|
Post by blackrose on Jul 29, 2009 10:29:36 GMT -5
Last movie we saw in theaters was HBP which, much like the book, generally feels incomplete. I liked some things they did with it, though, and it's good for a movie in the series, but not much of a stand-alone.
At hom was Burn After Reading and I think our shared general reaction was "Wtf did we just watch?". It's supposed to be funny... I'm not sure what it is, though. I think I just don't get Coen Bros movies...
|
|
|
Post by Denethor on Jul 29, 2009 18:46:51 GMT -5
I saw HBP too and my thought was well, it's good enough I suppose. It was a Harry Potter movie. By now we all know what these are like: they can't really cover what goes on in the book, so they gamishly try to tell a good story "of like sort" and similar basic plot, using lots of neat CGI, cool sets and costumes, and an emphasis on the wild characters. Reasonable success on that front. Probably the best way to describe it without spoilers is to use the "plenty of" method, so people will guess whether they'll like it based on what there's plenty of: plenty of Snape, plenty of Dumbledore, plenty of "dark and dreary Hogwarts magical scenes", plenty of the adolescents-growing-into-relationship-material thing, plenty of flashbacks, all stuff you can more or less predict if you've read the book. Oh, and to say, don't even think of going to the bathroom in the last half hour or so. Go earlier if there's any question. Just warning you. (If you're like me you'll spend half your time trying to get a better glimpse of what's actually printed in the Potions Book Of Much Plot Importance, because you recognize some of it from real texts. But not everyone is like me, so that might not be a good predictor.)
|
|
|
Post by E on Aug 17, 2009 21:06:34 GMT -5
I liked Burn After Reading. It is one of those films that is so choppy and screwy that you should have a drink before watching it. Brad Pitt really pulled off his role well and I had to laugh about George Clooney playing "whorebag".
Okay as for my review.
A Haunting in Connecticut
B-, C
It was a standard horror, suspense thriller. It had some jumpy scenes, some gore and some yell at the screen "Are you out of your mind?!" moments. The ending was too dramatic and the "token" reverend was just that, token. The play out of how they ended up in the house was silly and the father's role could have been better. Overall it was decent. I wouldn't watch it again though.
|
|
|
Post by Shannon on Aug 23, 2009 22:09:00 GMT -5
Coraline: good. Sort of a mish mash of Beetlejuice, Alice in Wonderland, Willy Wonka, and Nightmare before Christmas. I liked that TPTB purposefully chose the parents to be less than perfect because they think its bad for children to desire a perfect family.
Gran Tarino: good. Must see.
Body of Lies: IHateLeoDicaprio! 'Nuf said.
|
|
|
Post by E on Aug 27, 2009 20:25:02 GMT -5
Fast and Furious
I don't know if I can even grade it and give a fair judgement. I told Shawn during the last 9 of these damned films that they are horrid. He merely laughs and replies "Sh** blows up and there are nice cars".
I'll give it a B for a B movie, a D for a mainstream film.
Great special effects, a couple of now "big" names, chopped up and tacked on story line, Brewster is beautiful, beautiful cars, sis I mention the bad story line? Oh and the "bad guy" with the Hammer and Sickle?
|
|
|
Post by E on Aug 29, 2009 22:44:48 GMT -5
Last house on the left
OOOOooooooo OOO! Wes Craven you are the MAN!
A+
Sick, twisted, horrid, just wrong. Everything you could want in a horror suspense thriller. I could have don't without the rape scene but the last half of the film is sooooo good. I actually was near tears when the husband and wife banded together in such a gruesome kitchen scene. It really made the whole film. Bad guys sometimes screw with the wrong people.
Did anyone see the first one? It was made in the 70's I believe. I caught some of it once on TV and changed the channel because it was such a bad 70's film. Mr Craven directed that one too I have heard. He really out did himself making it so much better.
|
|
|
Post by blackrose on Aug 31, 2009 8:12:33 GMT -5
Valkrie
B/ B-
I actually liked this better than I thought I would, and didn't even mind Tom Cruise in it, though I liked some of the other "oh, I know him from somewhere" people that were in it even better. (I always like playing the "what else were they in?" game, don't you? What would we do without imdb.com? *grins*)
Anyway, Darkk thought it was a bit slow, but I thought it was pretty well paced, and even suspensful. Even though I know how it turned out, I could feel my heart racing a bit and even found myself holding my breath once or twice. All-in-all, not a bad little film, and it made me appreciate just how many German officers were against Hitler at the time, which was heartening.
|
|
|
Post by E on Sept 9, 2009 16:12:34 GMT -5
Duplicity
C
It was a well shot, big names film. Lovely Rome scene, it really presented a "feel" to the area. I had a hard time following the story. It seemed like it was an Pulp Fiction attempt at memories then it seemed it was actually following a chronology. I just didn't "get it" I suppose. I found that the way it tied together at the end made everything make sense but I don't want to wait until the end to understand what is going on.
It was a hard watch for me. Not only did I find my interest (got up to do dishes) wandering, I found myself nodding off.
|
|
|
Post by Denethor on Sept 27, 2009 22:05:09 GMT -5
Three "movie-worlds" since last reply. Most recently in the theater: both 9 and District 9.
About the latter: what you've heard about it's true, both good and bad. I'm starting to wonder a bit about that Peter Jackson. (Not wonder. It's pretty obvious. Still like LotR, though). It is a good science-fiction-action-and-aliens show, and I liked the fact that the aliens in it aren't glorious saviors or terrifying invaders, but desperate creatures trying to survive like any other. But it is at some points racist. as. fuck. I'm not really sure a white guy can set a film in South Africa without running into a minefield of that sort, however, so I'm still not sure. (On the non-racist side, if I hadn't encountered the blogstorm about its relation to the real events in District 6 of Cape Town, I'd have never learned that history. Those events happened, or at least started, when I was very young, and they were eclipsed in our news by Vietnam, the Nixon hearings, and the Arab oil embargo, to take it in rough chronological order. So I suppose the controversy also did some good).
About 9: the main issue I had with that one was the "meh?" ending. (And the caricatured "Asian-looking" character, but I don't want to delve into that again). But it's visually pleasant, and it creates a neat fantasy world. It's also short enough so you can drink a drown-your-puppy soda and see the whole thing without having to go to the bathroom, always a plus, and pretty rare these days. I'd say that that one is nice and cute, and while there are violent scenes you could take a relatively mature kid to it. I wouldn't say that about District 9.
I'd see either of them again, controversy, "meh" endings and all.
The other thing I did was take some overtime money and get the Alien/Predator series box set. Over a couple of weeks I watched these after work. I'd forgotten how much I liked these critters, especially the Alien, despite their extreme implausibility. Only problem for me is the one I have with all "monster" movies: the bad guys always seem to win, because I side with the "monster" instead of the humans. Hey, just like Ripley says in Aliens, "I don't see them screwing each over for a percentage" (!) - or for that matter, destroying their own planet either.
Brown marmorated stink bugs...pish posh...
|
|
|
Post by blackrose on Sept 28, 2009 7:56:14 GMT -5
Saw 9 over the weekend. I did like it, but I agree that it was kinda meh. Sort of sweet, in a way, but I was expecting them to bring them back.
I think I liked these things better when I was younger, when the part of my brain that says "wait - we're supposed to be happy that the protagonist survived when 5 other characters had to die in order for him to get there?"
Or maybe it's just 'cause I liked 6 a lot... I now want a 6 doll. I wonder if they'll make them. You think they would - I mean, talk about built-in marketing.
|
|
|
Post by Denethor on Sept 28, 2009 19:24:55 GMT -5
Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if someone comes out with a (probably overpriced, sadly) boxed set of dolls of all of them - it's a rather obvious product idea, don't you think? Almost as obvious as the Noble Collection version of the alethiometer from The Golden Compass. *SPOILER ALERT*. . . . . . . . . (I could go into my usual objection to the "so-and-so is 'free' or 'at peace' now so everything is all fine in 'the afterlife', and so their death(s) on account of your mistake are ok too" trope, but my objection is the one you'd predict, so why bother? )
|
|
|
Post by E on Sept 28, 2009 22:11:51 GMT -5
House
D
The 1986 version starring William Katt. It was so cheesy, corny, poorly written, badly thought out film from that entire horror/comedy genre. I wouldn't have known it was even meant as a horror/comedy had I not just googled the year it came out.
Total "B" movie. . . Ugh the soundtrack, Horrid!
|
|
|
Post by blackrose on Oct 5, 2009 12:48:42 GMT -5
Mummy 3: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor
It was ok, but not as fun as the first two. A large part of this is due to the fact that Rachel Weiss didn't repeat her role, and half the fun was the chemistry her and Brendan Frasier had - which didn't much exist with her replacement. Also, the kid who played the son was kind of annoying, and the romance between him and the other girl was rushed and unbelievable. And they tried too hard for laughs in some places.
All in all, it was ok, but didn't have the charm of the first, or even the second.
B-
|
|
|
Post by Denethor on Oct 5, 2009 16:00:08 GMT -5
Mummy 3: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor<...> All in all, it was ok, but didn't have the charm of the first, or even the second. B- Darn. I liked the first two.
|
|
|
Post by Denethor on Oct 13, 2009 17:39:26 GMT -5
Paranormal Activity. D+It only gets the "+" because I stopped for a chicken pesto on the way home, and being well fed put me in a more generous mood. So, I finished a bunch of work and decided to reward myself with a nice, autumn-appropriate horror movie, on the big screen in the theater. To approximate my experience: 1) Go outside and toss a twenty dollar bill into the recycle bin. 2) Return inside, get a can of Coke, and nuke some butter-flavored popcorn. 3) Eat these in the dark. 4) Now take a two hour nap. Don't forget to turn off your cell phone! The constant temptation to turn it on again to check the time is an important element of this movie experience. In short, I'm glad I only paid matinee price, though it seems rather unprincipled to charge me even that much for a film I could have made myself. I even know a couple of out-of-work real estate agents I could hit up to act in it. Give this thing a miss. "Nightmares guaranteed" - but only if you pop a pharmaceutical agent such as Xanax that tends to have these as a side effect. A better tagline would be, "For the love of God, move the f**king plot!"
|
|