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!    Come December, keep in mind there is already a Star Wars thread - Movie Reviews « previous next »
Author Topic: Come December, keep in mind there is already a Star Wars thread - Movie Reviews  (Read 22325 times)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 ... 13 Print
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #160 on: 06-28-2015 04:08 »
« Last Edit on: 06-28-2015 04:09 »

Ted 2

    This movie was greattttt, go see it. Right now,  get off yah lazy bums and see it. I'm not gonna give it an A cause it could've beeeennn betterrr. But it was still really good so I'll give it a B+
I haven't seen it myself (nor the first one) but all the reviews I've seen seem to say that's complete garbage. hmpf

EDIT: Two TOTPDs in a row? It's like Christmas!

ShinyMetal***

Professor
*
« Reply #161 on: 06-28-2015 04:38 »

WELLL I THOUGHT IT WAS CUTE SO THEY CAN BITE MY SHINY METAL ASTERISKS
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #162 on: 06-28-2015 05:02 »
« Last Edit on: 06-28-2015 05:03 »

To my surprise, I really enjoyed the first one. Seth MacFarlane's humor is very hit or miss for me, but when it works it really works, and I thought Ted was more hit than miss. That said, A Million Ways To Die In The West was exactly the opposite, a movie with only a couple decent laughs that overall just left me asking "Why?". Still, while I'm very much expecting Ted 2 to not be as fun as the first was, the trailers I've seen have amused me enough to give it a shot.
Jezzem

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #163 on: 06-29-2015 17:36 »

I saw Inside Out today. I was kind of surprised by how depressing it was, but I really enjoyed it. It made me sad but in a weirdly satisfying, cathartic way (which I guess is sort of one of the main points of the story).

That said, it was also really fun and had a lot of laugh-out-loud moments and was certainly less emotionally taxing than watching Toy Story 3.
Quantum Neutrino Field

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #164 on: 07-01-2015 21:02 »

Ex Machina was really good with interesting plot and that theme of line between human and machine. It carried through the movie and played well with expectations. Basically, I liked it.

Other great movie I saw recently: Whiplash. It's intense and kind of similar to Black Swan (watched recently as well). They have similar tone and both of them have main character aiming for perfect performance.
DannyJC13

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #165 on: 07-04-2015 22:49 »
« Last Edit on: 07-04-2015 22:51 »

So, I saw Terminator Genisys on Thursday night.

Before I post my thoughts, I should note that I was more excited for this film than I am for


Anyway, my first two annoyances:

Literally almost every action scene/explosion/fight is shown in the film's mass of trailers, plus the big twist


is ruined by most of the trailers too, leaving nothing to surprise or shock you when you see the full thing. If you are a fan of the Terminator franchise and plan on seeing this film but haven't seen any of the trailers, DON'T. It's best to go in not really knowing what to expect.

Second,


I think Jai Courtney was a pretty good choice for Kyle Reese, as was Jason Clarke for John Connor, but Emilia Clarke as Sarah....meh. Not feeling it a whole lot. Arnold is pretty great through the entire thing, he probably delivers the most laughs in the film. The attention to detail in


Regarding Matt Smith's character,


I also wish we got some closure on J.K. Simmons character, who is just kind of brushed aside towards the end and never seen or mentioned again.

Overall, it's an okay film. Not great, not bad. They need to show way less material in the trailers for the sequels (if they get made, that is). I like how they rebooted the franchise by also connecting it to the past films, if I explained that right? It's like a reboot but...not. (Because time travel.)

A lot of people are saying this is better than Rise of the Machines & Salvation, but I'm not so sure. It's a better Terminator film than Salvation, but a better film in general? Maybe they're on the same level as each other. (Yeah, I know Salvation is universally hated, but I think it's better than T3.)

Overall, 6.5/10
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #166 on: 07-04-2015 23:59 »

It's like a reboot but...not.

More of a rehash, really. The franchise really went nuts a while back, and at this point the original Terminator movie is a nice standalone movie about a killer robot who introduces a freedom fighter to a woman old enough to be his mother (which totally doesn't stop them fucking).

Add in the second movie, and you get a couple of major inconsistencies that are never addressed, as well as problems with regard to paradox and the possibility of a split timeline arising as the logical solution. Add in the stuff from the Universal Studios themepark, the TV show, and the third movie, and you've got five timelines with different endings for the story.

Add in the fourth, and you've got a new timeline (out of nowhere) that continues the story, then add in the fifth and you've got a retcon that merges all of the timelines into a single branched tree which doesn't really work out unless you deliberately ignore many of the established principles which have gone before, and accept that it all runs on "rule of cool" and what serves the plot rather than what serves the framework.

Which is hack-y writing, but serves the ultimate driving force behind continuing the franchise; box-office returns and merchandising revenue.

A lot of people are saying this is better than Rise of the Machines & Salvation, but I'm not so sure. It's a better Terminator film than Salvation, but a better film in general? Maybe they're on the same level as each other. (Yeah, I know Salvation is universally hated, but I think it's better than T3.)

First of all, let's be perfectly clear on this: there are enormous problems with both the third and fourth films. They're both pretty bad as Terminator films. As popcorn films go, they're both not abysmal, but also could have been done much better.

Secondly, this makes it kinda hard for a film that's had at least a little effort put into it to be worse than either, as long as it plays to what the audience want to see (Terminators, basically. The audience want to see Terminators).

This means that overall, it's probably going to be remembered as a much better instalment in the franchise. Which is a little bit of a shame, because in all honesty everything after the original movie adds to the overall mass of problems with the overall lore of the films. Which isn't to say that Terminator 2 was a bad film. As a popcorn movie goes, it was better than the original.

But still, as an actual piece of cinematic art, the original movie was really the only story they had worth telling, and in order to put the overall arcs of each of the movies together logically with no holes or branching timelines, it really does need to be rebooted at this point for five second-generation films to re-tell the story as a cohesive narrative in five chapters without the need for retconning or diluting the impact of the initial story of a killer robot introducing a man to a much older woman and the sweaty night of passion which results.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #167 on: 07-05-2015 00:38 »
« Last Edit on: 07-05-2015 00:43 »

I think Jai Courtney was a pretty good choice for Kyle Reese, as was Jason Clarke for John Connor, but Emilia Clarke as Sarah....meh. Not feeling it a whole lot. Arnold is pretty great through the entire thing, he probably delivers the most laughs in the film.

Wholeheartedly disagree with you about Kyle Reese. If the movie had maybe been written better or if they had cast an actor more appropriate for the role, I'd be more forgiven but the movie fails in both regards. On just a physical level, there is nothing about Jai Courtney that is reminiscent of Michael Biehn. The thing is that Biehn's portrayal of Reese is that he plays it like he has PTSD, and more importantly looks like it. He's very paranoid and starved. The way the original movies goes, the movie doesn't even expect you to trust him because he's somewhat menacing in his own way. And yeah Genisys is a different timeline or whatever, but it still begins the same way as the original and this version of Kyle Reese is still supposed to be the same one from that timeline, which just makes Jai Courtney's performance so painful because it's so bland and boring.

Even Terminator Salvation, for all the shit it gets, has a way, way better Kyle Reese. He's a scrappy kid who is obviously not as mentally deteriorated but still in a constant struggle to survive the dystopia he lives in. Jai Courtney looks like one of the Terminators. And again had they not written him in such a, "generic action hero" kind of way, maybe it would have bothered me so much, but this movie just completely fucks up everything about Kyle Reese. He's so damn whiny and there's nothing about his relationship with Sarah Connor that makes me believe they're equals in each other's eyes. Ugh I was just so fucking offended at how bad they butchered that character.
DannyJC13

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #168 on: 07-05-2015 00:44 »

Fair enough, you raise some good points. I agree that he looks too strong/buff considering what Kyle has meant to have been put through. But then again, he is meant to be one of John Connor's top soldiers, right?
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #169 on: 07-05-2015 00:50 »
« Last Edit on: 07-05-2015 00:53 »

These are not top soldiers shipping off to the Middle East in present day USA. These are top soldiers who survived a nuclear holocaust and have to fight robots all the time. I don't think the same principles apply to what a "top soldier" would look like.



Also, it's not like Michael Biehn wasn't in shape. He's just a sexy lean guy.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #170 on: 07-06-2015 12:46 »

The Shawshank Redemption

This gave me a justice boner to end all justice boners.

Not actually the first time I've seen the movie, either. But it's the first time I've seen it in the last 10 years and it definitely holds up very well.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #171 on: 07-06-2015 12:59 »

The Shawshank Redemption
This gave me a... ...boner.

Not actually the first time... ...But it's the first time I've seen it in the last 10 years and it definitely holds up very well.

You're meant to review the movie, UrL. We did have a set of genitalia-themed threads a few years back, but that ended poorly.
Motor Oil

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #172 on: 07-06-2015 21:15 »

Side Effects

It was pretty good up until the grand reveal.
I enjoy movies about depression and medicine, but witch hunts and mastermind plots aren't interesting to me.
A lot of the visuals were beautiful, but the last 20 minutes make the whole movie almost bad. The premise was interesting enough, albeit unlikely.
The good guy was good, kind of. He was probably the most likable character. But he saved the day by engaging in obsessive behavior that ruined the lives of or permanently scarred everyone around him. Yay?
This could have been a somewhat thoughtful film about depression, or a fun movie about a weird lawsuit. One of the final scenes was a good amount of foreplay and no payoff. Fitting.

B up to Act 3, then D- at best. Overall, D+.
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #173 on: 07-06-2015 21:25 »


There's nothing wrong with foreplay for its own sake.


B up to Act 3, then D- at best. Overall, D+.


So, in all seriousness, if someday I see this showing on cable for free, might it be worth it just to catch the first half or two thirds?

JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #174 on: 07-06-2015 22:05 »

Do you actually do that with movies on a regular basis? Watch only part or most of them and then intentionally don't watch the rest? That's...bizarre.
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #175 on: 07-06-2015 22:15 »


Rarely, if I am bored or distracted or offended by the first parts.  But occasionally I will seek out a film specifically for a particular segment.  e.g. I have no interest in watching Saving Private Ryan, but after some discussion with friends back in the day, I set aside time to see an unedited broadcast of it solely to watch the beginning with the beach landings.

Motor Oil

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #176 on: 07-06-2015 22:17 »

There's nothing wrong with foreplay for its own sake.
There isn't, but I'd much rather watch a poor lead-up and excellent ending than vice versa.

So, in all seriousness, if someday I see this showing on cable for free, might it be worth it just to catch the first half or two thirds?

Yeah, I'd say so. I wouldn't go out of my way to catch it, but if it's on, there's no need to immediately change the channel.

I mean, the ending isn't god awful, but it takes a previously empathetic and interesting situation and turns it into not that.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #177 on: 07-07-2015 06:48 »

It's a pretty good film. It's really only the turn-around at the end that's done clumsily. It doesn't ruin the film, it's just handled badly compared to the rest of it (and the rest of it is done well enough that I think it's worth watching all the way through just to complete the story).

There's nothing wrong with foreplay for its own sake.
There isn't, but I'd much rather watch a poor lead-up and excellent ending than vice versa.

You must love watching the Star Wars sexilogy in numerical order then.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #178 on: 07-07-2015 11:49 »

These are not top soldiers shipping off to the Middle East in present day USA. These are top soldiers who survived a nuclear holocaust and have to fight robots all the time. I don't think the same principles apply to what a "top soldier" would look like.



Also, it's not like Michael Biehn wasn't in shape. He's just a sexy lean guy.

Think I probably agree with stuff you've said.  Haven't seen new Terminator movie, but I guess the 1980s is over now.  Wish I was a holocaust war robot killing soldier or something.

Anyways, I didn't know everyone hated Salvation?
cartoonlover27

Professor
*
« Reply #179 on: 07-11-2015 08:34 »

Legally Blonde is actually a really good movie, I was watching it on this very long car ride home. It's very great.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #180 on: 07-11-2015 14:26 »

WALL-E

Man, I really appreciate how they not only managed to tell an indredibly compelling story with such a small amount of dialogue, but also made the characters convey a wide range of emotions using limited expressions. I have seen this movie before, but it still remains one of my favourite Pixar films (that I've seen).

Also, I'd totally turn robosexual for EVE. Just sayin'. flirt
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #181 on: 07-11-2015 19:08 »
« Last Edit on: 07-11-2015 19:14 »


Once you go tin, you'll never miss skin flirt

I watched it on a quiet night a year or two ago.  It was well done and I enjoyed it.  Before watching, I had of course heard the endless hyperbolic praise for the film, and I still don't really understand what grabbed people that hard.

JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #182 on: 07-11-2015 19:54 »

Any kid's movie that manages to maintain a totally cynical view of the human race gets points in my book. wink
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #183 on: 07-11-2015 23:06 »

I still don't really understand what grabbed people that hard.

The cold, steel, arms of the WALL-A mega compactor.

cartoonlover27

Professor
*
« Reply #184 on: 07-14-2015 14:43 »

I'm not sure if anyone here's watched or heard of it because it's a pretty low-key movie, I only know about it because when I heard Carey Mulligan was in it, I had to give it a try, but I watched An Education recently and I really enjoyed it. It has a lot of surprises, and I thought Mulligan's acting was impeccable.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #185 on: 07-16-2015 07:24 »

Ant-Man

Fairly standard Marvel film, although it tied into the established universe far, far more than I was expecting, which I suppose is necessary at this stage. I read somewhere that Ant-Man is the last origin story they're making, which I'm sure not complaining about.

The best part was the visuals. All the crazy special effects and shrinkiness looked absolutely stunning and they constantly found new ways to get creative with the premise. Many of the set-pieces were very busy visually, but they managed to keep it clean and easy to follow at the same time.

Despite that, I felt like it suffered some of the same problems that Thor 2 had: some of the humour and dialogue felt like they were trying just a little too hard. Some of the jokes worked, some didn't, and some completely lost their effect because they were in the trailer. mad Unsurprisingly, the villain was also forgettable.

I don't think this will sway anyone who dislikes superhero films but it's enjoyable to those who do like them and it had some great scenes with solid acting.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #186 on: 07-16-2015 13:00 »

I don't think this will sway anyone who dislikes superhero films...

I was actually quite curious to check this one out. Up until Edgar Wright jumped ship. hmpf
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #187 on: 07-16-2015 13:23 »

Ant-Man is the last origin story they're making, which I'm sure not complaining about.

They're introducing more new characters into the MCU over the next few years. They'll get origin stories (or at least have them shoehorned into their standalone adventures). It's just that perhaps they won't need to establish quite so much when the films tie into the MCU in their own right as strongly as offerings like the Avengers franchise.

Also, this isn't really an origin story. Hank Pym's story is the origin story. Scott Lang's story is more of a continuation. I mean, it's not like you'd call the first film in a Nightwing series an origin story, what with Batman being the origin of the franchise. Which is one reason I was surprised they went with telling Scott's story, rather than starting out with Hank. We're coming in at the middle.

Still, I'm not going to complain. I mean, any Ant-Man film is better than no Ant-Man film.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #188 on: 07-17-2015 00:21 »

Not every one of those characters in upcoming MCU films needs an origin story though. Perhaps a very short scene at the beginning (like in GotG), but it this point they don't need to start from scratch for every character.

Also, it might not be Ant-Man's origin story, but its definitely Scott Lang's. That's where I was getting at.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #189 on: 07-17-2015 00:57 »

Also, it might not be Ant-Man's origin story, but its definitely Scott Lang's. That's where I was getting at.

The difference is that it's his introduction, rather than anybody's origin. That's the particular nit I was picking.

As far as everybody getting an origin story, obviously some characters won't. But I'm willing to bet that at least half of Doctor Strange's film is going to deal with his origins. Anybody that comes into the next few films which tie directly into Avengers 3 is going to get at least a few minutes of explanation so as to save needing any in that film. There's going to be a bit of screen time devoted to origin stories, and one thing that the MCU is doing particularly well at right now is building up characters from scratch.

So, I doubt that this is really the last we'll see of establishing movies for these franchises. Perhaps they won't be quite so origin-heavy, or exposition-laden from now, but there's going to be origins, backstories, exploration, and the groundwork for future development, all coming thick and fast until we hit the point where Marvel's creative team run out of new characters to add to the mix.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #190 on: 07-17-2015 06:28 »

I guess we'll wait and see. I'm not inherently turned off by origin stories, it's just that they're all so formulatic and often take far too long to get started, which is what looks like will be happening with the new Fantastic Four movie (not that I give even the slightest shit about that).
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #191 on: 07-17-2015 09:48 »

Ant-Man

So lots of interviews over time about what happened with Edgar Wright have mentioned that he got distracted with other films, thus putting Ant-Man on the backburner. In all honesty I wish he had gotten his shit together because I agree the "worst" part of Ant-Man is all the Avengers tie-in. Certain elements of it work such as the prologue and how Hank Pym ties into this universe, and I wish there had been more exploration of that. That being said the movie is tonally all over the place and Corey Stoll I think gets at most 10 minutes of characterization before his big fight scene at the end, easily the most underdeveloped Marvel villain thus far. Despite that though, I do like all of the ideas the movie had to juggle, and I was incredibly entertained and happy to see a new superhero on screen. The little girl who plays the daughter is unbelievably adorable (although I can see how people will think the complete opposite of that). And I am very curious to see how Paul Rudd fits in to future installments. The effects in this movie are fantastic and the characterization of the ants are great, they're so cute. All the problems I have are not necessarily bad, because I like all the ideas and potential this movie could have been, there's just too many of them.

B
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #192 on: 07-17-2015 14:20 »

JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #193 on: 07-17-2015 17:16 »

It is true that Edgar Wright had put off really trying to convince Marvel to let him do Ant-Man for quite a while due to Scott Pilgrim and The World's End, but as far as I've read that has nothing to do with what caused him to leave the production after it was underway. It seems that he left because he was against having any tie-ins to the other Marvel movies period, to have the film stand by itself and only itself. Which is sort of understandable from his standpoint as someone who birthed the idea for the movie years ago, but ends up being pretty unreasonable now considering that an interconnected film universe is currently Marvel Studios' ONLY business priority and that fact has been pretty apparent for a while. I don't think that necessarily infuriated Wright to the point of quitting, but I imagine him as the kind of director who tells himself that if he can't have 100% unadulterated creative control, it's not worth it to him. Which is fine...he handed the movie off to the studio and from all accounts they still implemented most of his original screenplay.

Going to see it tonight to actually judge the finished product.
Tachyon

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #194 on: 07-20-2015 05:57 »


Sharktopus vs. Pteracuda

The "Pteracuda" construction in the title is excellent, and easily one of the highlights of the film.  As I've been watching it in the background with the audio muted, I can't tell where this movie sits on the wide spectrum with "taking itself seriously" on one end and "shameless mockery of all summer beach terror films" at the opposite extreme, which is reasonably good entertainment itself!

C- with the sound off.

totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #195 on: 07-20-2015 12:19 »

The film very much feels like Wright's influence made itself felt, and the story doesn't jump around as much as it could have done. This film could easily have been a lot more confused.

Wright's hand is clear in the overall tone of the film, and the juxtaposition of goofy shit and sincere emotion. Which is all to the good. This might not be a fantastic MCU movie, but it's a good and faithful screen adaptation of the characters from the source material, it's a decent introduction for Lang, and it neatly bypasses a lot of "origin" stuff that could have made the movie much longer and very tedious.

It's a shame that Wright left, because quite frankly this movie could have been great and it feels like it was just lacking a little polish to live up to that potential. But as it stands, it's good. Solid. A nice example of how to adapt a comic book to the screen without fucking up anything major.

It could have used a little more Falcon, but so could any MCU instalment. He's a critically under-utilised badass, and he's played to perfection by Mackie. I might be a little biased here because I fucking love jetpacks, but I'd like to see him get his own movie series.

 
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #196 on: 07-20-2015 23:25 »
« Last Edit on: 07-20-2015 23:27 »

Your last paragraph is interesting because I'm sure the inclusion of Falcon was one of the things, possibly more than anything else, that absolutely wouldn't have been were Wright to have stayed and been allowed to exercise his control over the script.

For the record, I loved his scene too.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #197 on: 07-22-2015 05:11 »

Will the new movie Pixels actually be a good film starring Adam Sandler
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #198 on: 07-22-2015 11:06 »

Raiders of the Lost Arcade already has the upper hand, of account of its lack of Adam Sandler.
JoshTheater

Space Pope
****
« Reply #199 on: 07-22-2015 19:40 »
« Last Edit on: 07-23-2015 06:05 »

The trailers are absolutely dreadful. And the reviews so far say the movie's even worse. They must have given Peter Dinklage a lot of money to show up in that garbage.

Edit: And to think I posted this even before I watched this review (most definitely NSFW):
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 ... 13 Print 
« 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 0.197 seconds with 17 queries.