Films: Rate and Discuss

[Solaris]

Law Abiding Citizen - 8/10

It was cool. The ending was rather dull though, I was expecting more.

You're joking right? 8/10?! I watched the first hour or so then walked out, it was by far the stupidest biggest piece of shit I've seen in quite a while.

Case in point, they bring him out of prison to beat him up out of site, something like that could never and would never happen.

The whole films a load of shit, really your taste is terrible.

 

[stemot]

The whole films a load of shit, really your taste is terrible.

Nice to see the tolerance of other peoples opinions is still as low as ever.

 

[Lucid]

Seriously.
Hurr, because when we're watching films we always worry whether or not our taste will be accepted on the hl2net forums. :upstare:

Way to make yourself look like a pompous twat.

And stop trying to be like Samon, you can't replace him.

 

[Solaris]

Seriously.
Hurr, because when we're watching films we always worry whether or not our taste will be accepted on the hl2net forums. :upstare:

Way to make yourself look like a pompous twat.

And stop trying to be like Samon, you can't replace him.

I don't ask you to agree with me. You guys are free to tell us what you like, and I'm free to tell the OP his taste is awful.

And I hold it against him, he is the lowest common denominator market sharewise, it's why intelligent films never make much money and so we all get left with Hollywood trash.

 

[kupocake]

If you think someone's taste isn't up to much, that's absolutely fine. But there are more diplomatic ways of getting that across.

 

[stemot]

I don't ask you to agree with me. You guys are free to tell us what you like, and I'm free to tell the OP his taste is awful.

And I hold it against him, he is the lowest common denominator market sharewise, it's why intelligent films never make much money and so we all get left with Hollywood trash.

Oh FFS.

 

[PvtRyan]

I don't ask you to agree with me. You guys are free to tell us what you like,

Yes, that's what we call an "opinion".

and I'm free to tell the OP his taste is awful.

That, however, is a factual claim, not an opinion. It's also a personal attack, rather than an attack on the film itself.

 

[Sheepo]

Pretentiousness works both ways. The Samon being obnoxious eventually just becomes a tool that the Stemot uses to validate his own opinions based on pretentious antagonism alone. Rather than intelligent discussion we have an everwidening split between those who look down their noses and those who roll their eyes.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Personally I think people just take things way too hard around here. Maybe just accept that people think you have shitty opinions every once in a while without packing a sad about 'subjectivity' every goddamn time. I do.

Anyway, usually when I see people saying something like "YOU'RE WRONG" over a movie opinion, I assume it's meant mostly in jest. Whether or not they're right is another matter entirely.

Inception

Had to watch this a couple times for everything to click, but yeah, it's pretty dern good. I think where it fails is that you never really get the sense that they're actually in a dream, it's just the movie world's interpretation of dreaming, which comes off as a bit too rigid. To me, it essentially felt like this generation's Matrix - everything is very slick and cool, but much of the sense of wonder or adventure you'd except from the scenario is absent, and ultimately it's much more style than substance. Which is perfectly okay when the style happens to be this enjoyable.

Dylan Moran - What It Is and also Louis CK - Hilarious

I like these people they are good at saying things which are funny and insightful. Mostly about penises.

 

[PvtRyan]

Dylan Moran - What It Is and also Louis CK - Hilarious

I like these people they are good at saying things which are funny and insightful. Mostly about penises.

I think Louis CK is the only person in the world who can talk about how his infant daughter was lying spread eagle naked on the floor and somehow still be funny.

 

[JUL3]

really your taste is terrible.

You're a tard, I'm terribly f*cking sorry my taste in film doesn't overlap with yours.

 

[Sparta]

Inception

Had to watch this a couple times for everything to click, but yeah, it's pretty dern good. I think where it fails is that you never really get the sense that they're actually in a dream, it's just the movie world's interpretation of dreaming, which comes off as a bit too rigid. To me, it essentially felt like this generation's Matrix - everything is very slick and cool, but much of the sense of wonder or adventure you'd except from the scenario is absent, and ultimately it's much more style than substance. Which is perfectly okay when the style happens to be this enjoyable.

I agree with just about everything here except for it being good and that The Matrix is far far superior. I'm of the unpopular opinion that the film is mediocre at best, and god-awful at its worst. All because of it's awful, awful script. Nolan works himself into a corner by having to establish all these rules for an hour and a half, only to break all of them and establish more rules once the "heist" starts.

I expected some exposition in the film, especially when dealing with such a convoluted setup, but Nolan then goes even further and has Leo incessantly talk about his guilt as if it somehow isn't obvious from the way he's behaving, especially in the near final scene of the film (you know the one). My god that was just awful. I just can't believe the same guy who made that film, made The Dark Knight.

Then there is the James Bond stuff, and the fact that everyone except Saito is invincible and barely gets so much as a scratch... the more I remember about the film, the less I like it. The "heist" is enjoyable but not enough to make it worthwhile for me.

I'm not having a dig at you by the way. I came in here to post a review of that film and saw your opinion, and agreed with a lot and yada yada here we are.

Louis CK is awesome though. You seen his show?

 

[Qonfused]

Louis CK is awesome though. You seen his show?

So good.

 

[Sparta]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLOO9xtFTIU

 

[Bad^Hat]

I'm not having a dig at you by the way.

Phew.

I agree with pretty much everything you said, especially about how they establish the 'rules' and how awkward some of the exposition is, I just managed to enjoy everything else enough to outweigh that I guess. Usually this kind of thing would bother me more.

And no, haven't seen his show, only clips. Looks more awkward than anything, gives me a big Curb Your Enthusiasm vibe, which I wasn't huge a fan of. Will check it out sooner or later, anyway.

 

[Dan]

I don't ask you to agree with me. You guys are free to tell us what you like, and I'm free to tell the OP his taste is awful.

And I hold it against him, he is the lowest common denominator market sharewise, it's why intelligent films never make much money and so we all get left with Hollywood trash.

I am glad that we can voice our opinions freely here without any concern about being polite or considerate. In that case, you are being an asshat Solaris. That is my opinion, and I voice it freely.

 

[Sheepo]

The Matrix is far far superior.

I wasn't crazy about Inception either, but that's ****ing loco right there.

 

[Asknoone]

Rather than intelligent discussion we have an everwidening split between those who look down their noses and those who roll their eyes.

And I've worked very hard to get it that way!

 

[Sparta]

I wasn't crazy about Inception either, but that's ****ing loco right there.

I'm not talking about the whole trilogy, I mean just The Matrix, the first film. I think it really is far, far superior.

It has an actual bad guy for one (and an awesome one at that, until the sequels ruined him)

The protagonists (half of whom, actually die) are actually up against antagonists more powerful than them, that can shoot and can reincarnate almost instantly, as opposed to an infinite number of cardboard cutout baddies from the StormTrooper School of Marksmanship.

The stakes are massively higher in The Matrix and add more to the tension. Saving humanity VS Getting kids back or being stuck in Limbo...

Spoiler

...until they can remember it's Limbo

The Matrix actually has multiple memorable fight scenes, reveals and set pieces (the real world reveal when he wakes up, the "battery" monologue, the lobby, the subway, the dojo, the helicopter, half the film is memorable) whereas I feel Inception only has the hallway fight and the world bending in half that stands out to me.

Seriously, I could keep on going for a while, but I think that get's my reasoning across pretty well about why I think it's better.

 

[Bad^Hat]

I'm not talking about the whole trilogy, I mean just The Matrix, the first film. I think it really is far, far superior.

It has an actual bad guy for one (and an awesome one at that, until the sequels ruined him)

The protagonists (half of whom, actually die) are actually up against antagonists more powerful than them, that can shoot and can reincarnate almost instantly, as opposed to an infinite number of cardboard cutout baddies from the StormTrooper School of Marksmanship.

Completely agree.

I'm not really sure which I prefer, as Matrix is one of the fondest memories of my adolescence as far as movies go. Kind of hard to be objective about it.

Edit: That said, I was only really comparing them on a thematic level. They're pretty different movies when you get down to it.

 

[Sheepo]

I'm not talking about the whole trilogy, I mean just The Matrix, the first film. I think it really is far, far superior.

It has an actual bad guy for one (and an awesome one at that, until the sequels ruined him)

The protagonists (half of whom, actually die) are actually up against antagonists more powerful than them, that can shoot and can reincarnate almost instantly, as opposed to an infinite number of cardboard cutout baddies from the StormTrooper School of Marksmanship.

The stakes are massively higher in The Matrix and add more to the tension. Saving humanity VS Getting kids back or being stuck in Limbo...

Spoiler

...until they can remember it's Limbo

The Matrix actually has multiple memorable fight scenes, reveals and set pieces (the real world reveal when he wakes up, the "battery" monologue, the lobby, the subway, the dojo, the helicopter, half the film is memorable) whereas I feel Inception only has the hallway fight and the world bending in half that stands out to me.

Seriously, I could keep on going for a while, but I think that get's my reasoning across pretty well about why I think it's better.

Well yeah, obviously this conversation would not be worth having if I thought you were talking about the whole trilogy; I would just report you to the opinion police and they would condemn you to a slow and painful death.

Your problem here is that you're trying to compare the two movies as simple sci-fi action movies, which is wrong, because even in the general sense where they can possibly be described that way, they exist in two very different veins of that genre. The Matrix... well, I have a hard time criticizing the Matrix, mostly because of how much I liked it when I was a kid and the fact that it really was rather groundbreaking. The first reason the Matrix is compared to Inception is because they're both associated with the idea of dreaming. This comparison is shallow because in the Matrix, the idea of a simulated world is really only the means to an end, the end being a sci-fi action hero's journey. 20 minutes in the dream world has already been explained, understood, and accepted. After that you may just as well be watching any movie about any band of ordinary people resisting against an incredibly superior tyrannical force. Neo casts aside his meaningful life, accepts his role as a hero, gets the girl, etc. The best unique meaning to be taken from it is striving for spiritual fulfillment in a world obsessed with shallow material gratification. It's not bad, it's not great. It executes its specific purpose very well. The acting is okay, the action is, well looking back, it's really not so much great as it is flashy and impressive, the plot is serviceable, the effects are great.

Inception is whole different story. Where the Matrix pleases, Inception challenges. The very nature of the movie forces us to ask questions, both technical and thematic: Is this a dream? How much can these thieves control? What is real? How much can be taken for granted? Is ignorance bliss? Unlike the Matrix, Inception doesn't go "Yep, this is a dream, that ain't. This guy's evil and Kobb's wife was wrong." Nope, we're allowed to determine our own values and what the movie means to us, rather than getting the good guy beating the bad guy and getting home in time for tea. As you said, the Matrix has an "actual bad guy" (though I don't know how awesome he was. He's a thoughtless and emotionless destructive machine. He is, almost by definition, a robot.), while Inception's characters oppose what is honestly a rather sympathetic character. Yes, Inception's protagonists are ****ing criminals, who, no matter how harmless their methods are, are in the business of sophisticated theft, a business the audience is meant to cheer in. We are given real characters, who suffer from psychological problems and self doubt.

I'm not saying Inception is perfect. I think the premise is just a little too big to pull off effectively, and it suffers from too much necessary exposition. The acting isn't amazing and none of the character's are flushed out fully (except for Fischer, which I think is a testament to the incredible potential of this idea. Character's defined by architectural constructions of their own psyche. Soooo cool). The plot's pretty good, but like I said, when the script is so bogged down with explanation of everything, it really never comes off right. But that's what Inception is. It aims high, it comes out somewhere below it's mark. And the Matrix aims lower and hits it's mark. Yes, as a standard action movie, scene for scene, the Matrix will win. But it's not really trying to be a standard action movie and thank god, because I don't really need another Matrix.

 

[Sparta]

I'm not saying Inception is perfect. I think the premise is just a little too big to pull off effectively, and it suffers from too much necessary exposition. The acting isn't amazing and none of the character's are flushed out fully (except for Fischer, which I think is a testament to the incredible potential of this idea. Character's defined by architectural constructions of their own psyche. Soooo cool). The plot's pretty good, but like I said, when the script is so bogged down with explanation of everything, it really never comes off right. But that's what Inception is. It aims high, it comes out somewhere below it's mark. And the Matrix aims lower and hits it's mark.

Yeah definitely. The Matrix is a lot more clear cut and less ambiguous, it doesn't ask as many "big" questions as Inception appears to, whereas Inception wants the audience to question everything. I don't think that necessarily works out too well though for Inception, because in order for people to be sucked into a film they need to care about the characters first and foremost and having them ask intelligent questions gets them picking threads at the plotholes in the film and they can become distracted with them (like I was) and begin noticing more flaws in the film. That doesn't mean I think films shouldn't try to be smart, I just don't think Inception pulled that off well.

They are still two high concept science fiction (in Hollywood terms anyway) action films, and by action or thriller standards I think Inception is weaker and less entertaining because the protagonists are overpowered and never up against a challenge or a threat that is greater than them, so there is a lack of tension and little thrill to it. The only guy who seems to have his hands full and having trouble in the film is the Indian guy. After all, they can shape-shift and alters their weapons with thoughts, change gravity and create the worlds they go through and none of the henchmen their up against can't even aim to begin with. Well, one can. That's it.

It's a great concept, but I think if Nolan changed the actual character development so those scenes weren't told through expositional narration ("I told my wife this, I told my wife that, she didn't believe me") and montages but were allowed to act out in front of us through a flashback or seeing them in Cobb's psyche (if I remember right, only one scene sort of does this), that would be a huge improvement over the film already.

Anyway, them's my two cents.

Tron Legacy

Genuinely good. The film is shot with genuine consideration given to the widescreen cinematography (thank god), none of that shakey-cam perpetual close-up nonsense that only Paul Greengrass can pull off.

Awesome art design, it's got Jeff Bridges (two of him) so that's automatically good. Great soundtrack especially the Daft Punk stuff and excellent vfx with the exception of Young Jeff Bridges who is more of a distraction than anything else and rarely convincing. Bit off more than they could chew with that one.

Iffy dialogue and direction in the beginning had me worried (particularly the opening sequence which is Michael Bay stuff only shot and edited better), but once Sam gets onto the Grid, that disappears and the action and film improve dramatically. Good stuff. Slight pacing issues towards the end, would've liked to have seen one or two of the (rather brief and rare) hand-to-hand scenes go on for a bit longer, but it's good.

3 - 3.5/5

 

[Warped]

The Beach 8/10

this was a decent movie, at times a bit annoying like the video game scene...but I like Leo so this worked out for me well. i have so much snow here a beach movie is what the doctor ordered

 

[stintage]

Exit Through The Gift Shop- 8/10

Never before have I wanted to vandalise this badly.

 

[Sheepo]

Yeah definitely. The Matrix is a lot more clear cut and less ambiguous, it doesn't ask as many "big" questions as Inception appears to, whereas Inception wants the audience to question everything. I don't think that necessarily works out too well though for Inception, because in order for people to be sucked into a film they need to care about the characters first and foremost and having them ask intelligent questions gets them picking threads at the plotholes in the film and they can become distracted with them (like I was) and begin noticing more flaws in the film. That doesn't mean I think films shouldn't try to be smart, I just don't think Inception pulled that off well.

They are still two high concept science fiction (in Hollywood terms anyway) action films, and by action or thriller standards I think Inception is weaker and less entertaining because the protagonists are overpowered and never up against a challenge or a threat that is greater than them, so there is a lack of tension and little thrill to it. The only guy who seems to have his hands full and having trouble in the film is the Indian guy. After all, they can shape-shift and alters their weapons with thoughts, change gravity and create the worlds they go through and none of the henchmen their up against can't even aim to begin with. Well, one can. That's it.

It's a great concept, but I think if Nolan changed the actual character development so those scenes weren't told through expositional narration ("I told my wife this, I told my wife that, she didn't believe me") and montages but were allowed to act out in front of us through a flashback or seeing them in Cobb's psyche (if I remember right, only one scene sort of does this), that would be a huge improvement over the film already.

Anyway, them's my two cents.

I actually really liked the way Cobb's character was explored in Inception. I don't think any one scene was a direct flashback in the general sense of the word, although they are pretty much exactly that for all practical purposes. I just don't think there was enough exploration of other characters, and I don't think Leo pulled it off as well as he could've. As before, I think, THE BAD GUYS WERE NOT TOUGH ENOUGH is sort of silly problem to have with a movie. Firstly, I thought they were plenty tough and I was pretty afraid that anyone of them might bite the dust. Secondly, fighting off the bad guys is not the main conflict, it's Cobb dealing with his wife, convincing Fischer to change his view on his father, whether Saito will keep his sanity. Them's my two cents.

Scrooged 7.5/10

Well, it sometimes takes the physical comedy annoyingly far and the live broadcast scene goes on a little too long, but hey, Bill Murray.

 

[Sparta]

Fair enough. But writing off that criticism of lack of antagonism in the film as me saying the baddies weren't tough enough is simplifying it far too much. I can see how people could think they were up against plenty of odds, but I personally didn't think so at all. The only part I thought anyone was having trouble with was Cobb and his wife.

Anywho, has anyone seen Tangled? I hear it's surprisingly good and not god-awful like the trailers make it out to be.

 

[morgs]

Skyline - 0/10

Just...wow. What a waste of $16.00.

 

[Warbie]

I'm in the Sparta camp in regards to Inception, and am finding it hard to pinpoint what didn't quite click. On paper it's my ideal movie, but I never got invested, or felt excited, or really cared beyond mild curiosity about what would happen. The deep dreamworld stuff was the most interesting part - the blurring or what's real and it's addictive qualities - and it's a shame we got some rather average action scenes rather than exploring this.

The Matrix poos on Inception from a great height.

 

[Sulkdodds]

The problem with Inception is diagnosed within the movie itself. Cobb's mate Gordon-Levitt is shooting out of a window when the suave British one comes along and says "don't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling." Then he pulls out a grenade launcher. The movie's idea of 'dreaming bigger' is weapon slot #7 rather than slot #4 on the keyboard layout of a generic early-noughties first-person shooter. Just so, comparisons to videogames need not end at the film's concept of 'designing' virtual worlds for virtual conflicts. Most of its environments and action sequences look like they're lifted from a videogame, not an interesting, dreamlike one (Zeno Clash) but a competent, derivative, unimaginative one (Soldier of Fortune): snowbound military bases, empty cities, warehouses, alleyways. Very little in the film resembles a dream, though the long squeeze through that crack in Marrakech is a nightmarish exception, and perhaps if I return to the snow-base sequence I'll realise it's structured like on of those dreams where you experience a series of irritating niggles that eventually stop you from getting what you want to get. You know, you're trying to have sex with your sister and all the places you try to take her too are flooded or full of people or they smell or whatever, and then she's like I dunno, and you're like come on, we can find somewhere, and so on and so forth. In terms of interest, there's the nested climaxes, the long plunge off the bridge, the hallway fight (which left me a little cold) and the world rolling up into a ball. That's about it.

This lack of imagination is compounded in two areas. Firstly, the script: it's rubbish. All characters other than Cobb are composed of flat and empty platitudes, and while I appreciate the difficulty of writing a movie with so much to explain, one could at least attempt to explain things in an interesting way. There's no zing, no crackle, no references to Freud, and certainly little humour that doesn't fall flat on its face. The second problem is the direction: it's boring. I would have to watch it again to be sure, but I don't remember anything to impress me in the director's work. The best description I've read of Nolan's direction is that it's borderline autistic. He's clinical without being clear, slow without being thoughtful, dull and static; he fails at creating strong oppositions or a sense of space, and I never got any clear impressions of the structure of his sequences. That, perhaps, is quite dreamlike, but not in a good way, not in a way that is exciting or challenging or revelatory but in a way that's rather pedestrian.

There are exceptions to all of this, but usually they prove the rule. At many points it's held aloft only by two things: its actors and its ideas. The former all do very good jobs with the material they're given, adding extra dimensions (or intimations of them) to their allotted 1. The latter are interesting enough in theory to sustain a movie that never quite exercises them or exploits their full potential. It doesn't help that the whole thing's so absolutely serious. It's almost completely po-faced. It has a few over-obvious jokes but it never plays, never lets loose. It has no texture to it. It's monotone. It drones. I know this is a difficult criticism to agree with because it's a bit weird and vague, but I hope someone sees what I mean. It's not a bad movie. Perhaps I'm overreacting. At the very least it has a competent core in the relationship between Cobb and his wife; what happened to them is genuinely interesting, genuinely chilling, a rare example of the dark/guilty past that actually lives up to its diagetic hype. I just don't think the film is worthy of the high acclaim that's been heaped on it, and perhaps that's the reason I'm so harsh. I would probably give it 3 stars out of 5 if I was reviewing it for a magazine that practiced such a system.

The Matrix has its own flaws (again script problems, and a shitty love story) but it's more visually interesting and has proper fun with the concepts it introduces. That's one reason why the sequels came off as such irrelevant guff - the first film had covered most of the good angles, so they had to introduce nonsense like the Architect and replicating Smiths.

 

[Asknoone]

I agree with Dodds in some respects and I think the criticism is fair (except for the script being rubbish, that is not at all fair), but those problems didn't hamper my first (and second) viewing. From the off-set I took the drab, clinical nature of Inception's dreamworld to be a representation of how the characters chose to interact with it. It's of no surprise that Cobb's drama with the ghost of his wife is the driving interest; everything else is a manipulated and tweaked puppet-show for the purpose corporate espionage. It's a dream that's manufactured with a purpose, and that purpose is theft. And that's how I embarked on the rest of the film. And I kind of liked it, a lot.

Oh, and did the action bore me? Yeah, but the action sequences in Nolan films always bore me. The only one I have really enjoyed is the climax to TDK - Batman versus the SWAT team. Inception was at its most exciting when Gordon-Levitt's character was trying to figure out a way to trigger the kick.

 

[Warbie]

That's pretty much what I was trying to put my finger on, Sulk. The folding city near the beginning promised a great deal and we end up with sub par Bond action sequences.

 

[joule]

Tron: Legacy - 8.6/10
IMAX 3D - 9.3/10
Daft Punk musical score - 9.5/10

An exciting thrill ride with a brain. A lot of critics dislike the implausibility of the Tron films, but they don't realize that the new-age techno-mysticism is what makes Tron such good sci-fi fantasy. I loved the way the system was imbued with the aspects of its creators in the first one, and I love the way this one contrasts a programmer "creating" life and life actually coming into being. Jeff Bridges is always awesome and Olivia Wilde is hot.

I have seen only a small number of 3D films but The Grid here is scaringly well made. The first hour is sublime, with a nice Gotham-like feeling and tension building up nicely. Then comes the part where you'll be blown away by the 3D. If you were impressed by the 3D in Avatar, you shouldn't hesitate. Like the original movie, Legacy was made to push the boundaries of technology in cinema. It succeeds. The film is a special effects spectacle to behold, and it's deserving of Academy Award nominations in visual effects, costume design, and art direction. While not as innovative or charming as the first film, it's still a pretty wonderful sight to behold, and one of the rare instances where the 3D feels right. The film lightly touches on some sort of existential ideas, but a more thoughtful script could have made things more intelligent and emotionally involving. Weakness of the script aside, I was drawn into the story and won over by the visuals and soundscape. It's flashy 'n' modern but it's still Tron.

 

[Lucid]

Oh man, thanks for the morale boost, Joule.
I've been dying to see the movie all year but the critics have been tearing it a new one and it just about put me off.
But then again, critics seem to expect every film to test to push their intellect to the maximum.

It's just too bad that the nearest IMAX is an hour and a half away so I may have to settle with a regular theater.

 

[JUL3]

Dawn Treader was probably the most disappointing film adaption of a fantasy book I've ever seen. Including Eragon.

 

[MJ12]

Tron: Legacy 6.5/10

It's pretty much what you will expect- visually beautiful, great sound, terrible dialogue, weak plot, and lots of exciting action. Definitely worth seeing just for how pretty it is.

Tron: Legacy - 8.6/10
IMAX 3D - 9.3/10

Whatttt

 

[Asknoone]

Dawn Treader was probably the most disappointing film adaption of a fantasy book I've ever seen. Including Eragon. Sorry.

The trailer was horrible.

 

[Lucid]

Dawn Treader was probably the most disappointing film adaption of a fantasy book I've ever seen. Including Eragon. Sorry.

Uh... what are you talking about?

 

[Sparta]

I agree with Dodds in some respects and I think the criticism is fair (except for the script being rubbish, that is not at all fair)

I think that criticism is more than fair. Ignoring the problem all the exposition causes (which was inevitable for something as convoluted as the dreamworld), look at the dialogue between Cobb and his wife, or Cobb and Ellen Paige's character.

"She had herself diagnosed as sane by three seperate psychiatrists, so that I could never prove how truly insane she really was".

That's an actual line from the film.

In the climatic scene between Cobb and his wife, he is actually asked how he felt about what he did to his wife, by his wife, and he replies that he felt guilty. Of course he does, we've been able to tell that since halfway through the film for pete's sake. Honestly that is soap-opera stuff.

"You can't have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!"

You may not agree, but the criticism is more than fair.

I'm just posting quickly before I skip out the door, but I saw -

The King's Speech - 9/10
Great film, great script, great performances. Forgot I was watching a film by the end of it. I pretty much agree with everything The Onion's AV Club said about the film. Conventional but it's hard to resist it.

 

[JUL3]

Uh... what are you talking about?

Uhm... nothing.

 

[Yorick]

Avatar: The Last Airbender (TV Show) 9/10

I just wrapped the three seasons of this up last night, and aside from a few missteps (such as the assassin who shot lasers, and the awful character of Jet), it was really, really great. At first I felt it was a bit too ligthearted for me, but it juxtaposes the dark moments nicely. While I found that I grew to dislike Katara more and more as the show went on, no other characters were so grating. I especially loved the Iroh / Zuko relationship. Pretty excited to see the sequel.