I Just Bought Popcorn and a Drink and Now I Have No Money - (movie reviews)

[Reply #560 on:]

Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

I always loved this film as a kid and should have realised at an earlier age that I wanted to do musical theatre. This time though I watched the original ending which was based on the stage show and is seriously weird/depressing (well not depressing but certainly not uplifting like the cinematic release).

I advise anyone who, like me, hadn't seen this in years to watch it again - the years have not put rose-tinted spectacles on it. It's awesome! And you might just find something in it that you never appreciated as a child.

A+

[Reply #561 on:]

I've seen it numerous times, and love it. My favorite scene is still Bill Murray playing masochist to Steve Martin's sadist.

[Reply #562 on:]

X-Men: Days of Future Past

This was good. Very good. Great. It presented a method of time travel and timeline modification I found very difficult to criticize, and it didn't even follow my basic rules for accurate time travel. Nice seeing a new idea that doesn't fall apart upon further analyzation. Yet.

A


Titanic

I was never under the impression that Jack and Rose had anything other than a superficial relationship. Also, Rose is a dumb bitch and also a slut.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the movie. A few scenes made me wince, and it was pretty tedious to watch after I had already seen CinemaSins' critique of it (I had not intended to see the movie when I watched the critique, and really don't consider there to be spoilers when it's based on a real event—the deaths of real people are a tragedy, but I really couldn't care less about the lives of these particular fictional characters). They said each other's names a lot. Like, a lot.
It was a pretty quality film and I did laugh at some parts, but as I did not find Jack and Rose's romance (which was basically the entire plot) to be at all engaging, I can't give it a very high grade.

B

[Reply #563 on:]

I had already seen CinemaSins' critique of it

Ah, a fellow CinemaSins viewer. The critique usually doesn't mean much; they rip into any movie, even the ones they love. Pretty entertaining stuff.

They said each other's names a lot. Like, a lot.

I like how just the names being said gives a pretty good (albeit short) rundown of the entire movie.

[Reply #564 on:]

CinemaSins is not genuine film critique, it's incessant (though somewhat entertaining) nitpicking that in a roundabout way shames its viewers for liking movies despite their "sins". No it's not meant to be taken seriously but if you walk away from those videos thinking you're better versed in film then imagine me doing this to you:

[Reply #565 on:]

I know the critiques aren't serious, but they do make me feel less kindly towards movies, even those I love. While the videos are mostly made up of fake "sins", they do (on occasion) bring up a good point. Anyway, whenever I watch a video of theirs, my opinion of the film in question will be subject to damage.

[Reply #566 on:]

And that's fine to have a heightened sense of how movies are made and a better understanding of the mechanics of character and script development, but when it's berating you with solely negative points that's really detrimental to the picture as a whole. You should not have to compromise your personal feelings towards a good movie or a bad movie just because there might be more flaws than you realized. The reason CinemaSins and Honest Trailers exist is because it's so much easier to see a movie for it's problems and criticisms and I'll admit more fun to watch than to have a docile discussion about why those same movies are actually very good. Actual film criticism is being able to see what went wrong and what went right, CS is viewer-bait bullshit.

[Reply #567 on:]

I've never seen any CinemaSins, so I'll take your word for that.

But Titanic is not a very good film. Its bad qualities easily outweigh its good ones, in my opinion.

[Reply #568 on:]

I haven't seen Titanic since the 90s, so I'll take your word for that.

[Reply #569 on:]

22 Jump Street
Quite entertaining "this is a stupid cop comedy and we all know it", part 2!
Good for a few lols, end credits pretty good, making fun of sequels.
B-

[Reply #570 on:]

Star Trek: Into Darkness

Roberto Orci is a miserable good-for-nothing retconning bastard.  But I enjoyed the film. The scene in the Engineering spaces did have me cringing in a serious way, though, and if the dialogue had continued mirroring Star Trek II I would have ejected the disc from my player and fired it into the sun at warp 9.

Zachary Quinto is the perfect younger Spock and most of the cast members gave performances that were faithful to and respectful of the original cast.

B

[Reply #571 on:]

Filth
James McEvoy plays a morally corrupt drug and booze fuelled manipulative detective, who is trying to get a promotion, but his motives turn out to be driven by mental instability due to an event from his past, and another involving his wife and daughter.
Excellent performance, this is as far away from his Charles Xavier performance as you could get. Darkly comic and disturbing in equal measure, (reminded me of Fight Club).
B

Edit:
Snowpiercer
Pretty good actually, the last surviving members of humanity trapped on a train that automatically circles the Earth, which has frozen, ice age style.
The poor oppressed lower class tail section revolts (led by Chris Evans) to get to the front engine section where all the good food and drugs and fancy clothes are!
It has elements of Animal Farm or The Hunger Games (on a train), Day After Tomorrow (plus train), and Game of Death or The Raid (wait for it... on a train! )
Great performances for the most part, especially from Tilda Swinton who is hilarious.
A-

[Reply #572 on:]

Oh you reminded me that I saw Filth last week. I loved the closing animation sequence. Pretty crazy movie and definitely unsexy in every way possible despite all the banging that happens and the fact that I would still bang James McAvoy in a heartbeat.

B+

[Reply #573 on:]

Source Code

Not sure why I only just saw this, but damn I loved this movie. Great concept, great execution, and really entertaining.

A-

[Reply #574 on:]

Source Code

Have you seen Duncan Jones' other film, Moon?

[Reply #575 on:]

Indeed I have. Which is why I don't know why it took me so long to see Source Code since I thought Moon was brilliant.

[Reply #576 on:]

Anger Management

That was good. Very enjoyable. Colorful characters are what draw me to stuff and junk, and this film had no shortage of them. While a bit predictable, it did make me laugh several times and there were no parts that I found thoroughly tedious.

A

[Reply #577 on:]

Yesterday I watched Transcendence. Today I watched Transformers 4. They were both excellent movies. 'Nuff said.

That is all.

[Reply #578 on:]

Ugh, you're the worst.

Violet and Daisy
The two title characters played by Alexis Bledel and Saoirse Ronan respectively are teenage assassins sent on a job to kill a guy (James Gandolfini) who stole money from their boss.
What starts off as a "quirky young naive female assassins are quirkily sent to to the job of a much rougher and more ruthless kind of person" turns out to be pretty tedious and dull in the end.
The dialogue is stunted and poorly delivered or written, the two leads seem to have an ok rapport but for an entirely different movie, like a coming of age drama or something, which this isn't.
Expected better, Danny Trejo is even in it but only in one scene!
D

[Reply #579 on:]

Ugh, you're the worst.

I second this. Especially coming off the movie I just saw, which is also in theaters but did not get a nationwide distribution for whatever reason even.

Snowpiercer

It's one of those movies I got more excited about now that I'm home and I've thought about it. Superb acting, Chris Evans is at his finest, Tilda Swinton is unrecognizable and a fucking asshole, Allison Pill has a great scene, and John Hurt is always great and so forth. It reminded me of a Terry Gilliam kind of movie. While I do have one issue with the logic of the train:

Show spoiler

If they had just explained that the train had a double-decker kind of level, that would have made it a little clearer as to how the logic of the train cars work. There's one train that is just a classroom for school kids but then two trains down its a nightclub. Where do the kids go when class is over? Where are the high school-age kids? Etc.

I highly recommend the movie. It's brutal and violent though.

A

[Reply #580 on:]

Metallica Through the Never

I think there was a story there, but I can't remember, if so. Great music and visuals anyway, but I was waiting Fade to Black to end it.

The best soundtrack ever.
One/1

The whole story is a symbolical nod to Cliff Burton.  That's why the movie ends with Orion... which is the best part of the movie anyways.

[Reply #581 on:]

Earth to Echo

Good child actors. Good child actors. THEY HAD GOOD CHILD ACTORS.
There were a few bad things in this movie, but I'm too impressed by the good child actors to look at it properly. The ending dialogue was cheesy, though. "We can do anything." I suppose they kids are worthy of saying that, considering the lengths they went through to secure Echo's happiness, but it was a ridiculously cheesy note on which to end an otherwise excellent movie.
I'm taking points off for that.

A

[Reply #582 on:]

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

I'll break the ice on this one I guess. It was fun. If you can get past the sometimes silly ape dialogue (done mostly with grunts and subtitles, although there's some vocalizing in a caveman-talk sort of way), the story is pretty good and all the characters act very believably. It's definitely a step above the first movie in those regards. The CGI apes look incredible, they did a great job of making everything look pretty natural and realistic. There's also a lot of great action near the end. It weighs on you a bit heavier than most action movies without necessarily being super meaningful in an original way, but it's at least genuine about its message, and for what it was I had a great time.

B+

[Reply #583 on:]

Ugh, you're the worst.
...
Violet and Daisy

You disappoint me.

[Reply #584 on:]

You may have both picked shitty movies to review, but the key difference is that Faze actually gave his a D while you described yours as "excellent."

[Reply #585 on:]

I admit I got a bit carried away with my initial response, but I realized it was too late to change the post. I now instead find them as 'pretty good' films that I would indeed recommend, but the special effects were well done, which is probably what I was getting at. lol, leave me alone! I haven't done a proper review in a while.

I'm 16 (nearly 17) years old - of course I'm gonna like movies like that. Logic first then criticism, people!

[Reply #586 on:]

I think the "nuff said" was more of an issue. I mean, you can't call a movie that's pretty much universally agreed to be awful "excellent" and then think that's enough information. Elaboration is your friend, friend.

[Reply #587 on:]

Nobody's disputing that the special effects in Michael Bay movies are well done. But if you're going to throw that much money into the production of a film, there's no excuse for not fleshing out the characters and narrative in the process. Action movies don't have to consist of terrible fodder that serves as a thin excuse to string elaborate (albeit nice-looking) set pieces together. There's "good" bad, and then there's just plain bad.

As for your age, that's a cop-out if I ever heard one. Granted, my tastes have changed a lot over the past decade, and will probably continue to change over the rest of my life. But when I was your age, my favourite film was The Shawshank Redemption and my favourite tv series was Arrested Development. And they still are today.

I shall leave you withthis article. Because it's relevant, and The A.V. Club is great.

[Reply #588 on:]

Transcendence was apparently pretty awful too, according to critics.

[Reply #589 on:]

Boyhood

An expertly-crafted film with extremely believable characters and situations. For those of you who don't know, this was filmed over a period of 12 years, following a boy named Mason (Ellar Coltrane) from the age 6 to the age 18. Better known actors in it are Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke. It's a super-relatable film and it is very well-acted. Definitely a must-see. It currently holds a 99% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It's also longer than both versions of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

9.5/10

[Reply #590 on:]

Nobody's disputing that the special effects in Michael Bay movies are well done. But if you're going to throw that much money into the production of a film, there's no excuse for not fleshing out the characters and narrative in the process. Action movies don't have to consist of terrible fodder that serves as a thin excuse to string elaborate (albeit nice-looking) set pieces together. There's "good" bad, and then there's just plain bad.

As for your age, that's a cop-out if I ever heard one. Granted, my tastes have changed a lot over the past decade, and will probably continue to change over the rest of my life. But when I was your age, my favourite film was The Shawshank Redemption and my favourite tv series was Arrested Development. And they still are today.

I shall leave you withthis article. Because it's relevant, and The A.V. Club is great.

I'm inclined to agree with you but I'm gonna give Meerkat the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not hugely invested in films as you or I or Faze might be. That's something I've noticed lately while at work and watching movies with my mom; I know all about the actors and specs of the film because it's my major, I'm trying to make a career out of this, but not everyone is and I shouldn't hold everyone to the standard that I make when I watch a movie. So you know it's totally ok if he thinks Transformers 4 or Transcendence were good, the best we can do is talk about other movies we liked in hopes of inspiring him to go watch something he may not have considered.

On an unrelated note:

Tammy

Ugh...I wish the whole movie had taken place on Kathy Bates' Magical Lesbian Island. I like Melissa McCarthy, I know she is a lot better than this but there were so many times I wanted to say out loud, "But seriously, are you ACTUALLY RETARDED?" And I can't think of a nicer way to say that. The movie would have made an itsy bit more sense if she was a fucking retard and that's why everyone kind of just put up with her bullshit. Kathy Bates is the only redeeming thing about the movie.

D+

[Reply #591 on:]

I'm inclined to agree with you but I'm gonna give Meerkat the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not hugely invested in films as you or I or Faze might be. That's something I've noticed lately while at work and watching movies with my mom; I know all about the actors and specs of the film because it's my major, I'm trying to make a career out of this, but not everyone is and I shouldn't hold everyone to the standard that I make when I watch a movie. So you know it's totally ok if he thinks Transformers 4 or Transcendence were good, the best we can do is talk about other movies we liked in hopes of inspiring him to go watch something he may not have considered.

I'm with you here. I don't think anyone should be shamed for enjoying a movie, regardless of popular opinion. It is a bit frustrating to hear that people go in flocks to see those movies though, missing out on movies that are just as entertaining but with much more competent stories and characters that are in theaters now as well and won't make nearly as much money. With all the resources to see accumulated review scores (not that they're always truly indicative of a movie's quality, but more often than not they are) there's not much excuse to go see something bad in theaters (wait for it to come to home media and save some money) instead of spending money on something that deserves it more and isn't already guaranteed to make waaaay too much. And I know some people don't look at review scores since they don't like to have any influence on their opinion before seeing something, which I get...but with a franchise like Transformers, if you've seen any of the first three, you should know what to expect. I think that's why some people tend to lash out like they have at Meerkat.

[Reply #592 on:]

Boyhood

[kissass]

9.5/10

I've been wanting to see this film since I saw a commercial for it seven days (approx.) ago, and I'm glad it was so good. Definitely an incentive to get to the theater quickly!
It makes me eager for the consenting Truman Show that's sure to exist someday. I mean, something better than reality shows.

[Reply #593 on:]

The Lego Movie

I thought it was decent, but not great. All the praise I'd been hearing for this movie left me feeling rather underwhelmed when I finally saw it. I wasn't really laughing up until Batman showed up, and I found it incredibly jarring when we finally cut to live action. I much preferred it when I thought it was some sort of commentary on conformity set in a weird little lego world, as opposed to one extended fantasy sequence of a kid working out his issues and blah-blah father son bullshit. I'm also baffled as to how (and why) they're doing a sequel. The middle part was entertaining, at least. I enjoyed the double decker couch. Oh, and the cast was pretty good. With the exception of Will Ferrell, who seriously needs to just fucking die already. The movie loses some points just for his presence.

C+

I don't think I've ever agreed with you before, but I think you hit the nail on the head with this. Everything you wrote is what I've said since I saw the movie. I was enjoying it immensely, until the damn humans showed up.

Will Ferrell makes me angry. Nuff said.

From what people have been saying here, Transformers 4 was apparently reviewed as shit? All I know is that I love transformers, and as such, I take Michael Bay movies as lots of explosions and very little else.

It's a movie about transforming robots, it's never going to be an epic tale, but at least it can be enjoyed on a base level.

Transforming robots, man.

[Reply #594 on:]

I'd be lying if I said the Transformers movies weren't entertaining, but I'd also be lying if I said they were good movies.

That said, the first one was passable, and I admittedly haven't even seen the newest one.

[Reply #595 on:]

The problem isn't that they're just mindless fun action flicks with lots of explosions. I don't think anybody has a problem with that.

The problem is they're downright insulting to one's intelligence. The attempts at comedy are cringeworthy, there's a buttload of subtle racism and not-so-subtle misogyny, the characters' personalities and any semblance of coherent story plain don't exist, and Bay's camera direction in general is awful.

There are plenty of eye-popping CGI-pornfests to see that aren't irritating beyond belief like the Transformers movies are that one could watch if mindless action is all they wanted. So I don't really understand the defense. I'm not saying anybody's not allowed to enjoy them or that they're wrong for doing so, but not acknowledging that they could easily have made superior films seems to be setting the bar pretty low.

It's a movie about transforming robots, it's never going to be an epic tale

Epic tales have been told with more ridiculous premises. See: almost any other nerdy/sci-fi franchise currently in existence.

[Reply #596 on:]

Okay, I typed this response up before Josh submitted his post, which is quite similar, but fuck it, here it is anyway:

It's a movie about transforming robots, it's never going to be an epic tale, but at least it can be enjoyed on a base level.

Certainly not, but there's no excuse for not trying. I just looked it up, and apparently the most recent Transformers movie had a budget of $210 MILLION. They couldn't have put a tiny bit of that into hiring some decent writers?

It's more than possible for dumb action movies to be engaging on some level beyond the visuals (the original Terminator films, for example). OR it would be equally acceptable to go the opposite direction and have some fun with the ridiculousness of the concept and make it into a joke (Crank and Shoot 'Em Up spring to mind here). But Michael Bay just lands in this incredibly dull middle ground where there's zero substance and nothing to offer except for some nice-looking special effects.

If I'm going to devote over 2 hours of my time to watching a film, I expect to get something out of it beyond "omg look at these splosions."

[Reply #597 on:]

Frozen

Having successfully avoided any and all spoilers until I finally saw it this weekend, I was expecting to thoroughly enjoy this film. I was instead severely underwhelmed.

What the rubberfaced hand-jiving piss-swilling hell was so great about that film?

It was a mess. A poorly-paced, incohesive plot combined with the sort of formulaic storytelling template that I thought Disney were trying to move away from. There were several items which could have done with being explained, and weren't. The most minor of these being how the King and Queen came to the conclusion that the best way to deal with the fear-induced-unpredictability of their daughter's random magical powers would be to isolate her from everybody and everything, thus ensuring that when she did come into contact with the world in general, it was always going to scare her shitless and result in some sort of nightmarish icepocalypse.

The characters were cookie-cutter templates, every one of them (with the possible exception of the sauna guy, who could be a mashup of two archetypes instead). There were a couple of songs which felt disjointed - and for me that didn't add to their charm or anything. Admittedly, most of "Let it go" was an enjoyable number, but the lead-in to it was clumsily done.

You'd also expect there to be fewer mistakes on-screen in an entirely computer-animated production, where every single detail can be corrected. But there were quite a few stray reflections, odd highlights, and lots of unnatural colour choices when it came to the ice, there was a lack of natural movement in snow and water (odd, considering that Disney's CG animators actually have experience in making relatively natural-looking water), and there were moments when Elsa's walking animation seemed not just slightly off, but as if they'd tried to animate some form of a gliding motion driven by her hips and then though "screw it, we'll move her feet".

The story wasn't exactly anything new, there were no real attempts to put a twist in the tale (compare this to Tangled, Enchanted, and other recent offerings), there wasn't even a cursory attempt to mislead the audience about Hans being a shitbag (seriously. Am I the only person who read him as a smarmy fucktree from the moment he appeared?), and the magically-animated snowman was one of the most annoying little dickstains to have appeared on my screen since Star Wars Episode I put Jar-Jar Binks there.

All in all, it just didn't feel like a polished production. I really liked Tangled. I was expecting something of similar quality. I don't understand the immense boner that people seem to have for Frozen, and if you think it was some sort of masterpiece, then you can expect to be eliminated in one of the first great purges when I complete my work on the wireless transmission of lethal agony via esoteric radiation. Most of the science is done, but I think it needs a slightly catchier name than that.

As for Transformers, I've recently caught up on the world's blandest action blockbuster franchise myself, and I can honestly say that the only part which entertained me at all is still the two or three seconds in the first film where we see a vending machine transformed into a murderous killer robot. But - the idea of giant robots that hide from people by disguising themselves as everyday machinery is still kinda awesome, and I'm hoping that once Michael Bay retires to swim in his pool filled with money, whores, cocaine, and unsuitable roles for Shia LeBouf, somebody more competent picks up the franchise for a reboot and hires writers who know how to do things like dialogue, exposition, pacing, and coming up with an overall plotline that's got just a smidge more depth than "some stuff explodes. There's military hardware involved. Sexual tension between a skank and a wanker. Robots appear. They punch each other to shrapnel. Roll credits".

Now I'm tempted to watch the Lego Movie just so I can post something disparaging about it. I already know I'll hate it.

[Reply #598 on:]

No, don't say that. The Lego Movie is far and away better than Frozen.

[Reply #599 on:]

Hype has got to be the worst thing in the entire world. No matter how serviceable any given movie is, stupid amounts of hype will cause anybody who watches it who doesn't love it to immediately rip it apart as being awful just to spit in the faces of those who called it amazing. It's sad, really...horribly extreme opinions on both sides with no decent middle ground to be had. What makes it even stupider though is when the hype and those who rail against the hype aren't even the target audience for the goddamn movie in question.

For the record, I thought Frozen was a pretty good kids movie. And that's it. It wasn't a masterpiece, it wasn't an atrocity, it was a fucking KIDS MOVIE. It wasn't made for adults to fawn over as great art or to pick apart with a fine-toothed comb. It was a decently animated movie with okay characters, some good music (and some not-so-good music), and most importantly it had a twist/moral lesson (love at first sight is bullocks and you need to get to know somebody deeply before you decide you're meant to be together) that not only hasn't been done so blatantly in a kid's movie before, but goes against the message of so many other kids movies. No, it wasn't amazingly original storytelling, but I can't help but feel its message was conveyed effectively, and that it's an important message for some kids to wrap their heads around. That's it though. I didn't adore it, I wouldn't watch it again, and I certainly wouldn't call it a great movie. But I definitely wouldn't call it bad, and I would have no qualms showing it to children if I were in the position to do so. Compared to a lot of kids movies these days, I'd consider that a modest win.

As far as The Lego Movie goes, I'd repeat some of my same points from above...yes, the hype was undeserved, and it wasn't at all transcendent as critics would have you believe. Despite that though, it was a fun little movie with a decent sense of humor and some minor things to say about conformity and other stuff. It may not have been mindblowing, but there was nothing offensive about it, and as a KIDS MOVIE it was pretty good.

Sorry, it's late and I like cussing.