Lord of the Movies: The Return of the Review Thread

[on:]

Well, here we go again.

[Reply #1 on:]

Third part of Lord of the Rings was not as good as first or second. There were too many mistakes. It seems like in the end creators of the film decided: screw the book, lets change it where we want! For me, worst part was where ghost warriors killed all orcs in the battle and saved Minas Tirith.

[Reply #2 on:]

 

Originally posted by KVA:
Third part of Lord of the Rings was not as good as first or second. There were too many mistakes. It seems like in the end creators of the film decided: screw the book, lets change it where we want! For me, worst part was where ghost warriors killed all orcs in the battle and saved Minas Tirith.

Express your anger on the amazing and unofficial Lord of the Rings thread right here on PEEL!

[Reply #3 on:]

Oh, sorry. The name of the thread , Lord of the Movies must have confused me.

[Reply #4 on:]

Shaun Of The Dead
Fantastic. I loved it! It both made me laugh and made me feel sick (in places) 

[Reply #5 on:]

Kill Bill Vol. 1
Just rented it. Insanely bloody, but it was good-and I nearly choked on my dinner in exclamation when the 5 seconds of "Master of the Flying Guillotine" music popped up during the House of Tea Leaves battle. I also like the way the plot is like a book - Tarantino did say he wrote the script originally in novel form, so I like how he kept with that a bit for the movie. I kind of like movies that jump every place and then converge those places back together at the end instead of following a single linear fashion.

[Reply #6 on:]

Kill Bill Volume 2:

Saw this the other night, and it was really good, but I didnt enjoy it as much as the first part. After watching this it becomes really evident that Miramax simply cut Tarintino's movie in 2, and I feel it suffers slightly because of it, almost like tuning into a TV show halfway through it screws with the narrative of the story, I would have hated to have been in there not seeing the first one.

Apart from that the movie was great, funny, action packed, and few events that you just dont see coming, pack that all together with a chinese version of Yoda and you have quite an enjoyable evening.

Go see this now, especially if you saw the first Volume.

[Reply #7 on:]

Tarantino says he had always seen it as a two parter. He didn't think he would get to make two films, so he evisioned it as having an interval. As luck would have it Miramax decided it would be better as two films.

[Reply #8 on:]

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

This is an excellent film and probably, with 'The Barbarian Invasions', the best of 2004 so far.
Chris Kaufman has once again done a fantastic job in writing the film. Although not as funny or interesting as 'Adaptation' is it definitely cleverer. It is directed very strongly with a good sense for timing in the film. The story does jump a little but it retains a very good sense of grounding.
The plot just carries you through superbly and really only ties up near the end with some truly brilliant use of bookend symmitry.
The stars in this film are superb. Jim Carrey does a great job as the loser Joel. Tom Wilkinson and Mark Ruffalo also perform well in supporting roles.

Overall, if you can stick with this film it is thoroughly worthwhile. All of you true film fans will find this a film a magnificently original one that stands out from all the crap that graces our screens.

[Reply #9 on:]

Hellboy
Really good movie-but it's too damned short! The movie would be up there with 'Spiderman' and 'Batman' in terms of how good it is if it had given a little more back story to Abe Sapien and the bad guys and the action scenes had been a tad longer (or maybe I'm just getting too damn used to watching 3 and-a-half hour long movies with 40 minute battle sequences...). Hopefully the sequel will explain those characters a little bit more, since it seems that at least Rasputin and the Nazi woman will be back for the sequel. And it better not just be called "Hellboy 2."
But props to Dark Horse Comics-HEADQUARTERED IN MILWAUKIE, OREGON! Home state boys! whoo!

[Reply #10 on:]

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King

I thought the 3rd movie was the best. At first i didnt know if i liked it better than Two Towers, but after a second viewing, i loved it even more.

[Reply #11 on:]

Mystery Men

Ok so I know that this flick is a few years old and indeed I first watched about 3 years ago. Though a week or so ago I bought the DVD for £3 and just re-watched it.
Wow it is really great huh? The acting from the entire cast is really good to exellent aswell as having a truely great script.

Anyway to anyone who hasent seen this I highly suggest this exellent flick!

[Reply #12 on:]

Harry Potter and The Sorcer's Stone
I decided to re-watch the first wo Harry's for the new film coming in June.
Anyway,this one was good.
The special effects was the best part of the film.The film did have a few good laghs,too.
It was great when the mail went all over the house.

The scenes at Hogwarts were amazing!
From the moving stars to the ghost that float around,it had so much imagination.
The only bad part of this one was Hermonie being to much about school.Like this line:

[

Hermonie:I'm going to bed before you get us both killed or worse  expeled[/b]

Grade:4/5

[Reply #13 on:]

Isnt it called 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'?

That movie was boring, stop boring everyone. The SFX were crap, and you know it - I mean, who the hell was scared by that monster? No one, thats who.

Try running a spell-check next time you post.

[Reply #14 on:]

 

Originally posted by Woodbot 2.0:

The special effects was the best part of the film.

You know something's wrong when the best part of a movie are the special effects.

[Reply #15 on:]

The best part about the Harry Potter films is Alnwick Castle 
Hey, if I still lived up near there perhaps I could have auditioned (can't spell) to be an extra!
Oh well...*sigh*

But seriously, I quite enjoy the HP films even though I haven't read any of the books. I do think the second one was better though.

[Reply #16 on:]

 

Originally posted by eggsandwich:
Isnt it called 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'?

In all the countries that count, it was Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

[Reply #17 on:]

 

Originally posted by Grim:
 In all the countries that count, it was Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

Which makes a lot more sense.  What the hell is a "sorcerer's stone" anyway?

[Reply #18 on:]

Merlin's kidney stone.

[Reply #19 on:]

I heard that they changed it to sorcerers in America because Ameican children would be too dumb to get their young heads around the word "philosopher".  Is their any truth in this?

[Reply #20 on:]

 

Originally posted by davierocks:
I heard that they changed it to sorcerers in America because Ameican children would be too dumb to get their young heads around the word "philosopher".  Is their any truth in this?

Now that would not surprise me although it'd make me laugh in a tragic kind of way if it were true.

[Reply #21 on:]

So I'm curious. Did they dub parts of the script? I mean the Philoshphers stone does appear in the film, so did they dub it so the characters said Sorcerers stone instead?

[Reply #22 on:]

That's the story I heard, davie.

@scarymonkeyman: They said "sorcerer" in our release.  The question is, who did the dubbing for whom?  I don't know.  Ask Chris Columbus.

[Reply #23 on:]

Shots in which they say the name were filmed twice, once with each name.

[Reply #24 on:]

The Majestic

It may be a Jim Carrey movie but it's damn good! It's a really touching storyline, set in the early 1950's. It makes you realise the extent of the actions taken by the House of Un-American activites and how false accusations ruined peoples carrers in the movies. Another great thing about the movie is the soundtrack, good old Big Band, you got to love it. All in all I'd give it 5/5. A missed hit.

[Reply #25 on:]

That movie showed the impossible;
Jim Carry has dignity.

[Reply #26 on:]

No, The Truman Show showed that.

[Reply #27 on:]

 

Originally posted by Mr. Potter:
No, The Truman Show showed that.

What's that?I've never heard of that movie before.   

[Reply #28 on:]

Woodbot, are you just kidding, or do you actually live under a rock in a cave on Mars with your eyes shut and your fingers in your ears?

[Reply #29 on:]

Nah, he's just an idiot.

I like davie's theory on why they have different Harry Potter titles. It makes sense, really.

[Reply #30 on:]

 

Originally posted by davierocks:
I heard that they changed it to sorcerers in America because Ameican children would be too dumb to get their young heads around the word "philosopher".  Is their any truth in this?

That, plus they changed a bunch of other "British" terms into American ones.  I'm just glad that Canada isn't included under the Blanket of Assumed Stupidity (which surprises me, really. Normally we get lumped in with then for all sorts of crazy crap). 

Oh, as this is a movie review thread: I saw Ghostbusters on TV last night, and boy... it sure is a thin line that separates the MST3K material from the classics, sometimes. This one is (thankfully) on the classic side. It's a fun movie, especially when you are watching with a little sister who can't decide to be scared or laugh. 

[Reply #31 on:]

 

Originally posted by Ranadok:
 That, plus they changed a bunch of other "British" terms into American ones.

True story: in the first two books, they called it "soccer."  In the second two, they called it "football."

British slang is the best slang ever, by the way.

[Reply #32 on:]

Gothika:
Saw this last night, I really enjoyed it probably's Halle Berry's best role yet. It was quite suspenseful and a touch on the scary side. One of my friends found it quite scary, where as I found it only shocking, not really all that scary.

Enjoyable with a good plot twist! A must see


On the topic of Jim Carrey, recently I saw his new movie, "Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind", like the Majestic it was a serious role and he was really good in it. The story is sort of told backwards and it makes for a very good watch!

[Reply #33 on:]

   

Originally posted by Coilette:
The Majestic

It may be a Jim Carrey movie

True
 

but it's damn good!

False!

that movie was about as manipulative as "Pay it Forward."  If we are talking mainstream sentimental Jim Carry movies, I like the Truman Show better. The best non-ass-talking Jim Carrey movie is "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." Now that is underappreciated.

RE: HP- The American books have illustrations at the chapter headings. I don't think the other books have those, or am I wrong. We like pictures!
------------------

award winning cuteness

[Reply #34 on:]

 

Originally posted by VelourFog:
RE: HP- The American books have illustrations at the chapter headings. I don't think the other books have those, or am I wrong. We like pictures!

Lister: "Hey, there's pictures in here."

Cat: "Yeah, that's another cat thing.  Sometimes we put pictures in the book that go along with the story.  We call that illustration."

Lister: "Yeah, Cat, we have those too."

Cat: "Wow, you monkeys are smarter than I thought."

[Reply #35 on:]

 

Originally posted by VelourFog:
   that movie was about as manipulative as "Pay it Forward."  If we are talking mainstream sentimental Jim Carry movies, I like the Truman Show better. The best non-ass-talking Jim Carrey movie is "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." Now that is underappreciated.

True, but I don't think ESOTSM is entirely underappreciated. It's already in the top 50 in the IMDB and its box office was decent for a film of this kind with almost one third of the theaters other movies get. It's also the highest grossing movie from Kaufman and it has made more money than The Majestic. But yeah, The Truman Show is still miles ahead in the box office.

And speaking of Kaufman:

Being John Malkovich

I watched this movie tonight and I was blown away. The visual style of the movie is subtle but interesting, the direction by Spike Jonze is excellent, the performances are superb (Malkovich is specially hilarious), and the script is unlike anything I've ever seen/read. I think this movie is better than Jonze/Kaufman's followup Adaptation (also a great movie). Anyway, if you haven't seen it, you're missing a lot. Now, I can't wait to watch ESOTSM.

[Reply #36 on:]

Well, I just dug out my DVD collection (of 2 discs) from under my piles of clothes and decided to give this movie another whirl:

The Shawshank Redemption
Flawless acting (Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman were awesome). Moody, and believable, atmosphere. Brilliant writing. In essense, one of the best movies ever made.

[Reply #37 on:]

Just saw Pieces of April and I liked it a lot.
Liked the story, the trashy hand camera style and the actors.
Didn't know Katie Holmes could be taken seriously as a real actress...

[Reply #38 on:]

I've just been to see Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind .
Now I'm not saying that it was a bad film, really I'm not, I quite enjoyed it, however I did not go in in the right state of mind. Because... well lets face it, it's Jim Carrey, whenever anybody thinks of him it is about the comedy that he's done... rather than the serious stuff, not that i dislike the serious stuff, I really like the serious stuff, but well... As I said I didn't go in with the right state of mind.
Aside from that, and the intense complexity of the chronlogical order of events I thought this was a really good film. 8 out of 10, or thereabouts.

[Reply #39 on:]

Mean Girls

I was given the choice to see this or 13 Going On 30, so I went with this one soley becuse Tina Fey wrote it.  I think I made the right choice.

The film is actually clever, sharp and funny.  the actors are all pretty good (sure, most of them are probably not playing to far from themselves, but still...).  It's kinda like Heathers, but without the killing.

Grade: B