One movie: 1 good thing and one bad thing

[Tinalera]

Thought I'd throw this up, maybe get an idea on things we look for in films. The idea, take a movie that was either was poor either critically, or poor through your own opinion. Name one thing you liked about the movie, and one thing you disliked.

Example.

I watched "Ultraviolet" again the other day-a critical bomb, though I like it-call it a guilty pleasure:

What I liked-the fighting choreography. Instead of sissy kungfu kicks ala Charlie's Angel's, we had a female character that destroyed people in movements that were almost ballet like in movement(IMO)

What I hated-only noticed this on a second viewing, the movie just felt rushed. The type of story was maybe one that is a 3rd movie in a trilogy, with the characters established. Yet I felt like it was kind of slapped together.

There are other things, but I'd like to try and keep it to one thing-probably thing that stood out the most for you.

 

[Libby]

Ikiru.

Saw it on tcm last week. Just loved the story in and of itself. Didn't like that the funeral scene sort of dragged a bit. Would have liked the main charactor to have lived a little longer rather than mostly flashback at the end.

Anyway, great film overall. Its part of Kurosawa every tuesday this month as it would mark his 100th birthday. Its a Japanese film by the way.

 

[Smark]

For me it would be in the movie Serenity. To be completely honest i'm a large Firefly fan.

What drew me into the movie was the perfect balance of sci-fi and western style ethics. But the one thing that i still shake my head at, (not only in this film but a lot of films i see) They can have a dead on script, but then there comes that moment where a line is read, not in any part of direct dialog, But a single line that more so states the obvious.

The example that i have is when they crew is on the planet Miranda. Now we already know they are on their way to the beaken. Than "Wash" says his one line... "lets get to the beaken"

I cringe at dialog that is out of place. But i still watch this movie once or twice a month..

 

[Zensteve]

Serenity.

Heh, I was going to use this myself.

What I liked: The television series Firefly didn't get to wrap up any of its story arcs. None.

The series needed closure, and it was delivered.

What I didn't like: The film Serenity is just a terrible film. Really bad.

It attempted to wrap up a years-worth of story-arcs in 90 minutes - resulting in either a hatchet-job at narrative, or several characters being brushed over, and no time to realistically present & solve any kind of "new" material.

Well, 75% of the film is the "new" material (creating its own arc & issues).

I was happy that the story got some kind of closure, but holy cow - it was just bad.

Would have been sweet if it had managed to keep hobbling on like BSG.

 

[Lord of Light]

Van Helsing's the top of my guilty pleasures. I love the action, VFX, score, cinematography, and some of the acting's good (albeit cheesy at parts).

What I don't like is how they went almost nowhere with the titular character. He knew almost nothing from the start, and only knew a little more than that when it ended. Sounds like lazy writing to me.

And there should've been a sequel. But there's always fan fiction.

 

[don patterson]

I am guilty of owning Ultraviolet, Serenity (and all the Firefly episodes) and Van Helsing on DVD. Some of the camera work and all of the production values are very good. The scripts have weak moments both in dialogue and story-line. But the image(s) are beautiful, audio fantastic and pacing -- almost perfect...
Been watching Sparticus, Blood and Sand on Netflix instant view (on computer) and recommend it. I really see in some (big budget) action oriented films (and some TV programing) like 300, The Spirit (really horrible story-line and 'choke' dialogue) and etc. -- across the board actually, a pushing of the envelope in camera work (and quality production values in both production and post). Where do you think the next big move will be in pushing the envelope? Avatar and Alice In Wonderland on Imax and 3D ? Advanced CGI effects (as in LOR or Matrix, etc.)? Of course story has be number one, but what will be the next WOW factor to get audiences to fill theater seats?
Story will always be number one (name or quality acting -- number two?) as in Hurt Locker.
But what will be the next WOW factor to get audiences to fill theater seats?

 

[Tinalera]

Thanks for the responses! No one seemed interested in the thread, so I thought it had died-good to see some life!

As far as the next "big thing", I think it will be the continuation of 3D-the TV companies are making 3D tvs now(you still need glasses). I want to see Avatar in 3D, because people say it is like you're in the movie(not just things popping "out" of the screen"-supposedly superior effects compared to other 3D films.
I just saw "The Spirit", and really didn't know what to make of it. I mean, Jackson played his role totally over the top, which I expected. The script was not that impressive, and I thought there would be a better story than there was. They seemed more focused on playing up the production values(which were good in some places, awful in others).

Some movies are harder than others to judge. Ed Wood is easy to pick on, but he had a passion for it, and it had more to do with low budget and working with what he had(I still think Glen or Glenda is an underrated film).

I must say I can add another movie:Just saw "The Princess and The Frog"-I'm an animation buff, and the animation was really well done. What I disliked about it was that it seemed like something out the early to mid 90's,and I think Disney has come a lot further since the Pixar union than to put that out.