Lord of the Movies: The Return of the Review Thread

[Reply #160 on:]

Alex Going to the movie with his younger sister

Kinda weird

-D

[Reply #161 on:]

 

Originally posted by mikey:
Alex Going to the movie with his younger sister

Kinda weird

-D

I thought it was alright. Mum said I couldn't go out with my friends today because of exams next week, but going to the movies with my sister was ok for some strange reason. It was mum's money too, and a movie is a movie.

[Reply #162 on:]

I'm going to go see SuperSize Me! in a few weeks with my friends, whenever the holidays are on. Personally I think I can get through it without throwing up and making a vow not to eat fast food again.
Whereabouts did you go to see it, anyway?
Local theatre or Crown Casino?

[Reply #163 on:]

The Rivoli at Camberwell. They sometimes have big movie premieres there, it's a big place.

[Reply #164 on:]

Napoleon Dynamite
I went to a free advance screening of this film. It was terrible, but everyone in the audience laughed the entire time, so maybe I'm missing something. It's like if SNL writers tried to remake the Wes Anderson film "Rushmore." At the end of the screening they gave out passes to another free screening of the film. I guess that's the only way people will go see it, but I can't imagine why someone would want to see it more than once.

Super F-

[Reply #165 on:]

The Stepford Wives (original)

One of the best movies ive seen so far this year. i really want to see the remake when it comes out to see how far they strayed from the original. Loved the almost complete lack of special effects, the twisted ending, the suspense.

i give it an A

[Reply #166 on:]

Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban

WOW! Who knew that my least favorite Potter book would become the best Potter movie? Nobody that's who. The director has constructed a wonderful film with great special effects and some surprisingly good acting. The general opinon of moviegoers is that the film is too short. And your right, the film is too short despite the long looking running time(2:23). Hopefully, there will be a extended edition for the DVD. My fevorite part of the film has to be the last 40 minutes when Harry and Hermione go back in time. That was my favorite part in the otherwise mediocre book, and Alfonso nailed it on screen. This film is an excellent edition to the series and the film version of Goblet of Fire has a lot to live up to.

Ps. Look for the director's homage to "Y Tu Mama Tambien" when Harry, Ron, and Hermione watch

Show spoiler

Buckbeak gets killed(or does he?).

Grade:A+

Best film of the year so far.

[Reply #167 on:]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Gag me with a spoon. Sucked Ass.

Comic Book Guy: "Worst movie EVER!"

F-

[Reply #168 on:]

 

Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban

A+

F-

Well... I'm confused...

And I botched up the quote tags.

[Reply #169 on:]

 

Originally posted by Nasty Pasty:
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Gag me with a spoon. Sucked Ass.

Comic Book Guy: "Worst movie EVER!"

F-

WOW! Um, can you explain why you didn't like it?

[Reply #170 on:]

I am knowing a lot of people who don't like Harry Potter at all. Neither the books nor the movies.

[Reply #171 on:]

 

Originally posted by Sweetmelly:
I am knowing a lot of people who don't like Harry Potter at all. Neither the books nor the movies.

Yeah, but an F- is quite extreme. I don't think I´ve seen a movie so bad that it deserves that grade, and I've seen a lot of movies.

[Reply #172 on:]

My dear Melly, F- is reserved for the most hideous of the hideous.. Even if I didn't like the new Harry movie[and I DO like it!] the least I could give it is a C for TRYING. Before you give any movie an F- you need to watch Manos: Hands of Fate. Without the benefit of the 'bots..

[Reply #173 on:]

I can give "Going Overboard" an F- with great confidence. When the main character breaks the fourth wall at the beginning of a movie and comes right out and says it sucks, you know it's bad. Easily the worst movie I've ever seen, but it's almost worth watching again just because it's so bad.

[Reply #174 on:]

 

Originally posted by Mr. Potter:
 Yeah, but an F- is quite extreme. I don't think I´ve seen a movie so bad that it deserves that grade, and I've seen a lot of movies.

Oh wow, you've seen alot of films. You big boy you. Regarding this 'F-' grade, I'd give most of the films I've seen either from recent hollywood bore-craps to the international house of big-tit sluts trying to act, that grade. Its all in the viewers own opinions & tastes in films that the grade finally boils down to.

[Reply #175 on:]

 

Originally posted by eggsandwich:
 Oh wow, you've seen alot of films. You big boy you.

Woo! I'm a big boy.

Back on topic:

Hitler:The Rise of Evil

I saw this last night, both parts. I found it  very well made with excellent cinematography and production design.

The acting was also really good, I've heard some complaints about the accent but I don't know too much about them so I can't complain. Robet Carlyle is great in the title role, he has a tremendous presence  despite being such a short guy between all those high officers and guards.

The story was very interesting. I suppose there were some liberties taken, but I hope that for the most part everything really happened.

The only thing that annoyed was that Hitler's childhood and adolescence was summarize in 15 minutes. Sure, the basics are there, but I think that to truly comprehed the rise of evil, we have to look in detail at every part of his life. But after all, this is a good miniseries, recommended to anyone that has interest in the life of Hitler and the birth of Nazism.

[Reply #176 on:]

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
I liked this movie, Jim Carrey can be normal when he wants to be, but still dish out the funnies, like when he was in his Baby Joel memory. 

I loved the main memory sequence, some of it was so simple and some was really abtract, but it did the job for me.
Kate Winslett and Frodo were good too, it proves that Elijah Wood can do more annoying characters if he wants, kudos to him!
Oh and Kirsten Dunst is hott in panties and a tank top. 
Visually stunning film, kept me interested throughout.
A-

[Reply #177 on:]

I just got back from seeing Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, and feel like reviewing it. I'm sure this will end up being overly long, in true Harry Potter fashion.

First off, I have not read the novels. I thought the first film sucked but the second one was surprisingly good. So I look at this as a general filmgoer, and not a Harry Potter fan or ten year-old with a five minute attention span.

In a word: I enjoyed it. It is certainly a big change from the last film, although I still think The Chamber of Secrets was better. The tone has become darker and more serious and Cuaron's direction is much more stylised. Visually, the film is wonderful to watch. The dark moody atmosphere (does it ever stop raining in this film?) is great, and Cuaron handles the special effects brilliantly (just watch some of those Hogwarts scenes!). However, the film has it's weaknesses:

1) The begining. This seems to rush by too quickly for me. Nonetheless, it still has my favorite scene

Show spoiler

The Knight Bus sequence. It was like watching Harry Potter on acid! That fucking ruled!

2) Conversely, everything else was too long! I don't care what the fans say, there was too much trying to be squeezed in at the end and too many scenes that didn't need to be there.

3) Alan Rickman. Superb actor, wasted on this film. He really didn't need to be there (and I was complaining that he wasn't used enough in the last!)

Show spoiler

I mean, come on! Every scene he's in he does nothing! He's knocked out in two action sequences for god's sake!

4) Most noticeable is that Cuaron hasn't managed a good balance between the 'kid' and 'adult' elements. Some parts are really dark and adult, others treat you like you have the attention span of a ten year old   

Apart from these flaws, this is an enjoyable movie. If it had stuck to what it needed more instead of dragging it out too much maybe I would have liked it more.

C+

(Oh, and Richard Harris kicks Michael Gambon's ass!)

Whining over.

[Reply #178 on:]

Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban

I'll throw my thoughts into the melee.

I enjoyed the film. While not the greatest film ever it is better than the first 2. I enjoyed the direction far more simply because it was more interesting thann the previous directors work (not hard really).

Yet again the adult actors are wasted but in fairness the little actors are getting abit better. Now while I think Richard Harris looked more the part of Dumbledor I felt the Gambon got the character better. In the books he has a very weird sense of humour that Harris never really showed..

All in all. Could have been better but a step in the right direction
B

[Reply #179 on:]

Batman
The film that put Batman's Hollywood image out of it's campyness. Sure, some peopel didn't like it and some did. I still thnk it is one of the best films in cinama history.

Miceal Keton was a pretty good Batman. He wouldn't have been my first choice, but he is still good.

Jack Nicholsin is the ideal Joker.
He has a good insane touch

Show spoiler

(During the parad scene, Batman steals the balloons.)
Joker: Bob, gun.
(Bob gives him a gun. Joker suits him

Overall, A+

[Reply #180 on:]

The Terminal
Catherine Zeta Jones and Tom Hanks
This movie reminded me a great deal of Catch Me If You Can, not only because of the combination of Spielberg/Hanks/STEWS!.. But because of its lighthearted spirit, its celebration of love... the importance of living for life's smallest pleasures as well as its greatest thrills. Excellent acting, an engaging score and a supporting cast as well thought out and endearing as its main characters make this a movie of very high caliber. Hanks is charming and intensely likeable without being smarmy. Zeta Jones constantly has 'troubles' with men but comes off as anything but slutty. This film made me laugh.. hard. It made me cry a little bit. The romance was sweet, and not overdone. All in all, a beautiful film that you really ought to see. It's a bit anticlimactic, but.. you'll leave the theatre happy and with a sense of well being.. Resolved, even!
An interesting note.. Everyone was talking about how The Day After Tomorrow was leftist and shocking to conservatives because of its environmental message. That's crap[its logic was faulty ANYWAY.. How an ice age is the result of global warming I can't figure. Whatever], but I'm surprised no one's talking about this movie in that way. It's clearly commenting on how Homeland Security has treated foreigners[especially after 9/11].. But it isn't heavy handed about its message, and I know you'll love it.
A-

[Reply #181 on:]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
I actually really enjoyed it! It wasnt exactly like the book and that was a good thing, as the last 2 I felt were too detailed a retelling, whereas this told the same story, it was a better film translation.

Although there were a few things that I felt shouldnt have been changed from the book, being the now Formless Patronous (bar the stage "outline" ) and the lack of explanation of the Maruader's Map, if I hadnt read the books previously I'm sure I would have been a bit WTF?

The special effects and cinematography of this film were much stronger in this film than the previous ones. The special effects such as the warewolves, dementors and the Hipporgrif Buckbeak I felt were some of the most seemless 3D to real transitions yet seen in films. I was quite impressed!

Definately worth a look!

[Reply #182 on:]

 

Originally posted by EvilLunch:
The Terminal

Where did you saw this? I don't think this movie has been released already.

[Reply #183 on:]

I'd love to see The Terminal! I love Steven Spelbergs' movies!

[Reply #184 on:]

Am I the only one who thought "The Terminal" was going to be about a dying man? I want to see Tom Hanks die in a movie that's not "Philadelphia"

[Reply #185 on:]

Try Saving Private Ryan! (spluh!) 

Or Big: The Directors Cut.

[Reply #186 on:]

 

Originally posted by Mr. Potter:
 Where did you saw this? I don't think this movie has been released already.

"Special sneak preview this Friday."

My theater showed it tonight.  It had to be broken down and taken away an hour after it finished, though.

[Reply #187 on:]

Yup, saw it Sneak Preview Thursday night. My Dad works at a radio station.. Whenever I get an autograph or see a movie early it's usually thanks to his connections.

[Reply #188 on:]

I see. I wish we got Special Sneak Previews for this movie. It looks interesting (and it has the Pagoda!!). I've heard very good things about it.

[Reply #189 on:]

 

Originally posted by ~FazeShift~:
Try Saving Private Ryan! (spluh!)   

Sorry, I never saw that movie.

[Reply #190 on:]

Then try Road to Perdition! (spluh!) 

[Reply #191 on:]

Harry Potter + the Prisoner of Azkaban

I enjoyed this movie much more than the other 2. The long camera pans over Hogwarts were great, but some of the special effects were not up to scratch.
    The child actors are developing, except Daniel Radcliffe, he is still a bit wooden. I agree with most of the comments about Alan Rickman being wasted.

I'd give the move a B, good but not fantastic.

[Reply #192 on:]

I heard there were some pretty urgent pick-ups done on The Terminal within the last two weeks...interesting to find out what exactly was changed...

[Reply #193 on:]

From what I've read, they changed the ending.

The Triplets of Belleville

Very weird animated movie by Silvain Chomet. It's amazing that movies with almost no dialogue are still being recognized. It has excellent animation and some very funny characters with what possibly is the strangest chase sequence I've ever seen in a movie.

[Reply #194 on:]

 

Originally posted by Coilette:
The long camera pans over Hogwarts were great, but some of the special effects were not up to scratch.

Which exactly? I though everything in this installment surpassed the first two.. ESPECIALLY the Quidditch.
 

Originally posted by Coilette:
 I agree with most of the comments about Alan Rickman being wasted.

With this I concur. He was barely in the film! What a shame...

Yay, someone else saw Triplets! I loved that film. The ending wasn't great.. But it's been so long since I've seen such fine acting in an animated film. The way Grandmother Souza adjusted her glasses.. I hadn't seen such subtlety and emotion in animation since Motoko woke up in the beginning of Ghost of the Shell. Great music, too. Its rightful Oscar was stolen, I say!!

[Reply #195 on:]

 

Originally posted by EvilLunch:
 Which exactly? I though everything in this installment surpassed the first two.. ESPECIALLY the Quidditch.

Show spoiler

Professor Lupin's transformation into the Werewolf was good, but the finished product looked really cheesy and badly animated.

Apart from that all the other parts were tip top, including the gripping Quidditch scene.

[Reply #196 on:]

Ahh. I'll give you that. Padfoot looked great, though!

[Reply #197 on:]

I swear, he looked like Gollum with a muzzle.

Show spoiler

Lupin, not Padfoot

The dog from Sandlot was scarier.  Maybe just because you could tell it wasn't neutered.

[Reply #198 on:]

I saw Shrek 2 today and it was god damn hilarious from start to finish....!
I don't wanna spoil it (even with spoilers) just go see it for yourself....I'll just say this, it's better/funnier than the first one, the computer animation is jaw-droppingly excellent, and the actors they got for the various character voices fit really well....

I'm not good at reviews but I think this one turned out ok....

[Reply #199 on:]

I did a review of Shrek 2 in the closed Shrek thread. I still don't know why Nixorbo shut it down.. It was by no means a 'single movie review thread'.. But here it is because I'm very self serving.


Shrek 2 is one of the best films I've seen recently, and I'll attempt to review it without giving too much away. The first Shrek was a fine film, but I don't think it deserved the Oscar for a number of reasons. It was not what I'd call a classic.. DreamWorks used its CG to animate things out of their range, for one thing. Do you know why PIXAR never showed humans in great detail until now[The Incredibles] and even now its humans are highly stylized? It's because they knew they couldn't animate humans well enough for it to look good. DreamWorks ignored their limited capabilities and produced some odd, puppetlike people. As funny as Robin Hood is and as pretty as Fiona is, they didn't look natural. Shrek 2 improved upon this.. There isn't a character in the movie who looks awkward or unnatural[even the drones in Fairy Godmother's factory look expressive, despite their costumes. Is it me or is Godmother rather like Mom, with an overgrown Ignar in Charming?]. In the first movie, there was too much of a reliance, I think, on pop music. The soundtrack of Shrek 2 is vastly improved, the only really well known tracks being Funkytown and Livin' La Vida Loca.. And I LIKED Funkytown, so I have only one complaint for the soundtrack in that Loca is possibly even worse a choice than All Star to put in such a great movie. The orchestral tracks, as in Shrek, are very good.. Though somewhat less stylized[I can't remember the name of the music, but the waltzing violin track they use for the DVD menu of the first movie was more Fairy-Tale sounding, the new music goes more for general drama].
The characters are all hilarious, old and new. Not one character except possibly Fiona's mother goes through the movie without making you laugh at least once. Fiona's parents are well thought out and by the end very likeable[though two well placed lines of dialogue and the similarity to a scene in Oh Brother Where Art Thou near the end gives away Fiona's father's real identity before you actually see it.. Not necessarily a bad thing, but...]. Fairy Godmother is beautifully expressive and very funny. If you've ever seen Jennifer Saunders in real life, the animation they used really brings out her speaking voice and makes her instantly recognizable. Rupert Everett is delightfully metrosexual as Charming, and Puss is adorable though fickle and perfectly pulled off by Antonio Banderas.
The gags in this film are hit or miss wwith a 99.9% kill rate. Some are even delightfully subtle, so much though that you'll blink and miss them.. The one that absolutely killed me was when a "Farbucks Coffee" is destroyed, its customers run screaming across the street to.. Well, you'll have to see it. OH and Faze Shift... Muffin Man shows up too!
Be sure to stay though the beginning of the credits, especially if you miss a certain character who was prominent in the first movie but barely appears in this one.. along with six[if I remember properly] little surprises. But, whatever you do, don't miss this movie! I wouldn't be surprised at all if it won the Oscar next year, though I'm sure he Incredibles will give it a run for its money. Also, Shark Tale[formerly "Sharkslayer"]'s visuals in the preview are even prettier than Shrek's!