretty awesome, but there are quite a few problems with it. they move around way too much in the first half, we go through like 5 cities in less than half an hour. also, some of the better actors were left in really bland roles, like ken watanabe. bryan cranston was great [sp]but i wish his character stuck around for a little while longer[/sp], and the lead guy wasn't anything special. this doesn't really detract from the action, though, which was fantastic, and i think they really nailed (what i think are) the core aspects of godzilla

shrek 1 was great m8 [editline]17th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Scot;44832873]Requiem for a Dream im so sad so very very sad[/QUOTE] I know the feel the first time I saw that. :(

Vertical Limit (2000) Was a good movie, entrantaining nevertheless. Though you could probably predict who's gonna die and who's gonna live. 8/10

Am I the only one who felt pretty underwhelmed during the final fight in Godzilla? It felt like [sp]5 minutes of Godzilla and the Mutos holding each other, then he does the awesome tail whip to whack the air Muto into the building, then another 5 minutes of him and the ground Muto holding each other, then the awesome atomic breath. Like the ways Godzilla killed the Mutos were hype, but the rest of the fight was kinda just like "alright just push against each other for a bit while Ford does a thing with the bomb". They could have added more variety to the fight, definitely.[/sp]

Godzilla was a superb movie. Grade-a blockbuster entertainment. I however didn't like [sp] Bryan Cranston's character being killed off so early [/sp]. I thought it was very disappointing. Besides that, I thought Godzilla was able to surpass TASM2. I hope Gareth will direct a sequel, cause his direction is very talented.

[B]Godzilla [/B]i dont know why everyone's complaining about [sp]Cranston being killed off early. He served his purpose. [/sp] like.. this film was okay. It wasn't as great as everyone makes it out to be. I really enjoyed the action scenes at the end and the [sp] panning shot when we see Godzilla fully for the first time, dat roar, hot damn [/sp] but the second act of the film was incredibly boring and stagnant.

[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;44835840][B]Godzilla [/B][sp]Cranston being killed off early. He served his purpose. [/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]its just that he was so much more charismatic than all of the other actors[/sp]