movies What's the last film you watched? And rate it!
- Thread starter GerryLovesU
- Start date
Hedwig and the Angry Inch. A.
The story's pretty amusing and kept me involved. And the thing is, the music's really good, and since it's a musicial, that's pretty important. Good Lord, John Cameron Mithcell's gots some pipes. And a good voice. And, from the Wikipedia page...
It seemed like it, and by golly, that's pretty impressive because it all sounded really good. Well, it doesn't say that those vocals didn't get doctoring in post, either. Still...
The story's pretty amusing and kept me involved. And the thing is, the music's really good, and since it's a musicial, that's pretty important. Good Lord, John Cameron Mithcell's gots some pipes. And a good voice. And, from the Wikipedia page...
It seemed like it, and by golly, that's pretty impressive because it all sounded really good. Well, it doesn't say that those vocals didn't get doctoring in post, either. Still...
WARNING!
Maybe spoilers about the movies in the little review next to them.
Kingdom of Heaven (Director Cut) - 7/10. For a 3h movie it dragged way too much. Orlando Bloom didn't get to me as a leader and the story was in too many places some times. Also I liked Saladin way too much and wanted him to win.
The Hobbit - 8/10. Didn't know when 3h flew by and wanted more. Didn't like the dwarf design that much since they didn't looked like dwarfs, they showed too much of Azog, too little of Radagast. Throrin is the opposite of Aragorn and I could not care less if he died at the end and also eagles again.
James Bond Skyfall - 6/10. I love James Bond but this was bad. I know I am not in the majority but no. Just no. And they tried to pull a Joker in the villain but they failed terribly. And why make such a dumb plan as a genius villain? No. Just no.
Maybe spoilers about the movies in the little review next to them.
Kingdom of Heaven (Director Cut) - 7/10. For a 3h movie it dragged way too much. Orlando Bloom didn't get to me as a leader and the story was in too many places some times. Also I liked Saladin way too much and wanted him to win.
The Hobbit - 8/10. Didn't know when 3h flew by and wanted more. Didn't like the dwarf design that much since they didn't looked like dwarfs, they showed too much of Azog, too little of Radagast. Throrin is the opposite of Aragorn and I could not care less if he died at the end and also eagles again.
James Bond Skyfall - 6/10. I love James Bond but this was bad. I know I am not in the majority but no. Just no. And they tried to pull a Joker in the villain but they failed terribly. And why make such a dumb plan as a genius villain? No. Just no.
Last edited:
Elena
9/10
A really beautiful film which really makes you understand the class difference in Russia and how a mother can really love her family. Though at times you wished the painfully longs shots would end, and like the only scene in the film that was violent was tough to sit through. Also the acting is just sublime, all round brilliance.
9/10
A really beautiful film which really makes you understand the class difference in Russia and how a mother can really love her family. Though at times you wished the painfully longs shots would end, and like the only scene in the film that was violent was tough to sit through. Also the acting is just sublime, all round brilliance.
BAGHEAD
A meta-horror by the Duplass Brothers. Loved it from the very first line. Equally as daft as it was brilliant. 8/10
A meta-horror by the Duplass Brothers. Loved it from the very first line. Equally as daft as it was brilliant. 8/10
THE WATCH - 3/10
Don't even waste time on it.
There's a couple of childishly amusing puerile jokes, a whole lotta lame "buddy squabbling" improv substituting for actual script for time-filler, and just a general sense of "if we stick a bunch of well known comedians together and add a little scifi this'll be great!"
Yeah, well... $68m was a lot to blow on this.
Dumb@sses.
SAVAGES - 5/10
Meh... fair.
Watch it. Don't watch it. You don't loose anything by not seeing it or gain anything by watching it.
But it's interesting to see that not only the reviews less-sucky than that of THE WATCH, above, but at a $45m it was better entertainment money spent.
I haven't seen anything of Oliver Stone's since NBK, which I thought was really good (written by QT, BTW). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Stone#As_director
I wasn't impressed here.
THE ROAD (2006) - 4/10
As a father I've been deliberately dodging this one for years because I knew it was going to be miserable to experience.
Okay, it was an exercise in misery, I'll give it that. Otherwise, it was of little value or merit.
I appreciated that they didn't try to pass off some pseudo-sciency explanation of WTH happened, only that this was the post apocalyptic scenario, deal with it.
But I didn't appreciate the father's stupid way of going about things. Maybe my own survival skill set is different than his, IDK.
And I didn't know what to make of the generally stupid kid. IDK how he survived that long.
Whatever.
Don't even waste time on it.
There's a couple of childishly amusing puerile jokes, a whole lotta lame "buddy squabbling" improv substituting for actual script for time-filler, and just a general sense of "if we stick a bunch of well known comedians together and add a little scifi this'll be great!"
Yeah, well... $68m was a lot to blow on this.
Dumb@sses.
SAVAGES - 5/10
Meh... fair.
Watch it. Don't watch it. You don't loose anything by not seeing it or gain anything by watching it.
But it's interesting to see that not only the reviews less-sucky than that of THE WATCH, above, but at a $45m it was better entertainment money spent.
I haven't seen anything of Oliver Stone's since NBK, which I thought was really good (written by QT, BTW). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Stone#As_director
I wasn't impressed here.
THE ROAD (2006) - 4/10
As a father I've been deliberately dodging this one for years because I knew it was going to be miserable to experience.
Okay, it was an exercise in misery, I'll give it that. Otherwise, it was of little value or merit.
I appreciated that they didn't try to pass off some pseudo-sciency explanation of WTH happened, only that this was the post apocalyptic scenario, deal with it.
But I didn't appreciate the father's stupid way of going about things. Maybe my own survival skill set is different than his, IDK.
And I didn't know what to make of the generally stupid kid. IDK how he survived that long.
Whatever.
Mama - 6.5/10
I saw the short of it at the Cleveland International Film Festival last year, so I was excited when I saw they had gone from a minute long short to a feature. I'm glad I saw it, but it wasn't anything special. For the $5, it was worth it. I wouldn't have felt I got my money's worth paying $10+ at a big theater chain.
The story line was interesting and easy to follow. But, the movie itself just made no sense at times. There were quite a few times that made my spine tingle or made me flinch, so I say as a horror movie it accomplished that.
All in all, I'd recommend it. From a well put together short to a nationwide feature, I'd say they put together a fine film.
I saw the short of it at the Cleveland International Film Festival last year, so I was excited when I saw they had gone from a minute long short to a feature. I'm glad I saw it, but it wasn't anything special. For the $5, it was worth it. I wouldn't have felt I got my money's worth paying $10+ at a big theater chain.
The story line was interesting and easy to follow. But, the movie itself just made no sense at times. There were quite a few times that made my spine tingle or made me flinch, so I say as a horror movie it accomplished that.
All in all, I'd recommend it. From a well put together short to a nationwide feature, I'd say they put together a fine film.
Well it is Oscar Season...
So the last five films I watched were:
Django Unchained: A
I have to say this is probably Tarantino's best screenplay. I love Spaghetti Westerns and this one was pure awesome sauce.
Lincoln: A
Ok so Daniel Day Lewis is a genius. We know this. I especially appreciated the lighting in this film. Spot on. Janusz and Spielberg are dream teaming it once again.
Beasts of the Wild: A+
Still have no idea who directed it but it was beauitful and sad and so Indie in look and presentation. I hope it wins because it was really a breath of fresh poverty..I mean air.
Argo: A
All I kept saying was Argo get the f* ou of there!
Cloud Atlas: A+
I'm very disappointed in the Academy for snubbing this film. It was gorgeous, moving, powerful. It made me cry. Like touched my soul deeply crying.
So the last five films I watched were:
Django Unchained: A
I have to say this is probably Tarantino's best screenplay. I love Spaghetti Westerns and this one was pure awesome sauce.
Lincoln: A
Ok so Daniel Day Lewis is a genius. We know this. I especially appreciated the lighting in this film. Spot on. Janusz and Spielberg are dream teaming it once again.
Beasts of the Wild: A+
Still have no idea who directed it but it was beauitful and sad and so Indie in look and presentation. I hope it wins because it was really a breath of fresh poverty..I mean air.
Argo: A
All I kept saying was Argo get the f* ou of there!
Cloud Atlas: A+
I'm very disappointed in the Academy for snubbing this film. It was gorgeous, moving, powerful. It made me cry. Like touched my soul deeply crying.
The Bourne Legacy: 8/10
Loved this for a Bourne reboot/sequel/expansion/whatever. The tone and feel were in line with what I expect from a Bourne film. The parallels made with the original Bourne series are peppered in just enough to make the experience new and familiar at the same time. I enjoyed this film more the second time around. Also, I wasn't a Renner fan until I first saw Legacy in theaters. He was cast perfectly and did a great job.
Loved this for a Bourne reboot/sequel/expansion/whatever. The tone and feel were in line with what I expect from a Bourne film. The parallels made with the original Bourne series are peppered in just enough to make the experience new and familiar at the same time. I enjoyed this film more the second time around. Also, I wasn't a Renner fan until I first saw Legacy in theaters. He was cast perfectly and did a great job.
The tragic downfall of this film is the ending, or lack thereof. After a truly engaging ride I was left feeling like someone shut off the projector before we finished watching. None of the main antagonists are reprimanded or even approached about their wrong doings sans the silent "Bourne 2.0" character who isn't even introduced until 10 minutes before the credits roll. I don't know what it was if not a shameless tee up for the next Bourne film.
Upstream Color: 8.5/10
Really interesting film. If Shane Curruth hadn't expounded on some of the more confusing plot elements in the Q&A, I probably would have walked away not really knowing what the hell the film was even about. Obtuse would be an understatement, however once you know what's going on it becomes really interesting. After Shane talked about the film with us, I wanted to see it again and catch all the things I missed the first go-around. Not many people are going to like this film at first is my general feeling... however once they look into it and understand the story better, many will warm up to it I think.
Really interesting film. If Shane Curruth hadn't expounded on some of the more confusing plot elements in the Q&A, I probably would have walked away not really knowing what the hell the film was even about. Obtuse would be an understatement, however once you know what's going on it becomes really interesting. After Shane talked about the film with us, I wanted to see it again and catch all the things I missed the first go-around. Not many people are going to like this film at first is my general feeling... however once they look into it and understand the story better, many will warm up to it I think.
I guess I'm too much of a low brow, Beasts of the Southern Wild bordered on unwatchable. I needed a couple of stiff drinks and people watching it with me. Alone I would have turned it off.
I really enjoyed Beasts, both times I watched it. The first time I found the shakey-cam really annoying, but it settles down right around the first act turning point, so I realised it was quite obviously a creative decision and one I grew to like in the end.
Second viewing was on a smaller screen, so the shakey cam wasn't as pronounced.
Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired. I knew next to nothing about the thirteen year old and Polanski and the prosecution that followed etc. If you don't either and want to hear about it, check this documentary out.
John Waters: This Filthy World. He's a character. I don't think I've seen any of his films, but he's interesting. Even if I didn't care for them, it's good to know that someone's out there making films on the fringe, keeping the fringe alive.
=D Netflix has a number of these documentaries about Hollywood and filmmakers, and I'm enjoying going through them.
Titanic. Looks awesome in HD. I've bought this damn title too many times already. But I don't regret buying the Blu-ray...it is gorgeous. But will I have to buy the 4K version? The 8K version, if I'm still around? Or maybe by that time owning your own copy of a film will no longer be an option? Maybe "buying" movies in the so-called cloud will be the only option. Or, even if you can buy your own copy of an optical disc or whatever of a movie in the future, maybe it will come with a license to view it only 8 or 15 or whatever times. Never underestimate the power of greed. Or am I being too cynical?
Anyway, remember when 1080P was the Holy Grail of HD and home video and the best it could be? Once you're at 1080P, you're doing pretty well, I think. Will films not shot in 4K or 8K benefit much from some sort of "enhancement?" Pardon me, I'm an ignoramus about these things. I'm guessing that films shot on video in 1080P or whatever in the first place surely will not, because all the information that's there is there, you can't get any more out of it, can you? But, what about something shot in film? If you make a transfer from it to 4K or 8K or whatever video, will you get more information out of that and see an appreciable benefit?
John Waters: This Filthy World. He's a character. I don't think I've seen any of his films, but he's interesting. Even if I didn't care for them, it's good to know that someone's out there making films on the fringe, keeping the fringe alive.
=D Netflix has a number of these documentaries about Hollywood and filmmakers, and I'm enjoying going through them.
Titanic. Looks awesome in HD. I've bought this damn title too many times already. But I don't regret buying the Blu-ray...it is gorgeous. But will I have to buy the 4K version? The 8K version, if I'm still around? Or maybe by that time owning your own copy of a film will no longer be an option? Maybe "buying" movies in the so-called cloud will be the only option. Or, even if you can buy your own copy of an optical disc or whatever of a movie in the future, maybe it will come with a license to view it only 8 or 15 or whatever times. Never underestimate the power of greed. Or am I being too cynical?
Anyway, remember when 1080P was the Holy Grail of HD and home video and the best it could be? Once you're at 1080P, you're doing pretty well, I think. Will films not shot in 4K or 8K benefit much from some sort of "enhancement?" Pardon me, I'm an ignoramus about these things. I'm guessing that films shot on video in 1080P or whatever in the first place surely will not, because all the information that's there is there, you can't get any more out of it, can you? But, what about something shot in film? If you make a transfer from it to 4K or 8K or whatever video, will you get more information out of that and see an appreciable benefit?
Into The Wild - 6/10
Fairly interesting.
A lot of ranting and raving about a young man with what seems like a variant of the family's social mental health issues.
Although the story didn't do much for me the film was beautifully shot, acted and directed.
No Country For Old Men - 6.5/10
I dunno. It was averagely fine to me. All the hoopla and praise escapes me.
It just kinda went on and on with characters doing the stupidest things possible.
I woulda dumped the cash out first thing underneath the tree looking for a transponder and then switched containers, and then stuffed it in a airport locker or something.
Seemed like a lotta generally stupid things to do for a mature hunter with two 'Nam tours under his belt.
Whatever.
Ted - 3/10
I don't care for the puerile humor of any of McFarlane's work, so, despite the staggering half-billion this thing pulled in I didn't care for it.
I guess I'm in the below 69% of the audience whom approved of it.
Chernobyl Diaries - 4/10
$1m production cost becomes $37m in revenue. Not bad.
Completely missable story.
Shoulda been titled "Chernobyl Runners" 'cause 2/3 of the film is stupid 20-somethings running around.
I applaud the filmmaker's use of location and prop/costume resources, but the story was lame-O.
Like... Blair Witch with a budget snore-fest. I watched most of it fast-forwarded with the subtitles on.
As a technical side: Interesting that, for all the hoopla around here praising 4k as the resolution gold standard, if I'm understanding this right, the Digital Intermediate processing bottlenecked the rez down to 2k. Is that correct?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1991245/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec
Fairly interesting.
A lot of ranting and raving about a young man with what seems like a variant of the family's social mental health issues.
Although the story didn't do much for me the film was beautifully shot, acted and directed.
No Country For Old Men - 6.5/10
I dunno. It was averagely fine to me. All the hoopla and praise escapes me.
It just kinda went on and on with characters doing the stupidest things possible.
I woulda dumped the cash out first thing underneath the tree looking for a transponder and then switched containers, and then stuffed it in a airport locker or something.
Seemed like a lotta generally stupid things to do for a mature hunter with two 'Nam tours under his belt.
Whatever.
Ted - 3/10
I don't care for the puerile humor of any of McFarlane's work, so, despite the staggering half-billion this thing pulled in I didn't care for it.
I guess I'm in the below 69% of the audience whom approved of it.
Chernobyl Diaries - 4/10
$1m production cost becomes $37m in revenue. Not bad.
Completely missable story.
Shoulda been titled "Chernobyl Runners" 'cause 2/3 of the film is stupid 20-somethings running around.
I applaud the filmmaker's use of location and prop/costume resources, but the story was lame-O.
Like... Blair Witch with a budget snore-fest. I watched most of it fast-forwarded with the subtitles on.
As a technical side: Interesting that, for all the hoopla around here praising 4k as the resolution gold standard, if I'm understanding this right, the Digital Intermediate processing bottlenecked the rez down to 2k. Is that correct?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1991245/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec
Last edited: