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

[Reply #680 on:]

Big Nothing

The plot of this film is deviously beautiful. Three terrible con artists attempt to blackmail a vicar for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and just about everything goes wrong. There are plot twists, foreshadowing and a sickening sense of satisfaction as you watch all of these ridiculously horrific events unfold. It's like a perverse game of Cluedo, but without the colourful (literally) characters. It allows for multiple watchings, that give the viewer a sense of morbid superiority by knowing which characters are trustworthy and which aren't.

The performances range from suitable to superb, with no character seeming out of place, or inserted to try and boost box office sales. Simon Pegg is slimy but lovable as Gus, David Schwimmer is more down to earth, if somewhat typecast, as Charlie, Alice Eve is perfect as the half naive, half evil Josie, and all the supporting characters play their parts as well as they could have. Big Nothing does not exaggerate its performances; nothing is camp, but at the same time, nothing is totally serious. It's supposed to be a black comedy, where the audience is forced to question themselves for laughing at the tragedies before them.

Big Nothing is a shit bust sweet Naughty Bear of a film, where you can't help but gain pleasure from the incompetence of the wannabe con men. It doesn't have the deepest plot in the world, and a couple of jokes fall flat, but it deserves better than the melancholy shrug it's receiving from movie fanatics today.

Where Big Nothing truly shines, however, is in the mirror it holds up to the average Joe. Unlike action films where an unsuspecting citizen is taken under the wing of a bad-ass, violent douchebag, Charlie never stops being innocent. he never becomes a heartless killer, even when he wants and tries to be. At the back of his mind, he's always thinking of his daughter. That's a far more powerful character than a wuss who's taught how to be cool. Essentially, Charlie represents the person we all should be in society, while Gus represents the man we want to be. Both characters have major pros and cons, and the film suggests that no matter how you try and be as a person, nothing is set in stone.

8/10

Wait... that sounds familiar, have I watched that? ... Waagh!
Time to search old posts.

[Reply #681 on:]

Big Nothing

The plot of this film is deviously beautiful.

Oh my, yes. Thanks for this recommendation. I'm very glad I decided to spend what would have been otherwise unproductive nap time watching this film. An underrated masterpiece.

[Reply #682 on:]

I don't really feel like posting movie reviews today, but I'll post movie ratings.

A few movies I've watched recently:


A Good Day to Die Hard - 7/10

Iron Man 3 - 7.5/10

Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters - 8.5/10

[Reply #683 on:]

Star Trek-  A

Speaking as a fairly casual Star Trek: TOS fan, this movie was excellent and definitely the best I've seen so far this year. I honestly didn't have a single complaint about it. The acting was excellent, particularly from Cumberbatch and Quinto.
I was a bit taken by surprise, though, about the direction the movie took. I think the trailer makes the plot line appear quite different from what it actually is, but I may be in the minority on that.

[Reply #684 on:]

Fortunately, I've managed to resist temptation and have avoided watching the trailer.  With luck I'll get to see Into Darkness this week.

[Reply #685 on:]

Yeah, the trailers always look far different than the movie, to be honest. Most of the time, anyway. Though is it just me, or do I think that most trailers look better than the actual movie?

[Reply #686 on:]

Trailers do have all the action and main themes dumped in 2-minute clip with epic music...

[Reply #687 on:]

I'm going to see The Hangover part III saturday(it comes out tomorrow), anyone seen it yet? I'll post a review later(since I have to do an assignment about it...)

[Reply #688 on:]

I saw it and I didn't mind it. I don't really understand why people are being so negative about it. It's nothing special, but it's perfectly solid for the sort of film that it is. It's certainly a huge improvement over the crapfest that was Part II.

I don't really feel like posting movie reviews today, but I'll post movie ratings.

A few movies I've watched recently:


A Good Day to Die Hard - 7/10

Iron Man 3 - 7.5/10

Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters - 8.5/10

Are you senile? A Good Day to Die Hard was outright appallingly bad. I couldn't believe what I was watching. Everything from its writing to simply how it was shot was piss-poor.

And I haven't seen Hansel and Gretel but I seriously doubt it's anything other than another cinematic turd based on every last bit of promotion I've seen for it and everything else that I've heard people say about it.

[Reply #689 on:]

Are you senile? A Good Day to Die Hard was outright appallingly bad. I couldn't believe what I was watching. Everything from its writing to simply how it was shot was piss-poor.

I think this is the first time I've agreed entirely with you about a piece of cinema. AGDTDH was a complete shit sandwich (the kind where the bread is also made of shit).

[Reply #690 on:]

Are you senile? A Good Day to Die Hard was outright appallingly bad. I couldn't believe what I was watching. Everything from its writing to simply how it was shot was piss-poor.

I think this is the first time I've agreed entirely with you about a piece of cinema. AGDTDH was a complete shit sandwich (the kind where the bread is also made of shit).

I didn't see AGDTDH (because it looked horrible and I didn't like the last Die Hard movie), but there's no need to antagonize someone who did like it.

Now You See Me

I don't have much to say other than I liked it and I now have a crush on Melanie Laurent.

EDIT: Actually now that I think about it, I got dizzy from the camera movement because it was constantly moving. There was shaky cam and scenes where two people were talking but the camera keeps moving around them, and tons of tracking shots that never stop for a second.

B

[Reply #691 on:]

Star Trek Into Darkness
I liked it a bit more than the first one, Cumberbatch being a cooler villain and the story being slightly more interesting than "the reason why there's two timelines you have to follow now" of the first one.

B+

[Reply #692 on:]

Are you senile? A Good Day to Die Hard was outright appallingly bad. I couldn't believe what I was watching. Everything from its writing to simply how it was shot was piss-poor.

I think this is the first time I've agreed entirely with you about a piece of cinema. AGDTDH was a complete shit sandwich (the kind where the bread is also made of shit).

I didn't see AGDTDH (because it looked horrible and I didn't like the last Die Hard movie), but there's no need to antagonize someone who did like it.

I'm confused. Who's being antagonised here? Apart from whoever cyber_turnip asked if they were senile. Or is that what you meant? It seems to be relatively low-level antagonism, if that's the case.

[Reply #693 on:]

I was referring to cyber_turnip. His comment came across as rude. But you know I'm not even the one he was talking to so it doesn't really matter anyway.

[Reply #694 on:]

So close no matter how far
Couldn't be much more from the heart
Forever trusting who we are
So it doesn't really matter anyway

...

[Reply #695 on:]

ThE hangover part 3 was quite good, really different from the previous parts! I'd give it an 8 out of 10

[Reply #696 on:]

Yes, Tach, you just run along now...

I see that someone is questioning my likes on the movies I watched. Well, for starters, I was actually rethinking my rating on A Good Day to Die Hard. Although, all of that rating is directed into several smaller sections, if you must know why I gave it that initial rating, so the vote as a whole varies and relies on several different factors.

For example, A Good Day to Die Hard's story was understandable and easy to follow, but it wasn't the greatest plot I've ever known. So for that I'll give it a 5/10. The video-shooting was a bit sloppy - the camera was a bit shaky the whole time, unless that was just a problem with the copy we have, which it probably was, since we had trouble watching it instantly. So that I won't rate on. The detail and special effects were pretty nifty - I always do like a good shoot n' blow movie. So 8.5/10 for that. The dialogue was reasonably understandable - it's not like the music or background noise was too loud to not be able to understand what the hell they're saying. So for that I'll give it a 7.5/10. Let's see, was there anything else I normally rate on?.. Ah, yes, the characters/actors. The characters were ok, nothing too special. You understood their story and what was going on with them at the time, so you weren't staring at the screen with your mouth open like a dumb fuck, wondering what the hell was going on. The actors who played them were pretty good as well. Nothing too cheesy here. They were bearable - it's not like I had to close my eyes or anything. For that, 7/10. Finally, the music. I can't actually remember the music too well, as it was like 2 weeks ago when I watched the film, but judging from the current score I gave at the time it looked like it was a 5.5 to 6/10.

So getting the average of those altogether gives us an average of around 6.8/10, whereas I rounded that off to 7/10. So, cyber_turnip, just FYI, I don't rate the movie as a whole. I separate it into different divisions and then find the average and there's you're overall rating. I know, a bit of work just for a simple rating, but bear in mind I don't use that technique all the time. As of late I've watched a few more movies I'm willing to post my ratings for, but I'm not going to go through that technique this time, as it is getting late and I can't be bothered, and would rather post a simple straight-forward rating than a more complex one. And here they are:

Anchorman - 7/10
Haven't watched this one in a loooong time, but it's still pretty humorous.

Jack the Giant Slayer - 8.5/10

21 Jump Street - 8/10

So, just for future reference, if anyone is going to question my ratings, they can refer to the above explanation as a basic and general understanding of how it works from time to time. The same generally applies with certain games, too. 'Nuff said.

Edit: I'm not mad or annoyed at anyone, I'm just putting it out there how I rate things, so that people don't necessarily stereotype me quite instantly on a rating that they probably think is the whole official thing, when it ends up relying on those several different factors.

[Reply #697 on:]

What's News Anchor??

[Reply #698 on:]

Whoops, sorry, I meant Anchorman. Sorry, twas' late last night, as I mentioned in my post...

[Reply #699 on:]

I figured that;s what you meant...still really funny that you'd mess that up, considering it's one of the most popular and well-loved movies of my generation.

[Reply #700 on:]

[Reply #701 on:]

I figured that;s what you meant...still really funny that you'd mess that up, considering it's one of the most popular and well-loved movies of my generation.

You're thinking of Bladerunner.  I have it on laserdisk if you want to come over.

[Reply #702 on:]

Which of the 15 versions of Blade Runner do you have, winna?

[Reply #703 on:]

Director's Cut.

[Reply #704 on:]

I don't like Blade Runner.

There, I said it.

[Reply #705 on:]

I don't like Blade Runner.

You and I are e.....hhh. I don't mind. The book's way better than the film. Personally, I'd like to see it remade, closer to the book.

[Reply #706 on:]

Why are you on a message board about Blade Runner if you don't like Blade Runner, UnrealLegend?

[Reply #707 on:]

I must have taken a wrong turn somewhere. 

That said, it's been like 5 years since I saw it. Those where the days where I thought Transformers was a good movie and Jar-Jar was a funny character; so perhaps my opinion will change.

[Reply #708 on:]

I like Blade Runner aesthetically, and I do appreciate it's somber tone, but there's not much to it.

[Reply #709 on:]

I really loved "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" but was never able to get into the Blade Runner movie for whatever reason. I agree with tnuk that a film more closely following the book would be nice.

Juno- C+

I finally got around to seeing this movie and was quite disappointed. I've heard so many great things about it that when I came across it playing on TV, I was really excited and expected a great movie.
I enjoyed the first half for the most part, but after that I just got so sick of Juno's overdone snarkiness. I cannot imagine a real human being speaking like she does, and while I thought the constant stream of "witty" barbs and cynicism was funny for a while, I became tired of it long before the end of the film.
I also got so overdosed on the whiny indie music that seemed to be playing non-stop in the background!

[Reply #710 on:]

Director's Cut.

winna, the Director's Cut is *not* the director's cut!  If you want to see the director's cut, get yourself a copy of Blade Runner: Final Cut.  Which *is* the director's cut.

I like Blade Runner aesthetically, and I do appreciate it's somber tone, but there's not much to it.

Which version?  Some of them?  All of them?  The style and ambiance of the films is phenomenal to me.  I've read Dick, but not the novel upon which the films were made.  Amongst my friends, I'm the only one who doesn't think the voiceover theatrical release was terrible, though I prefer the versions without it (and with the origami-related dream sequence, doh!)

[Reply #711 on:]

I've only seen the one that didn't have the narration.

[Reply #712 on:]

***BUMP***

This Is The End

I wouldn't bump this if I didn't want to recommend this movie. But Jesus Christ I have a splitting headache that was so not helped by the fact that I was laughing so hard at this movie. It's great, I'm so happy this turned out to be as good as I thought it would be. Cameos galore, so many jokes, and some woman brought like a 3-4 year old (why? this was from start to finish a hard R-rated movie).

A- (The "-" is only because I wish Jason Segel had had a main role too).

[Reply #713 on:]

Director's Cut.

winna, the Director's Cut is *not* the director's cut!  If you want to see the director's cut, get yourself a copy of Blade Runner: Final Cut.  Which *is* the director's cut.

I'm aware, hence why I said Director's Cut.  I'm not sure what the major differences are between the two, though I am aware of the differences between the theatrical cut and others.

I've only seen the one that didn't have the narration.

Good, the narration doesn't help the movie, and you didn't have to watch the happy conclusion which ruins the movie.

[Reply #714 on:]

Machine Gun Preacher
Watched this on Netflix, it was ok, follows real-life guy Sam Childers who after being released from prison, cleans up his act, goes to South Sudan and builds an orphanage to shelter children who were victims of the LRA (Kony 2012's army)
Gerard Butler plays Childers, he's not bad in it.

C

[Reply #715 on:]

The Great Gatsby

Leo DiCaprio says "old sport" a disproportionate number of times in a better than average film which oddly uses contemporary music to convey a 1920s party atmosphere.

Enjoyable.

6/10

What might be more enjoyable is the drinking game:

Team 1 - "match the cast" drinks whenever something is being drunk on screen

Team 2 - "Old Sport" drinks whenever Leo says those words.

(Team 1 is probably the easy option)

[Reply #716 on:]

Epic

Another Ferngully rip off movie. Pretty lame, Milhouse.

[Reply #717 on:]

The Great Gatsby

Leo DiCaprio says "old sport" a disproportionate number of times in a better than average film which oddly uses contemporary music to convey a 1920s party atmosphere.

Enjoyable.

6/10

What might be more enjoyable is the drinking game:

Team 1 - "match the cast" drinks whenever something is being drunk on screen

Team 2 - "Old Sport" drinks whenever Leo says those words.

(Team 1 is probably the easy option)

Team 3 - Drink if you're watching this movie.

[Reply #718 on:]

Ok here is a review for The Man of Steel.

It's fucking Awesome

10 out of 10. A+

And Diane Lane is still a total babe.

[Reply #719 on:]

Man of Steel: B-

I was, unfortunately, very disappointed in this movie. In my opinion, it didn't feel the way a Superman movie should. In my mind, it should have had a lighter, more hopeful vibe to it; instead, it just seemed like a wannabe Dark Knight.
I expected a grey, gloomy atmosphere with Christopher Nolan as the producer, but I didn't think the mood would be as bleak as I found it to be.
The action scenes also went on far too long and became very repetitive. I also thought Cavill made for a very bland Superman.
Also, every time I saw Russell Crowe I imagined him bursting into song.
On a positive note though, I loved the flying scenes and thought it was quite moving emotionally in places. I loved Kevin Costner and Diane Lane, too.