1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Anyone seen any good movies lately?

Discussion in 'All other topics' started by Ag3ntNe0, Apr 19, 2005.

  1. rihgt682

    rihgt682 Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    HEy don't be fooled by trailers.. Like the movie hell boy man the trailer was awsonem.. But the movie sucked ass. Some of the trailer sucked but the movie is good. But the Fan 4 looks like it's fun. I can't wait for the island. Has anyone seen the trailer yet?
     
  2. Stitch221

    Stitch221 Regular member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Yeah I like Marvel Movies. Espesially Spider Man
     
  3. Nephilim

    Nephilim Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2003
    Messages:
    13,161
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    116
    Oh, hell yeah it was! Denzel was one cold calculating mofo in that film plus it had a great story :)
     
  4. creaky

    creaky Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    27,900
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    96
    man on fire got me all riled up, what i mean is i could identify with the determination he had to do what he needed to do, to rescue the little girl. Fantastic film, it's just the ending was daft, i don't agreee with the way he gave himself up to the bad guys in the trade, cus they could have just shot him and gone after the girl & her mom. Well Denzil died anyway and they could still have got the kid & her mom. That's where i think he should have tricked them and blown 'em all up or something. Ah well still a great film.

    Another fave of mine is Last Samurai, also Kill Bill movies, i like films where bad guys get what they deserve
     
  5. aabbccdd

    aabbccdd Guest

    [bold]SAW[/bold] has been one of my faves this year too WOW what an ending .seems like people really like the movie or they dont like it at all. i think it was filmed in like 18 days ,so iam sure it made money. and word is there working on the second one.
     
  6. creaky

    creaky Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    27,900
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    96
    SAW was ok, not great, i thought. what spoils films like that for me, is from the get go i suspected one of the 2 guys of being a plant. I can't remember the plot exactly now but for me, my own opinion of how the film would pan out, spoilt it for me, it's like one of those films where i knew what was gonna happen so i enjoyed it less than i might have done. (that's more a fault of mine than the film though!)
     
  7. p4_tt

    p4_tt Active member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    I thought man on fire took a while to get into it but after that I thought it was great, staying on DW The Manchurian Candidate was a very good movie. Watched Mr & Mrs Smith the other day that was also good. SAW was a cracking movie, the ending was very Surprising.
     
  8. creaky

    creaky Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    27,900
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    96
    am looking forward to Mrs Smith, but i'll be honest it's just (hubba hubba) Angelina that i'm looking forward to. But i suspect i'll enjoy the film anyway. There's a few due out in UK that i wanna see, ie Batman Begins, Fantastic 4, Madagascar, War of the Worlds and i'm sure there's more.


    A fantastic film i just watched again was Spirited Away (2001), beautiful film, and the kids adore it too. Now we're watching Secondhand Lions again, another top film
     
  9. deezp1

    deezp1 Regular member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Second hand Lions was a great film, I honestly didnt want to see it, but I have to admit the only reason why I saw it was because it was the first place you could of saw the LOTR: Return of the King trailer. So I was one of the freaks who bought a ticket to see a preview, but thank god it was a good movie with great storytelling
     
  10. rihgt682

    rihgt682 Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    I loved the secondhand lion. It was very good movie. I thought walking tall and punisher was good.
     
  11. MoZo1

    MoZo1 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2005
  12. rihgt682

    rihgt682 Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    I just watched notebook. It was ok.
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2005
  13. romero

    romero Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Answer to the question: No.

    I'm beginning to be really sad and frustrated: I've been hardcore movie collector and watcher for many years (focused mostly on 60'-80's horror and sleaze) and movies has always been the most important hobby for me - along with video games. Earlier I got lots of pleasure about them but lately I've started to notice that every movie I've watched has been some kind of disappointments, I can't say that all of them has been bad ones but they just don't wake any emotions in me - they all feel the same. I've tried to find reasons for this and it feels like movies won't give anything to me anymore, they just take from me in the form of spended time for watching them, gathering information, trying to find rarities and specific versions etc., and I've been seriously thinking about leaving this hobby and putting my collection for sale if situation doesn't change. It feels bad but if my interesting for them doesn't come back there's no reason to continue this, at least as seriously it has been.

    Making this little bit more exact I don't watch much new movies because most of them just doesn't match my taste at all. There's some expectations which have been or might be interesting, like Sin City which I haven't seen yet, but most of 90's or newer movies are just worthless crap. Almost all remakes which seems to became trend nowadays (like ones from original asian horror movies for example) have been just bunch of crap, and I hate from bottom of my heart all glittering and CGI-filled Michael Bay action romps Hollywood spits out. There haven't been many really original movies for a long time, movie industry has became some kind of mass manufacturing lab.
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2005
  14. Toiletman

    Toiletman Active member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Maybe you're becoming more cynical. It's just the way things are, the oldies will always have a different attitude towards the newbies. But sooner or later true orginality, not variation of ideas, but TRUE orginality will not exist except for those who are slightly insane.

     
  15. romero

    romero Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Toiletman: Yeah, you might be close. Maybe it's about tolerance for quality of the movies, which might be grown so high in my case that only very few movies can match it anymore. There is indeed lots of older films I would like to have, but they are impossible for me to get as originals (which I prefer) because of certain reasons so I can't get them on my hands and it annoys me even more.
     
  16. rihgt682

    rihgt682 Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    I just watched house of flying dagger. It was ok. I liked the computer effect of throwing knife that was cool. I don't relly like thoes kinds movie like hero, that was horrible.
     
  17. VideoBob

    VideoBob Regular member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26

    I saw War of the Worlds on the day it was released and hated it so much I decided to be quiet until others had a chance. I call it this season's first "Must miss" movie.

    On one promotion, it was called "Tom Cruise's best performance to date." While, this would not be hard to achieve, I think his range in this one was somewhere around half an octave. In the beginning, you didn't care for him much, but you weren't supposed to. However, as the movie progressed, I learned to dislike him a *LOT* and that is just not what is supposed to happen with a protagonist. The term "character development" never comes into play in this howler. I agree that the little girl was the closest thing we get to an actor in this movie--and her best scene was when she didn't want her dad to watch her pee.

    His character was a self-centered shallow dock worker whose personal growth and development was limited pretty much to killing a guy with his bare hands and acting as if he *might* (but probably doesn't) give a damn about his children in the end. Pretty much the only thing he did for the entire movie was *RUN AWAY* and he didn't even do that well. At least Gene Barry was trying to find a way to stop these things, in the original movie. This version lacked a single scientist or politician. All efforts were small-scale military and minor. None of the characters we followed made a gnat's ass of a difference to the situation at all. This was evidently produced from the reality TV school of science fiction.

    Over and above the fact that this was a movie that did *NOT* need to be remade, if I *did* remake it, I would chose someone like Quentin Tarantino to do it--since he is far more of the Orson Welles creative bent than Steven "High-tech Disney movies" Spielberg. Why Spielberg thought he could substitute special effects for H. G. Welles' superb writing is beyond me--but he definitely couldn't.

    Even throwing in an almost-obligatory knock-off of George Lucas' Imperial Walkers--and have then do transformer gyrations reminiscent of SPACEBALLS--didn't do anything to save this picture. And it was *so* predictable, that I spent the entire movie aggravating the people around me by flawlessly predicting what was going to happen next. In fact, I predicted the almost-obligatory Spielberg/Disney feel-good maudlin ending nearly twenty minutes early.

    Other than the very basic framework that allows them to keep the name:

    [Skip the next paragraph if you are under four or have lived in a sensory-deprivation box all of your life, and are not familiar with the original WotW. It might act as a spoiler for you.]

    (three-legged aliens invade the earth in three-legged machines that are impervious to anything that modern technology can throw at them, until--at the moment it looks like all is lost--they are defeated through no act of man, but by microscopic bacteria.)

    ....Spielberg kept almost nothing else from the book or original movie--*except* dedicating nearly twenty minutes to the farmhouse scene that he had to Disnify up with a couple of kiddies and a *lot* more repetitive pseudo-suspense scenes that seemed to drag on forever and challenge even the most willing suspension of disbelief.

    Time and time and time again, the viewer is asked to forgo even the minutest modicum of logic and reason and believe motivations and actions--let alone entire scenarios--that the average five-year-old would be able to see through, if presented as real. I'll list a very few of them that shouldn't act as spoilers for anyone:
    * The aliens send massive bolts of energy into the ground creating a bit of
    a hole, and yet the rocks around it are *icy cold*--and nobody gets around
    to even a minor guess as to how that could be.

    * These bolts disable every electronic device and automobile in New
    York--except the one Tom Cruise happens to have handy, simply because it had
    a bad starter relay when the EMPs hit. No other car that was off at the
    time appears to be usable.

    * There is an open line of travel around a zillion stalled cars, rubble, and
    bodies, from Tom Cruise's house all the out of New York, and many miles up
    the freeway--in spite of a vast quantity of stalled vehicles (which were
    theoretically moving at highway speeds when the EMP hit) all along his path.
    He never has to stop, or even slow down, the entire way.

    * Further hits of the energy bolts never took out the now fully-functional
    automobile.

    * During the entire journey through the streets of New York, and out beyond
    the stalled vehicles on the highway, never once did they run across anyone
    who tried to stop them and take their car. I commented on this at the time.
    It was only *much* later that Spielberg decided that this might be a likely
    occurrence--and he handled it extremely poorly even then (I won't go into
    that, because it would be a spoiler).

    * Everywhere Cruise went, there were great masses of people, all going in
    the same direction. This was *almost* believable when he was fleeing the
    city of New York, but once out in the country, people would be just as
    likely to be headed in one direction as another.

    * What was *really* unbelievable was, as much as *everyone* was fleeing New
    York, which was a large city, invaded by mechanical monsters, they *all*
    appeared to be going to Boston--which was also a large city, *just* as
    invaded by mechanical monsters.

    * Machines that were *completely* unaffected by *all* conventional weaponry
    for 95% of the movie, suddenly became vulnerable to the lightest hand-held
    and shoulder-launched weaponry, just because their operators were ill.

    * Spielberg apparently didn't think the original plot and message were
    obvious enough (or he knew that he had screwed them up beyond recognition),
    so he gave away the ending in the opening credits and then had the narrator
    beat us to death with the obvious, again, for the final credits.

    ...and there is much, MUCH, more, just as bad.

    I only paid $3.00 to see this turkey--less than the average DVD rental--and I still felt like asking for my money back.

    On the other hand, I paid $7.00 to see CINDERELLA MAN yesterday, and got more than my money's worth.

    What a difference a little acting, directing, and writing can make! There must be two guys name Welles spinning in their graves, this week.

    bob
     
  18. aabbccdd

    aabbccdd Guest

    thanks i was going to go see it now i will probably just wait on the dvd to come out.

    Has anyone seen [bold]Crash[/bold]? heard it was good
     
  19. romero

    romero Regular member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    If you mean David Cronenberg's Crash, it's definetely worth of watching like all other movies directed by Cronenberg too: He has really unique and dark visions (reaching the highest stages in Videodrome) which might be even very disturbing for some viewers, but his movies are also very fascinating at the same time. I'd suggest that you should also read J.G. Ballard's original novel, they are very different pieces of art but both of them are very interesting ones and worth of checking out.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2005
  20. Toiletman

    Toiletman Active member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    I saw Batman Begins. Loved the way they potrayed Batman, one of my favourite movies of the year and one of the best of my short 15 year life. And Christian Bale was absolutely entertaining to watch, as usual. In fact, Christian Bale should play every superhero movie that wants to stand a chance at being a good movie. =P

    Next up is War of The Worlds, Fantastic Four, and Land of the Dead. (Yes, I'm going to watch a zombie movie for the umpteenth time)

     

Share This Page