movies What's the last film you watched? And rate it!
- Thread starter GerryLovesU
- Start date
I wouldn't agree that he's the 'worst' writer but I do think he's a weak writer. It's a fairly subjective thing, but I'm inclined to agree with mussonman (to a lesser extent though).
Throughout shooting The Flight of the Flamingo I had to endure the actors telling me it had a very 'Tarantinoesque feel' as though they thought I would take that as a compliment. The other one I got all the time was 'it definitely has shades of Guy Ritchie'. Eurgh.
chilipie once said that it reminded him of Noel Clarke. Don't see him around these boards that often anymore, do you?
I feel ya, bro. People have compared my writing to Kevin Smith. It's a fair comparison for a couple reasons, but I'm not his biggest fan (strictly from a writing perspective).
Oh, and Ol' Ollie is here. He's manning his post, fear not.
You do seem to have a hard time with people who don't share your opinions
That said, I much prefer when Tarantino writes but doesn't direct (True Romance and Natural Born Killers are two of my favorites). I don't particularly like his other films (Kill Bill was okay).
Me, I'm on vacation, have whiskey and self-loathing so I'm on a bit of an Uwe Boll marathon right now (thanks, Netflix instant).
In The Name Of The King 2, aka So Bad We Lost The Fricking Dungeon Siege License. As expected, no redeeming features. A fantasy film that doesn't touch on non-human monsters until 1:18 in. Terrible dialogue, incomprehensible bad plot, so mild amusement there. It gets a point for taking the lens cap off, and for the sound being audible (though it might be better if it wasn't). Makes me yearn for the next Dungeons and Dragons film (the first was amusingly bad, the second was surprisingly good for a made-for-tv film).
Because I hate myself, 3 BloodRayne movies all lined up.
Heh. FINALLY, fernando97 and I have found common ground. QT is the tits, in my book. My most anticipated movie of this year is easily Django Unchained.
See, just cuz I like Avatar, that don't make us antagonists. Cheers!
You do seem to have a hard time with people who don't share your opinions
That said, I much prefer when Tarantino writes but doesn't direct (True Romance and Natural Born Killers are two of my favorites). I don't particularly like his other films (Kill Bill was okay).
Me, I'm on vacation, have whiskey and self-loathing so I'm on a bit of an Uwe Boll marathon right now (thanks, Netflix instant).
In The Name Of The King 2, aka So Bad We Lost The Fricking Dungeon Siege License. As expected, no redeeming features. A fantasy film that doesn't touch on non-human monsters until 1:18 in. Terrible dialogue, incomprehensible bad plot, so mild amusement there. It gets a point for taking the lens cap off, and for the sound being audible (though it might be better if it wasn't). Makes me yearn for the next Dungeons and Dragons film (the first was amusingly bad, the second was surprisingly good for a made-for-tv film).
Because I hate myself, 3 BloodRayne movies all lined up.
I share your disdain for the first D&D film, as the love for the second... As for Uwe Boll... have you ever seen the movie "Postal?" That was surprisingly kinda good. 6/10
(warning: dorking out for a moment) a beholder starts out at as a challenge rating 13 aberration...and it a) is on guard duty and b) fooled by the "toss a rock" trick? Seriously? Me and an equally dorky group of friends went to see it opening night. The entire theater was heckling...it was a blast. When the Wayans died, there was a standing ovation (interesting note: the original ending was almost poignant. The Wayans stayed dead). That the second film was done by someone who actually had played the game once was a huge improvement. The next film is based on the Book of Vile Darkness, so again, already a thousand times more in-universe than the first.
Sort of enjoyed the first BloodRayne. Again, not a good movie, straight up exploitation, but the narrative was pretty coherent. Dialogue was atrocious, but better than Far Cry. Better than most Boll films, but definitely still bottom of the barrel. Were I more sober, I probably would have hated it.
Watching Postal now. Toilet humor, racism as humor coupled with the typical Boll barely-passable filmmaking. Not my cup of tea. Didn't play the game, so I don't know how well it compares. Much like other Boll films, it has a few actors that should be embarrassed, acting worse than they usually do. Seriously, does he instruct actors to dumb it down? Anyway, I enjoyed BloodRayne a lot more, but I'd rather laugh at a bad movie than a comedy, doubly so one with the bar set so low.
I like the dark humor in it. The poo jokes and fat lady sex stuff is just gross and sad. But the violence and real comedy is almost good enough to forget it's a Boll film.... till he pops up in a cameo...
The Football Factory 3.5/10
It's trying to be realistic with a bit of humour but didn't get there and Danny dire is just a bad actor. I should have felt something for these characters (good or bad) as they were beating the crap out of people, but i didnt. Rise of the footsoldier is a better attempt at covering the hooligan football scene.
It's trying to be realistic with a bit of humour but didn't get there and Danny dire is just a bad actor. I should have felt something for these characters (good or bad) as they were beating the crap out of people, but i didnt. Rise of the footsoldier is a better attempt at covering the hooligan football scene.
I don't have enough praise for "Paranorman". From a technical perspective, the film is simply gorgeous. The stop-motion animation is the best I've ever seen, and the art design (or do you call it production design?) is just WOW! They did such a fantastic job creating an overall creepy mood that permeates every frame.
Our lead character is one for the ages, in my opinion. The movie has wit, satire, and if you're a fan of the horror genre, there are a few really nice homages.
This is also one of the rare 3D movies that actually looks great in 3D.
I feel like the story sputters, just a little bit, at the start of the third act. Otherwise, I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and I give it an enthusiastic "A"!
Our lead character is one for the ages, in my opinion. The movie has wit, satire, and if you're a fan of the horror genre, there are a few really nice homages.
This is also one of the rare 3D movies that actually looks great in 3D.
I feel like the story sputters, just a little bit, at the start of the third act. Otherwise, I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and I give it an enthusiastic "A"!
Outlander.
It's pretty good. I recommend it, at least to people who love this sort of thing. I suppose it's something like a 6 or a 7 out of 10 for me. I liked Jim Caviezel and the rest of the cast.
I've had more than my fill of these Beowulf adaptations, I think. Why do these filmmakers feel the need to twist this heroic tale into a story of villians who aren't really villians because they're the victims of its would-be heroes who are rather too morally compromised by their past duplicities, cruelties, secrets, lies, acts of conquest and extirpation, and, no less, genocide to even be heroes? What heroes? It kinda casts a pall over the whole hero's tale thing. Hello. There's not really anyone to root for, for goodness sake. Everyone's too damn busy being conflicted by their own moral failings and crappy choices. How is this entertaining for a tale that's supposed to be about heroism?
I'm all for villians (and heroes) having emotional complexity and complicated motivations, but why does the now typical Beowulf adaptation have to be this odd sort of masochistic polemic anchored in or, I guess, wallowing in Western Liberal guilt? Oy. Has it been decided by some filmmakers cabal that Beowulf will be the standard-bearer for this stuff?
Why can't a heroic epic tale just be allowed to be a heroic epic tale?
Yes, Outlander has some of what I'm bit-- complaining about. But, mercifully, somehow, it didn't get too much in the way of my enjoying it overall. I'll leave it at that.
I like The 13th Warrior. I take it that most do not. But for my money, it's the best Beowulf adaptation that I've seen (I haven't seen them all), even if a pretty loose one.
It's pretty good. I recommend it, at least to people who love this sort of thing. I suppose it's something like a 6 or a 7 out of 10 for me. I liked Jim Caviezel and the rest of the cast.
I've had more than my fill of these Beowulf adaptations, I think. Why do these filmmakers feel the need to twist this heroic tale into a story of villians who aren't really villians because they're the victims of its would-be heroes who are rather too morally compromised by their past duplicities, cruelties, secrets, lies, acts of conquest and extirpation, and, no less, genocide to even be heroes? What heroes? It kinda casts a pall over the whole hero's tale thing. Hello. There's not really anyone to root for, for goodness sake. Everyone's too damn busy being conflicted by their own moral failings and crappy choices. How is this entertaining for a tale that's supposed to be about heroism?
I'm all for villians (and heroes) having emotional complexity and complicated motivations, but why does the now typical Beowulf adaptation have to be this odd sort of masochistic polemic anchored in or, I guess, wallowing in Western Liberal guilt? Oy. Has it been decided by some filmmakers cabal that Beowulf will be the standard-bearer for this stuff?
Why can't a heroic epic tale just be allowed to be a heroic epic tale?
Yes, Outlander has some of what I'm bit-- complaining about. But, mercifully, somehow, it didn't get too much in the way of my enjoying it overall. I'll leave it at that.
I like The 13th Warrior. I take it that most do not. But for my money, it's the best Beowulf adaptation that I've seen (I haven't seen them all), even if a pretty loose one.
Last edited:
Warrior - 9/10
The best film of 2011. Perfect acting, profoundly moving screenplay and completely sure of what it is: an emotional masterpiece.
The best film of 2011. Perfect acting, profoundly moving screenplay and completely sure of what it is: an emotional masterpiece.
Srsly???
I just did a James Marsh triple bill of Shadow Dancer, Man on Wire and Project Nim. I enjoyed them all, although his documentaries are extraordinary.
It's filmmaking at its best. Did you have issues with it?
"Fido" 8.8/10 It is one of the most unique and interesting takes on the zombie genre that I have ever seen. It stars Carrie-Ann Moss and Billy Connolly in the title roll. Set in the 40s after the zombie apocalypse, it is a strangely moving tale of the distinction between alive and dead. Well acted and shot. I would recommend it to anyone that is a fan of zombie flicks and is looking for something totally different.