Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    It's got a TV!    I Just Bought Popcorn and a Drink and Now I Have No Money - (movie reviews) « previous next »
 Topic locked! 
Author Topic: I Just Bought Popcorn and a Drink and Now I Have No Money - (movie reviews)  (Read 24170 times)
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 Print
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #720 on: 10-06-2014 18:00 »
« Last Edit on: 10-06-2014 18:06 »

The premise is simple: steal an Enigma Machine from a German submarine. The plot is a sequence of events that taken in its entirety is ludicrously improbable, but several of the individual elements are not only possible, but actually happened during the war.

There are several glaring problems with this film.



The film credits acknowledge that it was the British who managed to capture Enigma machines.

And I stand by my summary: it's a fun, suspenseful film that will give you a taste of what it was like to serve on an S-boat or U-boat.

totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #721 on: 10-06-2014 18:37 »

The film credits acknowledge that it was the British who managed to capture Enigma machines.

This was not present in the US cinematic release, and was added for the worldwide release after Polish and British test audiences registered their disapproval at the twisting of history. The only thing American audiences responded negatively at all to was a decapitation scene which was later cut from the cinematic release due to the studio's desire to gain a more "accessible" rating.

The film might be "fun" for American audiences, but for international viewers, there's something slightly grating about yet another "America saves Europe's ass" war film which does nothing to acknowledge the contribution of other nations to the war's outcome within the story narrative.
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #722 on: 10-08-2014 09:24 »


<insert HedonismBot quote here>

Inquisitor Hein
Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #723 on: 10-19-2014 14:15 »
« Last Edit on: 10-21-2014 21:48 »

Just watched Bays "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles".

Typical Bay in many ways:
Shaky cam, often too action-oriented without actually being cool, etc... . I assume everyone knows the points I am talking about, as this Bay criticism seems to have become omnipresent on the net, regarding all of his movies.

But the movie had it's moments:
- The "Intimidating figre at first, starting to act funny/goofy/etc.." failed big time in Transformers. Yet, it worked in TMNT. The new "anabolica monster" look did not really bother that much in well writting scenes.
- Megan Fox showed something I would like to call the "Uhura Syndrome" since "Into Darkness". Acting was okay, the character did support the plot..yet, it was not really Uhura/April. Though, in direct comparison, Fox was closer to her original than Zaldana.
- The Turtles were character wise mostly spot on, with the exception of Rafael (his over-agressive, bitter brute shtick was too much) and sometimes Michelangelo (he was often the only clown in the troupe, while the four usually share oppotunities for embarassement). Splinter had a terrible (and imhO unnecessary) start as "feared, sadistic dill seargant" type, but luckily quickly changed back to the old, wise sensei.

In hindsight, the movie got its moments, especially when Bay did NOT fall for his old flaws (which he surprisingly is capable off).
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #724 on: 10-20-2014 00:03 »

I've never seen anything turtle-related before, but is the colour of the eye-mask things the only way to distinguish them? Not trying to be turtle-racist or anything.
Motor Oil

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #725 on: 10-21-2014 03:59 »

I've seen a bunch of movies lately, so here are a few rushed, rapid-fire reviews.

Annabelle

Terrible movie. There actually were one or two moments that were rather good in the beginning--the cops actually showed up on time(!), and there was a musical jump scare that was quite impressive: the musical crescendo alone was enough to make me start, even though nothing else particularly scary or suspenseful was happening onscreen.
But the movie depended entirely upon jump scares in order to scare the audience, which--in my eyes--is absolutely lazy, a very cheap move!--granted, this film was directed towards teenagers, who eat that shit up, so I did not expect very much from it from the beginning.
There are three different antagonists in this movie, and it really cannot decide upon which is the real villain. There is the doll (who, by the way, does fucking nothing throughout the entire movie), these demon things, and then like the police or something, I'm not sure. It jumped around.
I actually wrote notes on this while watching the movie. The unedited version is here, but a lot of it won't make sense unless you've seen it.

F



Rocky Horror Picture Show

Sex and music and bad acting! big grin Tim Curry is goshflabbity perfect for the role of Doctor Frank-N-Furter, and Richard O'Brien is both an awesome Riff Raff and a good writer. This is the first movie I've been obsessed with for a while. I've watched it four times, I think, since seeing it first with my friends about a week ago. It's a cult film, so definitely not for everyone, but it was extremely enjoyable for me.

A+ for me personally, B from a more objective standpoint.



Equestria Girls: Rainbow Rocks

A huge step up from the first movie. I saw this with a group of Bronies, which was a lot of fun--I would definitely recommend watching this in a group, if you intend to watch it. The nods to the fans were fantastic, and Octavia even had a treble/trouble pun. Flash Sentry's role in the movie got a lot of complaints, but that's only to be expected--he is about of the same importance as he was in the first movie, and I doubt anyone's opinion of him will change drastically because of this. They did a fantastic job of developing Sunset Shimmer into a real, relatable protagonist, and I loved how Vinyl Scratch did not, in fact, have any lines--a great little nod to her voice actress within the pony fandom. However, I was disappointed by the villains. For ancient evils, they act a lot like teenage girls. I also noticed the villains become increasingly flashy to outshine the old ones: Sunset Shimmer was quite bright by MLP standards, and these new guys are even flashier.

A-



Robot and Frank

Good science fiction movie and a robot and a cat burglar. Not fantastic, but quite good. The plot was sound and the acting was as well. While it had some flaws, it did make me feel emotion, which is a good thing for any movie.

B+
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #726 on: 10-21-2014 06:09 »


Rocky Horror Picture Show


I've only seen it twice -- the first time at a midnight theatre showing when I had absolutely no idea what to expect big grin

Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #727 on: 10-21-2014 08:03 »

I didn't like Annabelle either, but what inclined you to take notes on it?
Motor Oil

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #728 on: 10-21-2014 17:37 »


Rocky Horror Picture Show


I've only seen it twice -- the first time at a midnight theatre showing when I had absolutely no idea what to expect big grin

I was very reluctant to watch the movie, and did not expect it to be very good at all. I think this definitely plays a part in how much I liked it after seeing it.
I'd love to see a live showing at some point, but I don't think those happen very often anymore. frown

I didn't like Annabelle either, but what inclined you to take notes on it?

I generally take a notepad and/or typing device with me whenever I watch a movie. If I make observations or get tired of weak points in the plot, I am guaranteed to talk about them during the movie. Writing it all down keeps me quiet and makes it sort of a game--how much can I notice in this movie?
Inquisitor Hein
Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #729 on: 10-21-2014 21:49 »

I've never seen anything turtle-related before, but is the colour of the eye-mask things the only way to distinguish them? Not trying to be turtle-racist or anything.

For the 80s cartoon Turtles (the most iconic and famous one) , the mask was the only way to distinguish them. In the Bay movie, though, their stature and features have become more distiguishable.
bankrupt

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #730 on: 10-26-2014 06:21 »

Fury

All of the bloody, brutal action of Saving Private Ryan without the pesky story and character development.

B+ for the visuals.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #731 on: 10-26-2014 07:04 »

I didn't like Annabelle either, but what inclined you to take notes on it?

I generally take a notepad and/or typing device with me whenever I watch a movie. If I make observations or get tired of weak points in the plot, I am guaranteed to talk about them during the movie. Writing it all down keeps me quiet and makes it sort of a game--how much can I notice in this movie?

Wow. I would hate to watch a movie with you. If only because this is exactly how I was/still can be. And that makes me yearn for the days when I didn't make it my life to be critical of film and I could just watch a movie. Now I've become old and cynical.

Fury

All of the bloody, brutal action of Saving Private Ryan without the pesky story and character development.

B+ for the visuals.

Is that B+ solely for the visuals or the overall movie? Because I'm inclined to agree with you on visuals and acting but I didn't like the movie even kinda. Like did it even matter that it was a WWII film? No, not really.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #732 on: 10-26-2014 08:28 »

Personally, I tend to watch things MST3k style.  People hate that, so sometimes I have to control myself and keep quiet.  This doesn't just apply to things I don't like watching... I just find watching things to be an interactive experience.
bankrupt

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #733 on: 10-27-2014 01:16 »

Fury

All of the bloody, brutal action of Saving Private Ryan without the pesky story and character development.

B+ for the visuals.

Is that B+ solely for the visuals or the overall movie? Because I'm inclined to agree with you on visuals and acting but I didn't like the movie even kinda. Like did it even matter that it was a WWII film? No, not really.

B+ solely for the visuals and the acting.  After thinking about it, I'd give the overall movie a C-.  On my scale I give D and F grades to movies where I'm pissed that I spent the money on them.  Fury succeeds as war porn, so it was entertaining, but otherwise it has to be one of the emptiest movies I've seen.  That's why it almost enters D territory for me. 

The film reminds me of watching someone play a video game. The characters move from place to place and shoot at things without any other purpose.  The tone is serious, but the film says nothing as far as I can tell other than "It's WWII."

I did enjoy that the only real pause in the action in this film seemed to be there so Brad Pitt could take his shirt off.  Extra bonus because the other characters at this point in the film try to make a somber point that they have been fighting non-stop since the North Africa campaign.  Apparently there were enough stops in the fighting along the way so the sergeant could get a gym quality workout!  laff
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #734 on: 10-27-2014 08:15 »

Yup everything seems to be in order here. We are in 100% total agreement.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #735 on: 10-29-2014 04:33 »

The Raid 2
Following up directly after the end of the 1st one, Rama is recruited to infiltrate the other gangs in the city and reveal the other corrupt police on their payroll.
He does this by befriending the son of one of the big bosses while in prison.
The action is exhilarating as before, this time adding many different locations (a lot fancier this time, the slum skyscraper is replaced by fancy apartments, restaurants, etc.) and a car chase sequence, as well as another rogues gallery of henchmen to deal with (some a little gimmicky but whatever).
The film is also looks great and sounds fantastic, it's used to build tension using long slow shots and background noise to good effect.
Visually, certain stylized shots reminded me of Only God Forgives, but they didn't linger as much which is a good thing, there's shit to be kicked out of people here!
This is one bloody ass-kicking movie.
A-

Finally saw this, can't decide if I liked it better than the first or not. A bad-ass movie either way.
Motor Oil

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #736 on: 11-04-2014 20:30 »
« Last Edit on: 11-04-2014 22:04 »

Scream
Funny. It made several valid points against horror movies while also being quite suspenseful. The characters were believable and the ending was the good kind of unexpected. Everything tied together in a satisfactory way, especially for a horror movie. It was nice to see a cop as one of the main characters, even if he was oozing with inexperience. The characters in this movie were in desperate need of responsible adults.
A-

Scream 2
Some scenes were very well done, but the ending was atrocious, as were many of the scenes leading up to it. I don't feel like it was a waste of time, but I definitely won't be watching this one again, and not just because they killed off my favorite character.
I'm impressed that they churned this out in less than a year, but it's not got much else going for it.
C

Scream 3
My favorite character makes another appearance!
A+


Scream 3
The trilogy idea was bad. Oh, it was nice to see a different kind of antagonist, but his entire background was poorly done and (as the rules go) overruled much of what was made clear in the first movie.
C+

Scream 4 Skreh-forum
It was nice to see the protagonist almost fully prepared this time, and the ending wasn't bad when compared to those of 2 and 3. Actually, I liked the ending aside from the mandatory plot twist! The false endings were entertaining, the real endings made good enough sense, and for a moment I actually thought the protagonist would die. I was disappointed, but also pleased, because I disliked the protagonist less than this antagonist. The beginning of this was hilarious, and I found the movie as a whole funnier than the previous three.
A
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #737 on: 11-04-2014 20:39 »

Scream 4? I think you mean Scre4m (pronounced Skreh-forum).
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #738 on: 11-04-2014 20:52 »
« Last Edit on: 11-04-2014 22:34 by totalnerduk »

The Babadook

This was recently cancelled at my local cinema, and boy-oh-boy was it totally not worth the effort of tracking down a copy to watch at home.

There's this woman. She's depressed sad because her partner died. On the way to the hospital with her, on the day she gave birth to her son. Who is incredibly creepy.

The son is six, and is generally a little weirdo. Schools don't want him, and between him and his mother they alienate everybody who might give a shit about them.

Isolation and depression aren't enough for the scriptwriters of this movie: soon enough an actual horror movie monster decides to show up. Or does it?

The central conceit of this film is that the monster might be real, might not be, and it's all in the heads of the two protagonists, who each have their own warped view of the reality they inhabit. But at the same time, it's totally real.

The film's schizophrenia about whether the monster is real or not isn't helped by the cutting between seeing things from the son's point of view, seeing things from the mother's point of view, and seeing things as they really (probably) are, from time to time. The viewer is left to decide which POV each scene or segment of a scene is from, with the only obvious thing being that the POV changes between these three.

It's wonderfully shot, but slow and grating rather than suspenseful. The artistic direction and the acting are brilliant, but nothing is allowed to really shine with the script that's been filmed. It's as though the entire movie is deliberately as schizophrenic as possible. Everything about it is done wonderfully from one viewpoint and terribly from another. Every. Single. Thing. All aspects have two angles to them, and one is good whilst the other is bad. It's a film of very mixed messages.

I was looking forward to a good scary film. Instead, I got a plodding trainwreck that appears to have been meticulously crafted with great attention to detail, leading to the inevitable conclusion that this film was meant to be shit.

With that in mind, I just can't like it on any level. I'm really glad that I didn't pay to see this.
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #739 on: 11-04-2014 21:59 »

Scream 4? I think you mean Scre4m (pronounced Skreh-forum).

They totally missed out by not selling Scream 4 ice cream
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #740 on: 11-05-2014 02:42 »
« Last Edit on: 11-05-2014 02:43 »

Mmm I still really want to see The Babadook.

@MotorOil, I remember liking Scream 3 more than Scream 2 when I watched them all for the first time. Scream 3 gets worse on repeated viewings. Scream 2 stays the same but I genuinely like Scream 2 a lot.
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #741 on: 11-05-2014 14:12 »

Edge of Tomorrow

Pretty solid scifi/action/time loop tale

8/10
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #742 on: 11-08-2014 02:56 »
« Last Edit on: 11-08-2014 03:46 »

I watched three indie films that came out this year recently (not sure if they're all technically independent but they were low-budget at least), and they were all surprisingly very enjoyable. Here are my brief reviews:

Blue Ruin

This one didn't have a very complicated story at all, but it shined through it's fantastic acting (especially from the lead) and use of subtlety and style instead of over-the-top violence. It's basically a revenge story about a man who loses everything after the murder of his parents and decides to go after their killer who's just been released from prison. There are a couple small twists, nothing big, but what's brilliantly unique about the story is that the main character isn't your typical trained-killer-you-shouldn't-have-messed-with that's in most revenge movies like this. Instead he's just a normal guy who's never killed anyone before who makes amateur blunders along the way, and who is clearly disturbed by the idea of killing someone even though he's convinced himself he has to. I'd say this is definitely worth seeing if you're into the genre and want to see a new take on it.

A-

Cold In July

It's nice to see Michael C. Hall in something since Dexter ended, and he's really good in this. What's cool about this movie is that it starts off as one kind of thriller, and then as soon as you think you have the plot figured out it throws you for a huge loop and becomes a totally different kind of movie for the second half. It's hard to say if it really works as well as the filmmaker hoped it would (I'd be interested to see how the tonal shift comes across in the novel it's based on) but it kept me engaged the whole way through so that says something. Definitely one of the better low-budget thrillers I've seen recently regardless, though I'd probably recommend Blue Ruin to genre fans before this one.

B

Coherence

This is the best sci-fi mind-bender I've seen in a while. Definitely the most low-budget and minimalistic of the three movies I've reviewed here, but the story was so eerie and thought-provoking that I found it easy to ignore its technical execution. Without spoiling much since the frequent twists are what make this one, a group of friends have a dinner party on a night where a comet is passing close to earth, and strange occurrences eventually cause them to realize that they are dealing with which is a smart premise on its own, but the film ends up going even deeper until all the details you thought mattered become pointless. I don't think I've ever seen this sci-fi concept tackled in quite this way, and for me it really worked, especially how the movie almost takes the atmosphere of a horror film most of the way through. I really liked the implications of the ending as well.

What's weird about this one is that apparently there was no script, the actors were all given certain talking points to convey in each scene and otherwise improvise. At times you can see the seams almost start to come apart because of this, but for the most part I think the actors (some of whom I've seen in other work) did a great job holding everything together and making the reactions of these characters to the events they go through very believable. I think some people might be turned off by how this one is directed, but I thought it was awesome and if you're looking for an interesting and creepy sci-fi movie you could do a hell of a lot worse than this.

Someone else watch it so I can talk about it with you. tongue

A-
~FazeShift~

Moderator
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #743 on: 11-08-2014 03:38 »
« Last Edit on: 11-08-2014 03:40 »

I watched Edge of Tomorrow too.
Groundhog Day with battle suits, and Tom Cruise looking discombobulated!

Well it was good as other people say, my only complaint is Brendan Gleason was underused, I luv me some Brendan Gleason.

B+

Sidenote, to me Babadook sounds like "baba duck", which I snicker at every time removing any scariness from it, heh heh.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #744 on: 11-09-2014 00:45 »

I will watch Coherence at some point this week. Josh, if this film is not amazing then a version of me in a parallel reality will hunt you down and feed you to Fazeshift. The version of me in this reality probably won't, due to laziness.
~FazeShift~

Moderator
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #745 on: 11-09-2014 00:49 »

Can I saw Josh up and freeze bits of him, or do I have to eat him all in one sitting? hmpf
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #746 on: 11-09-2014 00:56 »
« Last Edit on: 11-09-2014 01:21 by totalnerduk »

You can puree him, and add small portions of him to your regular food over the course of a year if you like. It's funny though, freezing and portioning out food is exactly the advice I was giving to an imgurian yesterday.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #747 on: 11-09-2014 02:09 »
« Last Edit on: 11-09-2014 02:10 »

Woops
AdrenalinDragon

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #748 on: 11-10-2014 02:02 »

Interstellar
Liked it more than Inception. However, I wasn't blown away by it. Some good emotional moments and visual scenes scattered around the movie, but takes a while to get moving and the ending tried to be too clever.
C+
~FazeShift~

Moderator
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #749 on: 11-14-2014 00:00 »
« Last Edit on: 11-14-2014 00:01 »

Interstellar
The science checks out... no just kidding, but it is a good sci-fi film.
The performances are great and there's some nice tense action pieces that looked really good, except for a bit of colour grading (Matthew looked like an oompa loompa at certain points, surely getting a tan would prove difficult with the dust clouds!)
B+
Meerkat54

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #750 on: 12-02-2014 15:12 »

Interstellar

Wow. That's all I can pretty much say; wow. I did see this like last month and intended to write a review but never got around to it, but goddamn is it still worth writing a review now. Christopher Nolan and Hans Zimmer make a fucking, hands down incredible piece of work together, I tell you what. I don't even know where to start with this review though. There is just so much that this film covers that is just mesmerisingly brilliant and superb, and it really goes off the charts for my personal best movie of the year.

I suppose I should start with the storyline. Yes there will be spoilers but I won't be spoilering them, so don't spoil yourself by spoiling the spoils I am about to spoil of this spoilt rotten movie.
The pacing in this movie was excellent. The actors took their time and delivered their lines and important scenes brilliantly. Nothing was rushed nor was it sudden - the parts that were sudden were kind of expected (eg. the explosion on Endurance). I mean, that's not to say you were expecting the station to blow up, but you were expecting something bad to happen without much warning. The plot was your average apocalyptic movie plot - Earth is shrouded in some global disaster and the human race is put at risk - but the way they expanded on it, and the pacing in which they expanded on it, gave a clear insight and overview as to what was going on, what the plan was and what everyone was doing, and gave the suspense and tension that was building up incredibly slowly at the beginning that final 'push' to reveal everything in a plot-twisting, Doctor Who like fashion where they gather all that's happened in a certain timeframe, and piece it all together and thus it makes perfect sense as to why this happened, why that happened; who died, why they died, who they died for, etc.
That being said, the storyline was your typical "apolalyptic plotline" but was expanded into something huge and massive that ended up becoming something a movie that stands out amidst your DVD collection.
However, I must confess that the movie dragged on an extra 10-15 minutes it shouldn't have. I can't remember where it should have ended, but it attempted to fill in some gaps in the story that should have been left open, in my opinion; like Cooper's miraculous survival of the Black Hole (where he ends up drifting alongside Jupiter, which houses a space station colony), and what happens to Murph & Brand. It tries to explain and conclude too much there, and almost over-sweetens the icing on the cake with the whole "5th-dimension" thing, in which I have to mildly agree with AdrenalinDragon that it was Nolan's attempt at trying to be clever with the ending.
Regardless, however, the storyline was fantastic and had some amazing aspects and plot-twists to it. I loved it.

But that's not all. The actors were incredibly good in it as well, from Mackenzie Foy to even Matthew McConaughey himself. The robots were intelligently composed and voice acted, and the acting from everyone else (Especially Matthew) was just superb. There wasn't a single flaw from anyone that I noticed, apart from maybe Timothée Chamalet and John Lithgow, and perhaps some moments from David Gyasi as well, but they were otherwise all excellent and with that said Nolan picked a great cast for this film. Again, Matthew was brilliant (except maybe a little over-exaggerating on rare intervals) and could not have been picked better. On occasion I also kept thinking it was Christian Bale (they do look kinda similar, if you think about it (and if youpay close attention).

The special and sound effects were done perfectly as well. Just like with Gravity, Nolan mirrored Cuarón's take on the effects of space and represented them well, from things such as sound, gravity and motion in space, although the whole time-warping thing kinda confused me a little - I'd need to re-watch the film to understand it better. I mean, I think I do understand it, but I just need confirmation. Anyway, the science (to my knowledge) was relatively correct, and Nolan's potential theory of what is inside a black hole is vastly interesting but at the same time, again, a sly attempt at being too clever. That being said, however, we truly don't know what ]is actually inside a black hole or what it actually does. I mean sure, we've observed them from a distance in long magnified glass tubes and seen what they can do to stars, but seriously, we've never seen one close up let alone actually been in one. A lot of the things we know about black holes are really just myths - I mean how can we just assume that it devours all sentient life in the galaxy? Sounds to me like some kid's desire for attention.
(Await serious debate/discussion on science and black holes...)
Aaanyway, the special effects were also good. As I previously mentioned, the robots were well crafted and seemed to have an infinite amount of surprises in them which I enjoyed, and the way the other general special effects were done (explosions, particle effects, the ship, the wormhole etc.) made it almost seem realistic - particularly due to the fact that a lot of the camera angles often looked like they were mounted on the ships themselves. But it was very cleverly done, especially with the travel through the wormhole and the whole perception into the "5th dimension".

And finally, the soundtrack. My god, the soundtrack is just superb as well. It fits the movie exceptionally well and each track is done so uniquely for each individual scene that they pair so well. At times it gets really emotional whilst being full of suspense and drama, whilst at other times you can grasp a sense of drama and longing, if not even desperation. Hans Zimmer is hans down, the boss of composing. I loved his work for Inception and his stuff in Batman is just as mind-blowing. He's an amazing composer and the way he composed for this film is just so unique and inspirational. It's as if that when he composed this soundtrack, he imagined being in the thick of it all, and composed it based off of what was happening in the film. For example the explosion on the Endurance was so shocking and so sudden he had to mirror the experience through the music, and that just drives the film even further. It makes you want to hold onto the edge of your seat, gritting your teeth in anticipation of what will happen.
This track itself is just a masterpiece:


Phew! Good lord, I like to do reviews. roll eyes
Nah but seriously, this was an incredibly good movie. Just stunning. Some exceptionally minor flaws here and there but otherwise it was of A grade quality. I'd definitely recommend this and watch it again.
A-
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #751 on: 12-02-2014 20:26 »
« Last Edit on: 12-02-2014 20:35 »

Alright, I'll throw my review in the ring to balance things out a bit:

Interstellar

I really enjoyed most of this. It's well acted, has a good premise, the space travel and alien planet scenes are beautiful, and it uses some hard science concepts like relativity of time really interestingly. The first two acts are great and a twist halfway through ups the emotional stakes in a great way.

Unfortunately, the film doesn't think it's dazzled us enough and completely blows its load in the third act, asking us to suspend our disbelief for sentimental pseudoscience claptrap after already having forced us to do so for most of the movie while it played fast and loose with science. I'd compare it to if the final scene of 2001: A Space Oddysey was using exposition to explain exactly what was going on in a desperate attempt to make the audience understand and doing a really hokey job of it. It looks really cool and is interesting in theory, but it makes almost no sense and turns the whole story of the film into an unnecessarily distracting catch-22. What's most unfortunate is it all seems to be done just to give the movie an additional emotional punch that it really didn't need...I would have been far more satisfied with the story if it had continued on with no more twists after the second act.

Anyway, I think most people will not mind the ending, and to be fair, I enjoyed the movie for the most part despite it. But I think it's a very flawed movie, and a lot of people I've talked to about it have shared my thoughts. It's a much weaker film than Inception, which had a crazy premise but followed its own internal rules very well, whereas this movie has a solid premise but its plot kind of falls apart under scrutiny. If you go in with that knowledge you probably won't be as bothered as I was.

B-
hobbitboy

Sir Rank-a-Lot
Urban Legend
***
« Reply #752 on: 12-11-2014 13:59 »

The Hobbit: The Battle of the five Armies

I found it a bit underwhelming, actually.

It's not a bad movie as such and it has some cool bits in it but as the third act of something which just had to be set as a trilogy it seems to miss the mark somehow.

Maybe it'll improve on subsequent viewings but as things stand I liked the first part better than the second and the second part better than this one.

Rating: 3 armies out of 5.

Don't hate me, Trinity.  I'm just the messenger.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #753 on: 12-11-2014 15:01 »

The second Hobbit film is one of the very worst films that I've ever seen, so that doesn't bode well for this one.
tyraniak

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #754 on: 12-11-2014 20:09 »

I was pretty underwhelmed with the first and hearing the mediocre reviews of the second, I never bothered to go any further with them
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #755 on: 12-11-2014 21:03 »
« Last Edit on: 12-11-2014 21:07 »

I really enjoyed the first and second. I can absolutely understand why many took issue with them, especially fans of Tolkien's original works, but as a fan of the book The Hobbit myself the movies are pretty much what I expected and wanted them to be. Unlike most people, I like the idea of them taking what is essentially an adventure book and beefing it up with large-scale actions scenes, and the few liberties they've taken with the characters and story don't bother me. I'd say I possibly enjoy them even more than the LOTR trilogy movies as the story is less convoluted and easier to follow, and the whole ordeal feels neither rushed nor dragged out to me.

I haven't seen the third yet though, so the jury's still out on that.
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #756 on: 12-11-2014 23:12 »


I got a little impatient with the first one, which I chalk up to not being in the right frame of mind.  I got the second one a couple of weeks ago but haven't yet opened it, and I'm going to clear my calendar some Saturday or Sunday evening and watch them both back-to-back.

UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #757 on: 12-12-2014 05:11 »

I agree with Josh in that I like the way they've added some more meat to the story. Honestly, if they adapted it directly from the book without changing anything it'd be kind of... well, shit. The Hobbit may be a reasonably short book but there's a huge volume of things that happen and if it were confined to a single film it'd be ludicrously rushed. And the original story is still there, relatively unchanged; it's just longer.

They're definitely not perfect, but I still really enjoy them for what they are. Looking forward to when TBATFA comes to Australia
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #758 on: 12-12-2014 10:52 »


I got a little impatient with the first one, which I chalk up to not being in the right frame of mind. 

As opposed to it being terribly structured, incredibly bloated and completely self-indulgent? Really, why blame yourself?
Inquisitor Hein
Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #759 on: 12-13-2014 10:14 »
« Last Edit on: 12-30-2014 12:05 »

I watched "Battle of the five armies" yesterday.
Which turned out all right, though not overly great.

- The "Big Fight as intro" reminded of LOTR II.
- The use of just the battle gave the movie a direct, straight on theme. After the mess that was "Hobbit II", it got the movie in line again. (Though I can understand the criticism that "more meat should have been brought to the story table")
- For the most part, the fighting scenes were all right, though - towards the end - too many of the famously ridiculous over-the-top scenes crept in.
- Pacing started all-right, but - towards the end - started to fall apart. Mostly owed to too many heroes, all needing their own big fight. This lead to an impression of the movie being short on the one side (the shortest Hobbit Part by far), and still looking "stretched".
- Fortunately, it did not feature as many Good-byes as LOTR III.

As tabletop wargamer, I probably treat the lean "brief a battle, and then carry it out" theme more favorably than other viewers. So, I will give it a
B+
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 Print 
 Topic locked! 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.216 seconds with 18 queries.