Rate The Last Movie You Watched - April V3 - no tv shows
14,263 replies, posted
I used to read Ebert's reviews from time to time before he passed away. I don't think I read any 'professional' reviews now.
Despicable Me 2 - 7/10
Really enjoyed it. The minions made the movie.
3:10 to Yuma, 8/10
Hella good, love westerns. And it was rad to see Batman be a cowboy and maximus be an outlaw.
They're only professional because they get paid, they're just the same people as you and me.
Exactly Ak'z
Now that Ebert's passed I only really read/watch reviews from like Peter Bradshaw of the Guardian, Little White Lies (they focus more on euro/artsy stuff so its cool to mix up) and Red Letter Media.
Empire's reviews are really good, because they're sort of informal, and they're usually always accurate.
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;41346127]Exactly Ak'z
Now that Ebert's passed I only really read/watch reviews from like Peter Bradshaw of the Guardian, Little White Lies (they focus more on euro/artsy stuff so its cool to mix up) and Red Letter Media.[/QUOTE]
I'll read anyone's these days... it's more special for me to find a meaningful review by an average guy.
I read reviews sometimes. It's pretty much the only way to get a good idea on what the movie's like. Whenever I talk to friends about movies they tend to be really vague and unhelpful, and trailers are usually edited to make them look like a totally different movie than the actual thing.
It doesn't really matter if it's positive or negative. Sometimes a negative review can make me want to check the movie out because it just seems like a movie I want to check out and I just have a different taste than the critic.
Of course sometimes the critic can just be plain wrong about something, although if you know how to read reviews, it's pretty easy to spot things like that. Making points without backing them up with evidence, inconsistencies, and general logical fallacies are all common traits of reviews that aren't really about discussing the movie so much as it is about the critic asserting their taste. Yeah, people have different tastes and all, but if you suck at providing good, detailed evidence backing it up, it's not really helpful to people who want to see what the movie's like.
To the Wonder.
Visuals were good, OST was awesome, probably the best part of the film.
It was clumsy and cut like movie trailer. Olga Kurylenko was naked, if it interests anyone.
5 out of 10.
I really liked scenes with Javier Bardem as a priest.
watched Poltergeist for the first time ever
it wasn't terrible or anything but it was so incredibly frustrating when the characters would just stand there and scream instead of fucking doing anything
oh, and it wasn't scary at all
Spring Break - "LOOK AT MA SHIT! LOOK AT MA SHIT! LOOK AT MA SHIT! *bang,bang,bang* *snorts cocaine* *ass shots everywhere*[IMG]http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3294/2649501301_7a383dc5a7.jpg[/IMG]/10
I dislike A. O Scott, he is a asshole on movies and has Rusty's taste
[QUOTE=TheKritter71;41354451]I dislike A. O Scott, he is a asshole on movies and has Rusty's taste[/QUOTE]
I've only read a couple of his reviews and I thought they were alright. Can you show me some examples of his assholism?
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;41354554]I've only read a couple of his reviews and I thought they were alright. Can you show me some examples of his assholism?[/QUOTE]
I take back what I said about Rusty's taste, I realize his taste in movies isn't as bitter as Rustys
[url]http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/movies/robert-downey-jr-in-the-avengers-directed-by-joss-whedon.html?pagewanted=all[/url]
he had a short argument with samuel l jackson on that movie
2/5 - The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) - " Tolkien's inventive, episodic tale of a modest homebody on a dangerous journey has been turned into an overscale and plodding spectacle." — New York Times
" The movie invites you to believe in all kinds of marvelous things, but it also may cause you to doubt what you see with your own eyes - or even to wonder if, in the end, you have seen anything at all." —
2/5 - Life of Pi -" The movie invites you to believe in all kinds of marvelous things, but it also may cause you to doubt what you see with your own eyes - or even to wonder if, in the end, you have seen anything at all." — New York Times [sp] could someone explain to me what this means?[/sp]
Marvel's The Avengers (2012) - " The light, amusing bits cannot overcome the grinding, hectic emptiness, the bloated cynicism that is less a shortcoming of this particular film than a feature of the genre." — New York Times
Sarcastic bastard
[QUOTE=TheKritter71;41354769]
2/5 - Life of Pi -" The movie invites you to believe in all kinds of marvelous things, but it also may cause you to doubt what you see with your own eyes - or even to wonder if, in the end, you have seen anything at all." — New York Times [sp] could someone explain to me what this means?[/sp][/QUOTE]
Pretty sure he's saying he felt it was a hollow experience
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
It's poorly written though because he tries too hard right there to be witty and doesn't blend it well enough
[QUOTE=TheKritter71;41354769]I take back what I said about Rusty's taste, I realize his taste in movies isn't as bitter as Rustys
[url]http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/movies/robert-downey-jr-in-the-avengers-directed-by-joss-whedon.html?pagewanted=all[/url]
he had a short argument with samuel l jackson on that movie
2/5 - The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) - " Tolkien's inventive, episodic tale of a modest homebody on a dangerous journey has been turned into an overscale and plodding spectacle." — New York Times
" The movie invites you to believe in all kinds of marvelous things, but it also may cause you to doubt what you see with your own eyes - or even to wonder if, in the end, you have seen anything at all." —
2/5 - Life of Pi -" The movie invites you to believe in all kinds of marvelous things, but it also may cause you to doubt what you see with your own eyes - or even to wonder if, in the end, you have seen anything at all." — New York Times [sp] could someone explain to me what this means?[/sp]
Marvel's The Avengers (2012) - " The light, amusing bits cannot overcome the grinding, hectic emptiness, the bloated cynicism that is less a shortcoming of this particular film than a feature of the genre." — New York Times
Sarcastic bastard[/QUOTE]
Wow what a bitter asshole
I don't see what's wrong with that Hobbit review. He talks about how the original novel was light-weight and had a charm to it that he missed in the movie. He doesn't like that the movie's more of a theme-park ride, which is fine if you like theme-park ride movies. If you ask me a nice adventure movie should be like that, but just because he doesn't like that doesn't make him an asshole.
The Life of Pi quote is referring to [sp]Pi's alternate, more realistic story about what went on during his cruise. That doesn't show much assholism. It just seems like an explanation of the theme.[/sp]
I do disagree with him about the avengers. I think there's a lot of wit in the dialogue that pulls it out of being just another cynical superhero cashgrab. His review acknowledges that too. He compares it to Rio Bravo, so his review isn't completely negative. So yeah I disagree but that still doesn't convince me that he's an asshole. I do agree that the action scenes aren't that much different than any other superhero movie, except for the scenes with Iron Man in it because he's cool.
Mr Beans Holiday, 6/10 Very funny movie not meant to be taken seriously but an enjoyable movie
Europa Report
6/10
It's a decently made sci-fi film. I feel like things that went wrong included scenarios that real astronauts would have trained for to be able to handle properly and some things just aren't explained to any degree of satisfaction, such as [sp]why light can be seen shining through ice 3km thick. "The ice is thinner here" is not a valid reason when you just drilled 3km to get to where the light supposedly is shining through. Also, for some reason I'm pretty sure someone claims as they're landing that the surface temperature is absolute zero.[/sp]. The acting can be iffy at times, but for the most part it is good. If there is one area where this film shines its the exterior shots. Throughout the film there are space opera-esque shots of the spacecraft on its way to Europa and then shots on the moon's surface itself, which are all done very well. It is refreshing to see a convincing view of what the surface of such a distant place might look like from the view of a tiny, little Earthling.
I'd recommend a [B]single viewing[/B] to anyone who enjoys the science fiction genre, but not to anyone who prefers their sci-fi being hardcore adherent to scientific accuracy or requires every situation the characters find themselves in to be entirely plausible.
[editline]04:32[/editline]
Also, IMDB users can go fuck themselves:
[sp]To spend billions of dollars and to have 7 people killed in the flight just to find out whoopee there is an octopus or squid living on another planet, yes it is a waste. What exactly will that do to make Life on Earth better? Nothing. You Fail![/sp]
Evil Dead
8/10
I don't know if anyone else found it to be funny because of how over-the-top everything was
Pacific Rim.
7.5/10
Solid enough action, working story, and a fun watch.
[URL="http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1htzma/guide_to_christopher_nolan/"]/r/movies has just come full circle.[/URL] This is outstanding. Perhaps the biggest dicksucking of all time. The kind of circlejerking that only happens once in a lifetime.
[editline]8th July 2013[/editline]
"This needs to be a thing now with different directors. Can someone get on this with tarantino?"
SO GOOD LOL
The Pianist - A very strong 9/10
How have i not seen this before?!
A truly beautiful but yet horrific movie.
Aguirre, The Wrath Of God- 3/5
I went in not really knowing anything, and to be honest i was a little bit disappointed considering it's viewed by many as Herzog's crowning achievement. I enjoyed the film and it was very solid but overall not a massive amount more. Klaus Kinski was excellent portraying a man descending into madness, but I dunno. I was engaged the whole time but I didn't really feel anything either way when anything happened at all.
In terms of emotion though Aguirre brought out a few- the shot of him just staring right at the horse was really powerful, and also his rant about [sp]being "The Wrath of God" and proclaiming his treason[/sp] was just great.
The cinematography was pretty outstanding though- the final shot was excellent. I dunno I don't really have much to say about this film, which is a shame because I expected it to be something I could talk about.
Also, it was clearly a huge inspiration for Apocalypse Now. The plot is pretty similar and Coppola seems to have just copied the style of the film (and made it his own, sure, but it is incredibly similar stylistically and iirc Apocalyse Now is not really very Coppola-esque? But I dunno I've only seen AN and the first 2 Godfather films.)
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;41363358]iirc Apocalyse Now is not really very Coppola-esque? But I dunno I've only seen AN and the first 2 Godfather films.)[/QUOTE]
The Conversation is cool. Really wonderful soundtrack and not bloated like most people assume Coppola only does "taking his time" kind of films.
Here he does take his time but it's so through-and-through in its concept even if you miss the style, you can still rewatch it and realise things you've missed.
I really should grab the blu-ray of that some day actually.
You really should watch Rumble Fish though... that's a real crazy good flick with an early Mickey Rourke performance.
Oh also, This Is The End- 3/5
Really fucking funny and actually really quite smart- competently directed by Seth Rogen with non-stop laughs, twists and turns kept being thrown at you and you never knew what was going to happen next. It even had its fair few dramatic moments that were really quite nice or even intense- such as the dinner scene.
Also people praised the ending a lot which I did enjoy, and I applaud the film for not falling apart in the third act, but tbh I think it would have been a better ending if [sp]it ended with Jay and Seth going into heaven, without actually seeing anything of Heaven- partly because I wish they would have changed it up a bit... But at the same time. Backstreet Boys.[/sp]
World War Z (second viewing cos nothing else was on at the cinema)- 1/5
Jesus Christ, I think I gave this a 2-3/5 on first watch, giving it a point or two based purely on entertainment but this movie is honestly an absolutely atrocious pile of shlock. It is fucking awful. There is basically nothing good about this film. It was kinda fun I guess for the first watch, but it's too serious and on second viewing, knowing everything that's coming, there's absolutely no tension and every stupid decision just stands out even more. I'm not gonna bother listing off what's wrong with this film because frankly I'd be here for hours but it's a total pile of shit and I cannot recommend it to anyone whatsoever, even if you're looking for a fun popcorn flick- the main reason being, this film is not fun at all. It is dull, overly serious, and BORING. A total piece of trash.
The East- 2/5
Eh. Kinda rubbish. Alex Skarsgard was good. Goes against its own message (although I'm not really sure what its message was tbh- it kinda had 3 opposing ones and they clashed all the time so idk. Badly written.) Weird for the sake of being weird. The lead actress really sucked. A bit boring. Wouldn't necessarily say "Don't see this film!" but I'd not recommend it.
[editline]8th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;41363406]The Conversation is cool. Really wonderful soundtrack and not bloated like most people assume Coppola only does "taking his time" kind of films.
Here he does take his time but it's so through-and-through in its concept even if you miss the style, you can still rewatch it and realise things you've missed.
I really should grab the blu-ray of that some day actually.
You really should watch Rumble Fish though... that's a real crazy good flick with an early Mickey Rourke performance.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I've heard The Conversation is one of his best films. I'll maybe give it a watch at some point but to be honest I don't really rank Coppola very highly- I don't really like the Godfather films (pretty boring, overly long crime dramas that aren't as impressive as they think they are) and I see now that AN only really stood out as much as it did because Coppola took a massive amount from this film (although I do think AN is a strong movie- not as good as it's held to be though)
But maybe.
[QUOTE=AK'z;41358359]could be none an 80s poster as 80s as 48 hrs.[/QUOTE]
I saw a Blu-Ray copy on the shelf and noticed that they labeled Eddie Murphy as Nick Nolte and vice versa.
[editline]8th July 2013[/editline]
Watched Lincoln a second time. 9/10. Still very good.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
