Outrageous Prices For Food and Entertainment! (The Movie Reviews Thread)

[Reply #600 on:]

Parental Guidance.

Very good movie. It followed it's story genuinely well and became very touching at some points, not to mention that it had it's laughs. Billy Crystal, as he does, played a great role in being the grandfather. And the kids were great as well. At some parts it was very moving - Hudson (I think it was) getting up on the stage at the end and repeating the 1950's broadcast thing without stuttering. It was a very good movie. Music was good as well. Definitely very funny at certain intervals. Definitely able to pull some good quotes off that. Definitely enjoyed it. lol

Great movie. I'd recommend it.
9.5/10

TOTP_miniD!

[Reply #601 on:]

Lincoln
AKA Daniel Day Lewis flexes his acting muttonchops right in our faces!
Great performances and direction and cinematography (look at dat old-timey-ness!)
Just about the best "Lincoln passing the 13th amendment" film I've ever seen...
B+

[Reply #602 on:]

Identity Thief

I was not expecting to be so frustrated and pissed off by the end, that I wanted to strangle both McCarthy and Bateman since both their characters were beyond fucking idiots. Plus every time they tried to make McCarthy sympathetic she would do/say something incredibly asshole-ish within 5 minutes that would negate the nice thing.

Bateman is on thin ice. First he didn't show up to the Santa Barbara Film Festival and now this piece of crap. AD Season 4 better blow me away.

F for fuckballs

[Reply #603 on:]

Life of Pi

It was like a movie that started out crappy and got much, much, better by the end. I was shocked that I liked this movie. There was just a few things they need to cut but that was it.

B

[Reply #604 on:]

Now you're a Christian!

[Reply #605 on:]

The movie hews faithfully to the book. If you have read the book and love it, you'd love the movie. But if you didn't read the book beforehand, or read it and didn't care for it, then naturally blah blah blah.

Personally, I love both.

I rather enjoyed Cowboys and Aliens, even though it was incredibly cheesy at most points. The suspense was very well done--I was strung along, wanting to know what had happened to the Man With No Name...er, the Man With No Memory, I mean. Craig did a really good job, though I found that the actors' very white and straight teeth inconsistent with the grubby, brutal times.

I sorta wish that

Show spoiler

the alien space ships had actually contained human beings from the future, sort of like a Planet of the Apes twist, because there was a shortage of good actors for bad Westerns in the future.

And the scenery was really pretty. No, I don't mean Daniel Craig, but the mesas and mountains of New Mexico.

[Reply #606 on:]

No, I don't mean Daniel Craig...

You lie like a rug

[Reply #607 on:]

He's quite handsome, but I make that asessment from my brain, not my gonads.

[Reply #608 on:]

Now you're a Christian!

Hell no!

[Reply #609 on:]

John Dies at the End
/10

[Reply #610 on:]

UGH, JDatE better come on at cinemas here soon. I watched the first 40 minutes or so online though... The book is flawless.

[Reply #611 on:]

Burt Wonderstone

Not sure if it's a good thing when the funniest line in the movie could easily be interpreted as a line that wasn't supposed to be funny said by a character who had one scene in the entire movie and it's not even an important role. So...

John Frances Daley: A+
Olivia Wilde: A- (because I still plan on marrying her and Jason Sudeikis one day but I didn't really buy her hooking up with Steve Carrell in the movie).

Everything else: C+

I thought it was pretty straight forward, remake Zoolander but this time they're magicians instead of models. But no they couldn't do that.

[Reply #612 on:]

Oz the Great and Powerful

Saw it with some pals and didn't think I'd like it at all, but I was pleasantly surprised that it wasn't total garbage. At any rate it got me to read the actual Wizard of Oz book so that's something. The only part I really wasn't keen on was the ending. Superfluous romance. Just no.

B- because I went in expecting to entirely loathe it and I didn't.

[Reply #613 on:]

Looper
This was great! All the main actors did a wonderful job and it was really exciting seeing how the story played out.

It's 11:30 PM here so I can't be bothered deciding on a rating. I'll just say this is a /10

[Reply #614 on:]

Lincoln

'Lincoln' was worth every penny! Four score and seven years? More like four STARS and seven THUMB UP for this MASTERPEACE.

Jimmy Newtron

It was ok but only for a kids movie. As an adult, I found it to be rather pedestrian. 

[Reply #615 on:]

The Host

I had to go see this for a friend's birthday. I was not at all a fan of Twilight, and since this looked like Twilight-with-aliens, I went in with very low expectations. Even my remarkably low expectations were not met! This had to be the most boring movie I've seen! Almost nothing interesting happened throughout the whole movie. It didn't even have Twilight's so-bad-it's-funny moments!

I think what really annoyed me, though, was that the original concept could have been very interesting; the execution of it was just terrible.

[Reply #616 on:]

Jurassic Park: IMAX 3D Experience

Pretty cool stuff.  The first thing I noticed was, contrary to my prediction, the film is not letterboxed.  I can't tell if it's the new aspect ratio or the 3D effect or just being on a fricking IMAX screen, but certain things seem larger.  It's a movie I've seen quite a lot, so I feel like I should have a pretty good grasp on what the composition of the shots looks like, but it could just be my perception in this go-'round.  The 3D itself is unobtrusive with no added gimmicks, though there does seem to occasionally be a haze around the foreground characters from where they were popped into the third dimension.  The pan-and-scan is also hardly noticeable but for one or two times.

I was happy to see that only one of the errors from the original movie actually got fixed in the re-release, and I may have just missed the shot.  I was going to joke about how Genarro bites first, adorable compies doing cute things, and Nedry ringsploding, but it really is the original print, re-mastered and 3D-ed.  Everything else stands as it did 20 years ago, still looking pretty darn good.  Oddly, in this movie about dinosaurs, only the floppy disks and CRT monitors look anachronistic.

Still, I would have paid the outrageous IMAX 3D price to see a regular, 2D release, so my biases toward the experience may be colored somewhat.  I think I'd still prefer it that way, actually.

[Reply #617 on:]

The Host

I had to go see this for a friend's birthday. I was not at all a fan of Twilight, and since this looked like Twilight-with-aliens, I went in with very low expectations. Even my remarkably low expectations were not met! This had to be the most boring movie I've seen! Almost nothing interesting happened throughout the whole movie. It didn't even have Twilight's so-bad-it's-funny moments!

I think what really annoyed me, though, was that the original concept could have been very interesting; the execution of it was just terrible.

Watch the Korean The Host instead!

[Reply #618 on:]

That movie is what Cloverfield wanted to be.

[Reply #619 on:]

Source Code

This movie managed to tell an interesting story that was rather complex without being too confusing, which was great. It was fun seeing the protagonist get used to the situation he was in and be a bit of a smart ass to everyone around him.

But as enjoyable as it was seeing how the plot unfolded, I think it would lose some of its appeal on a second viewing thanks to the "mystery" involved. Either way, I really liked this!

8/10

[Reply #620 on:]

Evil Dead (2013)

Why is this the best movie I've seen this year? No don't get me wrong, it's a good gory fun movie, but really 2013? There has seriously not been one movie that I've been dying to see, and the (not super necessary) remake to a film that I love is the best we've got so far. And I honestly can't think of many movies coming out this year that I'm even remotely excited about.

But hey, I'd go see this again because I love the atmosphere of seeing a horror movie in a theater when the movie isn't shitty and everyone is taking it seriously.

EDIT: The problem with this movie I guess is that it's too straightforward and takes itself seriously, which is fine but there is no humor about it not even in the violence. I say that after watching Re-Animator which is crazy fucking gory but also has one of the funniest endings to a horror movie I've ever seen. Now this Evil Dead didn't need that kind of humor or like the Raimi brand kind but it has none whatsoever so that does make the non-horror scenes a drag.

B+

[Reply #621 on:]

The Host

I had to go see this for a friend's birthday. I was not at all a fan of Twilight, and since this looked like Twilight-with-aliens, I went in with very low expectations. Even my remarkably low expectations were not met! This had to be the most boring movie I've seen! Almost nothing interesting happened throughout the whole movie. It didn't even have Twilight's so-bad-it's-funny moments!

I think what really annoyed me, though, was that the original concept could have been very interesting; the execution of it was just terrible.

Watch the Korean The Host instead!

That looks way better! I think I'm going to have to watch that now 

Silver Linings Playbook

I absolutely adored this movie! For starters, the acting was brilliant.  I really sympathized with and cared for each of the characters, which is generally the most important factor in whether I love a movie or not. The writing was also great; it truly pulled me into the story and tugged on the heartstrings. I wasn't expecting this movie to be so funny either, so I was very pleasantly surprised about all the times it made me laugh out loud! I really can't wait to see this one again; this probably ranks up with my favorite movies of all time.

[Reply #622 on:]

I loved it too. JLaw: briliant.

I MUST see this biopic of Liberace:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqAC1yiIROw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Michael Douglas and Matt Damon together! Hot.

[Reply #623 on:]

I always thought Liberace and Scott Thorson's relationship was all sparkles and spangles, but that preview makes it look all angsty and tragic...and sparkles and spangles.

[Reply #624 on:]

I just have warm fuzzy associations with Liberace...I mean, I was a little girl, but my family would always joke about his rings and garish outfits--we never joked about his gayness. So, I want to see it really badly!

(Matt Damon looks so young--what did Soderberg do to him? Because I want to sign up for whatever he had!)

Also, Rob Lowe playing a plastic surgeon--his face tight as a mask. MUST. SEE.

Anyhoo, I saw Beasts of the Southern Wild. Pretty trippy. Strange. And wonderful. If anything, it's worth it just to see the actress, Quvenzhané Wallis, who played the main character. She was brilliant, and thoroughly deserved that Oscar nomination for Best Actress.

So weird: who would've known such wild, fiercely independent bayou folks existed? I have a soft spot for Louisiana (very much like a third world country--at least the last time I was there), so just the setting alone did it for me.

Not to mention the scene of the yummy crabs they were eating. Yum!

[Reply #625 on:]

My husband rented Django Unchained last night and after putting our daughter to bed, we watched it. Having seen some of the other films by Mr. Tarantino, I had an idea of what to expect in terms of the level of violence, foul language, and morally ambiguous protagonists. I did not, however, anticipate that the word "nigger" would comprise no less than 17.5% of the entire dialogue. I get that it's edgy and taboo to use the word, so "ooh, look at you using the n-word" could fan up controversy and make people want to see it, but it was hard for me to watch. I don't like it when black people use it, I don't like it when white people use it, and it's still not tolerable to hear a perky German say it. That out of the way, I did enjoy the movie up until the departure of Christoph Waltz's character. His performance was definitely the highlight of the film, with Leonardo di Caprio's absolutely vile Calvin Candie a close second. I guess when you play a character so purely embodying evil, you don't get much positive press or recognition for it, like Jack Nicholson in "The Departed."

I did not find much sympathy for the character Django, though. It's not that his situation didn't call for it: he was a slave, treated horribly, and his heart's desire was to find his wife who'd been intentionally sold separately at auction. At the beginning of the movie, he was a compelling character because of what he could become. As he learned the bounty hunter trade, he had a contemplative moment of whether or not he could kill a particular outlaw. After that, though, his character development ended and he just became your standard bad-ass killing machine. It seemed to me that once Dr. Shultz was out of the picture, the grip on reality was gone. When The Bride fought the Crazy 88 or whatever 88 they were called in Kill Bill, it stood to reason that there would be mounds of bodies at the end. Why in tarnation were there suddenly gobs of armed yokels running some kind of castle siege in the big shootout? Were they having a midnight julep festival on the front lawn the whole time? And why were they filled with what appeared to be red jello that bubbled over like a science fair submission when shot? I expect ridiculous amounts of blood given the director's usual style, but this stuff was a colloid-y mess.

The movie had its ups, downs, a few very funny moments, and some truly disturbing scenes involving dogs and Tarantino's favorite trick of sticking live people in holes in the ground. I'd give it a 7/10 but I doubt I could sit through nearly three hours of "Nigger, nigger, nigger" ever again.

[Reply #626 on:]

I somewhat disagree with your stance on use of the word nigger.  You may be correct in assuming the reason for its usage, but at the same time there stands enough reason that its purpose in the movie was to present a historically significant and truthful representation of society at that time. 

The same sort of perspective seemed to come up in an 8th grade literature class I had when we read aloud the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.  I never paused a moment over the word damn, nor did I when the word nigger presented itself, and further more I took pride in reading negro Jim's parts in a way that represented him as a character.  As a note, this is a story from an author not writing about history, but presenting a realistic portrayal of the society surrounding his life. 

Historically, at that time period, I believe it more than reasonable to presume that the word nigger was used abundantly by people of various races, and to include it in a story set in that period, whether fictional or factual, is just a sign of the setting of the story.  From that perspective, the word holds no value to me as an offensive term, and I have no qualms about using it in a discussion with anyone who wants to discuss such matters.

That said, I agree that the German bounty hunter was pretty awesome, and the movie as a whole was pretty decent.  Django does turn into a killing machine at the end, but it didn't pull me away from the story and it was essentially the climax the movie was always striding toward.


Evil Dead

Pretty neat movie to watch.  Cinematography was beautiful, although there's a lot of gore in this one, clearly an inheritance from its predecessors.  The story is essentially an amalgamation of the first two Evil Dead movies, which I believe are basically the same movie except slightly different... so essentially it's the third same movie except slightly different, though it borrows heavily from its originals.

The biggest improvement between this same film and the other two same films of the same name is that the narrative is contained in a much more detailed and reasonable manner.  The characters have a reason for being in the cabin this time around, and they have a reason to a larger extent for behaving the way they do.  To some extent this also allows the audience a deeper view into each character so that we can personalize with them a little more.  The story, much like the first two same stories, does still have quite a few things which are puzzling, questionable, and completely unanswered.

Bruce Campbell is only in this movie for approximately 30 seconds, and you'll have a bit of trouble finding him.

If you enjoyed the first two same movies, I think you'll enjoy this one.  It's pretty and the special effects get an overhaul, and it's gory, perhaps a bit scary in that way.  Also, the book is pretty freakin cool; the prop department did a wonderful job on that one!

[Reply #627 on:]

I did not, however, anticipate that the word "nigger" would comprise no less than 17.5% of the entire dialogue. I get that it's edgy and taboo to use the word, so "ooh, look at you using the n-word" could fan up controversy and make people want to see it, but it was hard for me to watch. I don't like it when black people use it, I don't like it when white people use it, and it's still not tolerable to hear a perky German say it... I doubt I could sit through nearly three hours of "Nigger, nigger, nigger" ever again.

You went to see a movie set during the era of American slavery, with a black protagonist, and didn't expect to hear the word "nigger"? That's a little like going to see a WWII movie and not expecting to hear the words "jew", "nazi", or "Hitler".

Seriously. The word might be somewhat jarring to modern audiences, but that's largely due to the fact that it's passed out of use due to people not being quite as intolerant, bigoted, or generally defamatory as they would have been back then - and not just with regard to race. Homosexuals and women were often given similar contempt (and we've stopped using some of the more derogatory terms for both women and homosexuals that were in use at that time, as well). Back then, people said "nigger" rather than "coloured", "black", or "African American". Similar racially-derived diminutives were in use during the British Raj in India. People didn't think anything of it, since they didn't really see racism as being wrong. To them, white people were people, and other people were... well, not really people. To a person in the 21st Century, this is deplorable.

But during the time that the film was set, this was simply the language that people used. Just as modern words like "computer" and "defibrillator" are not used in films whose setting predates them, archaic words like "nigger" are used to convey a certain period authenticity.

Besides which, you should probably look at some of the other films that Tarantino has made. Pulp Fiction springs to mind - especially the scene where Tarantino plays a man whose major contribution to the movie is to ask Samuel L. Jackson if there is a sign outside his house saying "dead nigger storage" (there is not, as it turns out, because Tarantino's character does not store dead niggers. Which is why he is upset that Jackson's character has brought him one).

He could probably have gotten away without using the word quite so much, but he seems to like it.

Finally, it's just a word. It doesn't have any power other than that which people ascribe to it. Just like "fag", "cunt", "retard", and other perjorative epithets, the barb is in the mind of the victim who associates the word with some negative quality. In an era where racial discrimination and hatred is rightly confined to the past (or at least it is by the majority of right-minded people), words like "nigger" shouldn't have any real power anymore. Except of course to reveal a certain insensitivity and need for re-education on the part of the speaker.

I'm tempted to ask acquaintances of a certain ethnic background what they thought of the film, to see if they had the same complaint as you do. But I haven't actually seen it yet, and would rather not have it spoiled for me in such detail as I am likely to receive.

[Reply #628 on:]

No, it's not like going to see a WWII movie and expecting to avoid hearing the word "Jew" or "Nazi." The frequency with which the word "nigger" was used in Django Unchained far exceeded the typical speech patterns one would expect. For example, if you were watching a movie about WWII, would the characters in a setting in Germany say "Go talk to that lady Nazi. No, not that Nazi, the Nazi with the red skirt. Yes, that's the Nazi I mean,"? You don't identify a person over and over again by that kind of designation. You would use pronouns like "her" or "him" or even "that one." Even on the premise that slaves were treated as property or animals you wouldn't use the word as much as it was in the film. When one of the characters shoots a horse at the beginning of the film, "horse," "beast," and "it" are used to reference the downed animal at various points. I think there's a difference between using a word that is historically accurate in its context and using it beyond what would be said in common speech. The movie crossed that line and it was grating. If you watch other movies set in that time period the word "nigger" is used much more sparingly, but maybe they didn't already have the leeway of an "R" rating for violence.

[Reply #629 on:]

Sorry, but I've seen the movie multiple times, and none of those times did I feel that the word nigger was overused at all. It didn't seem to be used only for shock, actually it seemed quite the opposite to me, it seemed that it was used exactly as much as was needed to sincerely and accurately portray the time period and subject matter.

For example, if you were watching a movie about WWII, would the characters in a setting in Germany say "Go talk to that lady Nazi. No, not that Nazi, the Nazi with the red skirt. Yes, that's the Nazi I mean,"? You don't identify a person over and over again by that kind of designation.

That's true, but irrelevant, because Nazis weren't the ones being degraded in that situation. I would imagine, however, that the Nazis were going around doing this to their prisoners, calling them that Jew, or this Jew, or the Jew Rat over there, instead of using their real names.

Even on the premise that slaves were treated as property or animals you wouldn't use the word as much as it was in the film.

I don't know what you're basing this on, and obviously I have no way of knowing for sure either, but I would make a guess that you're totally wrong. People who view others as not being fully human are historically as cruel and horrible to those people as possible, which is part of what this movie is meant to portray. I have no problem believing there were slave owners that used the word nigger as often and as freely as the characters in Django.

In the end, I don't think what you mean to say is that the movie's use of the word nigger "crossed the line," I think what you mean is that it crossed your line, because as you've admitted you find hearing the word in films to be grating and that it triggers a certain disgust in you, but you seem to assume that everybody is like that, which isn't even close to true. I would never use the word in real life to offend, shock, or degrade anybody, but hearing the word in a work of fiction when it's not of clear racist intent by the writer doesn't bother me. When I hear the word, my mind does kind of send me a little message that the word and the way it's being used is bad and hurtful, but it's not bad or hurtful towards myself or the audience, it's bad and hurtful to the characters, which is completely acceptable in a work of fiction.

I don't think it's quite fair of you to put down a movie just because of your own personal hang-up that, when you think about it, serves no rational purpose. What logical reason should you or anyone else have to be offended or upset by the use of that word in a work of fiction when there's no real life racist or derogatory intent? If anything, the idea that it could offend you or make you feel dirty is a sign that the movie is doing its job of portraying the horrors and inhumanity of that time period. Should a movie trying to display those things prominently also try to avoid making its audience uncomfortable? I don't think that it should.

[Reply #630 on:]

I don't think it's quite fair of you to put down a movie just because of your own personal hang-up that, when you think about it, serves no rational purpose.

I didn't put it down for my hang-up over the use of "nigger." I said I'd never watch it again for that reason. The reason I thought it was just a good movie (7/10) instead of a fantastic one was because of what I perceived as the the end of character development for Django, the complete suspension of reality, and then the spiral into "let's just shoot/blow everything up" once his mentor died. Movies I think are great movies have an ending that isn't just cathartic for the characters but that leave me feeling still involved in the characters. The ending of this movie rang hollow for me and I felt it detracted from how far both literally and figuratively the characters had come. Now, if it had ended with Django using the reading and writing skills Dr. Shultz had taught him fill out a form to ship a casket with Shultz's remains inside back to his home country of Germany or even some cemetery in Texas where they met (he said in the movie he didn't want Mississippi to be his final resting place), that would have left me with a different feeling about the conclusion. I wrote a review of a movie I enjoyed to a degree but for my own reasons, I would not watch again.

[Reply #631 on:]

For example, if you were watching a movie about WWII, would the characters in a setting in Germany say "Go talk to that lady Nazi. No, not that Nazi, the Nazi with the red skirt. Yes, that's the Nazi I mean,"? You don't identify a person over and over again by that kind of designation.

That's true, but irrelevant, because Nazis weren't the ones being degraded in that situation. I would imagine, however, that the Nazis were going around doing this to their prisoners, calling them that Jew, or this Jew, or the Jew Rat over there, instead of using their real names

One Jew, Two Jew, Red Jew, Blue Jew. Yeah, I agree with this. Which is kinda what I had in mind when I said it. The word "Nazi" was thrown in as an afterthought, really. I was mainly thinking of Nazis going around calling Jews Jews. 'Cause Jews are Jews.

By the same token, niggers are niggers.

 

Even on the premise that slaves were treated as property or animals you wouldn't use the word as much as it was in the film.

Pft. Did you miss the part where I said that people didn't really consider that sort of use of racist language anything bad, because they didn't view other races as "real people"? The attitude wasn't "call him a nigger because he deserves some abuse" so much as "he's a nigger, not a real person. Call him a nigger because that's what he is".

The frequency with which the word "nigger" was used in Django Unchained far exceeded the typical speech patterns one would expect.

I dunno. Now I'm expecting it to be every fifth word. If it's not, it will have failed to live up to the expectations that you've helped craft for me. I'll see it at some point, I'm sure. When I do, if there are not as many instances of the word "nigger" as I am expecting, I will come back to this conversation and tell you that you oversold this movie's nigger quotient.

I think I agree with everything that Josh has said on the usage of the word "nigger" in films. Whilst it is slightly jarring to the modern ear, there is no onus on the film's producers to avoid making the audience uncomfortable if they are trying to paint a particular picture without sparing the grisly details. Besides which, I don't think there's a period-appropriate term for a black man that could be substituted, other than "negro", which isn't that much better (and would really only be suited to dialogue spoken by somebody like Benjamin Franklin).

[Reply #632 on:]

Actually, an alternative that was common both prior to and after the Civil War was "darky/darkie." It was a feature of the (now retired) state song of Virginia. The lyrics of the version adopted as the state song were written in the 1870s. Here's an excerpt:
"Carry me back to old Virginny.
There's where the cotton and corn and taters grow.
There's where the birds warble sweet in the spring-time.
There's where this old darkey's heart am long'd to go."

This is getting off-topic and if there's further conversation about the history of "nigger" it probably belongs over in the English language thread. No level of additional discourse is going to change what I wrote or my opinion of the movie so I will henceforth recuse myself from further discussions of the merits of "Django Unchained." If y'all want to keep at it, be my guest.

[Reply #633 on:]

Went to see Warm Bodies earlier this evening.

This isn't a review, just a note that the male lead character was tall, dark haired, and wearing a red hoodie for most of the film. So it was like watching Freako play a zombie.

[Reply #634 on:]

I think zombies would go outside more...

Anyhoo, I saw Trance some time ago, but couldn't think of a good review, it was ok, it made me think at least, James McEvoy plays an art auctioneer security guy, who does an inside job with Vincent Cassell and some other guys.
He grabs an expensive painting but gets hit in the head and forgets where he put it, so they get a hypnotist (Rosario Dawson) to try to unlock his mind and get the painting back, but she is not what she seems...!
Rosario Dawson also has a full frontal nude scene that was unexpected, nothing like seeing a curvy naked woman on a huge projection screen to make you say "...huh, so that's what 2 foot tall labia look like!"
The film looks great too.
C+

[Reply #635 on:]

Late yesterday afternoon I put on A Shot In the Dark (1964) for company while I did some boring still work like laundry. I have the whole set of the Pink Panther/Inspector Clouseau movies and it's a close call between this one and "The Pink Panther Strikes Again" about which is my favorite. I think "A Shot In the Dark" may come out on top because it relies less on ridiculous disguises and the finale is unexpected. The opening song "Shadows of Paris" is one I wish I could find as performed by Fran Jeffries rather than the orchestral/choral version. This movie has one of the funniest openings with Dreyfus' exchange over the telephone.Peter Sellers is at his bumbling best showing off his fine physical comedy skills but not quite overdoing it. It's one I always enjoy watching and no matter what else I'm trying to accomplish, I can't help but be sucked in instead.

[Reply #636 on:]

A Shot in the Dark is great although I'd pick The Pink Panther Strikes Again as my favourite; I laugh till I cry every time I watch it. I bought copies of it for my seventy year old father and ten year old nephew a couple of years back and they both found it hysterical.

[Reply #637 on:]

The slow-mo fight with Cato in "The Pink Panther Strikes Again" is impossible to watch with a straight face. The assassin with the nail-studded bust is also ingenious. Come to think of it, maybe I'll have to watch it tonight to be sure it doesn't edge out "A Shot In The Dark..."

[Reply #638 on:]

Iron Man 3

In spite of adoring the first Iron Man and somewhat enjoying Iron Man 2, I honestly expected this to be more of the same. Thankfully, I was totally wrong. Iron Man 3 basically ditches the old formula of "Oh no, somebody is trying to copy Tony Stark's designs, we need to stop him!" and instead delivers on something much more exciting that manages to provide a respectable number of surprises.

As usual, it was really great seeing Robert Downey Jr. be a lovable smart ass. The film manages to dish out the same kind of humour that The Avengers had, which was welcome. I totally lost it at the part where he was

Show spoiler

hit by the truck. 

I found the plot a bit confusing at times, but overall this was much better than Iron Man 2.

8/10

[Reply #639 on:]

I just watched Avengers for the first time on my telly, so:

Avengers Assemble

Still as cool as it ever was, but I'm a pickier viewer from my own sofa, so I'd have to say - BETTER!

Scar Jo is a weak link for the most part but at least she wears her ass well.

heroes + cool + pace + ass = A+