Lucid
The Freeman
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 14,878
- Reaction score
- 39
Just watched a trailer for it, looks pretty gruesome.
A modern-ish Texan crime movie, you don't see a lot of those too often.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Rate the last movie you watched (DON'T POST SPOILERS Y' EEJITS)
- Thread starter craig
- Start date
- Status
Just watched a trailer for it, looks pretty gruesome.
A modern-ish Texan crime movie, you don't see a lot of those too often.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Icarusintel
Newbie
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2004
- Messages
- 5,302
- Reaction score
- 0
No problem.Just watched a trailer for it, looks pretty gruesome.
A modern-ish Texan crime movie, you don't see a lot of those too often.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Did you read the book? I highly suggest reading it at some point. It's a great read and quick.
Lucid
The Freeman
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 14,878
- Reaction score
- 39
Nope, I'm not much of a reader tbh.
But if I see it the next time I go to Barnes & Noble I'll definitely pick it up, or if I head to the library at any time.
But I'm reading The Heart of Darkness, atm... a bit of an on and off thing really. Pretty good so far.
Rambo : First Blood : Part 2 - 8/10...
Damn great action movie, god damn... I've never seen so much shit explode within a time span of 10 minutes.
Thunderclap
Spy
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2006
- Messages
- 733
- Reaction score
- 0
Beowulf 8/10
Wow. I thought this movie would be shite, and it actually turned out to be pretty kickass. Good score, and amazing fight scenes.
Semi-spoilers: In the last scene as Beowulf was chasing the Dragon, I thought, "He has to go Shadow of the Colossus on its ass or this film fails." And you know what? He goes Shadow of the Colossus on its ass.
The 3D animation didn't bother me at all. Yes, the plot varies from the original poem, but I can handle it. The Seamus Heaney translation of Beowulf that I read is one of my favorite stories, but I am able to seperate the film from it and appreciate the movie on its own. I got into an advance screening (my dad works for an entertainment news channel), and I want to see it again. Try to get it in 3D.
Wow. I thought this movie would be shite, and it actually turned out to be pretty kickass. Good score, and amazing fight scenes.
Semi-spoilers: In the last scene as Beowulf was chasing the Dragon, I thought, "He has to go Shadow of the Colossus on its ass or this film fails." And you know what? He goes Shadow of the Colossus on its ass.
The 3D animation didn't bother me at all. Yes, the plot varies from the original poem, but I can handle it. The Seamus Heaney translation of Beowulf that I read is one of my favorite stories, but I am able to seperate the film from it and appreciate the movie on its own. I got into an advance screening (my dad works for an entertainment news channel), and I want to see it again. Try to get it in 3D.
Dog--
The Freeman
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 9,741
- Reaction score
- 25
I seen on TV (didn't watch though) a Beowulf movie (like Beowulf vs. something), and the main character (I got satellite, and pressed 'info') said it was Gerard Butler.. I've never heard of it..
I didn't watch it because a good porno was on (well, I've never really seen a bad one..), so I watched that instead...
I didn't watch it because a good porno was on (well, I've never really seen a bad one..), so I watched that instead...
Sulkdodds
Companion Cube
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2003
- Messages
- 18,846
- Reaction score
- 27
Well, interesting. I'm expecting it to be shit, but slightly less shit now. Stephen Fry was brilliant o'course.
Seamus Heaney translation wooarrr!
Wilde
8/10
It was pretty damn good, although I didn't see all of it. The evocation of fin-de-si?cle England was pretty nice but it seemed to drag a little in the d?nouement.
Seamus Heaney translation wooarrr!
Wilde
8/10
It was pretty damn good, although I didn't see all of it. The evocation of fin-de-si?cle England was pretty nice but it seemed to drag a little in the d?nouement.
Ah, that was the one where Grendel was actually a great big hairy savage man whose father had been killed by Hrothgar.Dog said:
Dog--
The Freeman
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 9,741
- Reaction score
- 25
Arthur and the Invisibles - 8/10
Actually not as bad as it looks, pretty good story, I'll be watching the sequels. Although, it's probably because I like these "shrinking" movies, like Honey I Shrunk the kids, and those old movies where people are on islands with giant bugs and stuff.. Even still, pretty good movie.
Actually not as bad as it looks, pretty good story, I'll be watching the sequels. Although, it's probably because I like these "shrinking" movies, like Honey I Shrunk the kids, and those old movies where people are on islands with giant bugs and stuff.. Even still, pretty good movie.
Warbie
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 10,615
- Reaction score
- 0
DOA 7/10. It gets a +1 for Holly Valance who is complete slamming hottie. Utterly stupid movie with lots of sexy girls fighting - just like the game. There was even a little nod to DOA Xtreme Beach Volley Ball. Of course, it's total trash, but good trash. I watched it after drinks with the lads and, much to my surprise, everyone enjoyed it.
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,038
- Reaction score
- 30
Terminator 2 - 10/10
One of the best action movies ever. It nails every criteria. Badass heroes and villains, awesome action scenes, and a great sense for direction and pacing. The soundtrack is both fitting and chilling (with a theme that's yet to be beaten), and while special effects have come a long way since the movie's release, I think the movie has still aged pretty damn well. Especially considering it was made over a decade ago. And it's hard to make the T-1000 look bad because he's just so freakin' cool.
But it still manages to have some heart to it. Something deeper than robots shooting and beating the piss out of each other. I still get teary from the final scene. And watching this made me realize how much I actually detest T3 for being the complete step backwards into B movie territory it was. It didn't have any of the intelligence or thought this movie did.
So yeah, greatest action movie ever.
One of the best action movies ever. It nails every criteria. Badass heroes and villains, awesome action scenes, and a great sense for direction and pacing. The soundtrack is both fitting and chilling (with a theme that's yet to be beaten), and while special effects have come a long way since the movie's release, I think the movie has still aged pretty damn well. Especially considering it was made over a decade ago. And it's hard to make the T-1000 look bad because he's just so freakin' cool.
But it still manages to have some heart to it. Something deeper than robots shooting and beating the piss out of each other. I still get teary from the final scene. And watching this made me realize how much I actually detest T3 for being the complete step backwards into B movie territory it was. It didn't have any of the intelligence or thought this movie did.
So yeah, greatest action movie ever.
Warbie
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 10,615
- Reaction score
- 0
Terminator > Terminator 2!
A nice Terminator from the future (!!!!) makes friends with an annoying teenager you just want to smash in the face! (Actually, I do like T2, but still)
I'd love a decent prequel - some of the flashbacks in the original depicting the future war, with skulls being crushed under the tracks of massive robot/tank things and the few humans alive fighting for survival, were very chilling.
A nice Terminator from the future (!!!!) makes friends with an annoying teenager you just want to smash in the face! (Actually, I do like T2, but still)
I'd love a decent prequel - some of the flashbacks in the original depicting the future war, with skulls being crushed under the tracks of massive robot/tank things and the few humans alive fighting for survival, were very chilling.
Terminator 2 is an excellent film, and it's certainly the Creme de la creme of action movies in that it pretty much manages to nail everything perfectly, but on the whole I think The Terminator is the better film.
Lance Henriksen for the goddamned win.
Lance Henriksen for the goddamned win.
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,038
- Reaction score
- 30
The Terminator was certainly good, but I thought T2 did everything better, except for maybe some of the elements of horror in the first movie. The villain was more menacing. The concept was more elaborate and interesting in its look at the relationship between the human and the machine. And the events just felt more significant and convincing than the camp of the first movie.
I also think T2 contributed more to the action genre and industry special effects. It really influenced how most action movies would be made from that point on.
I also think T2 contributed more to the action genre and industry special effects. It really influenced how most action movies would be made from that point on.
:bonce:
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,317
- Reaction score
- 16
Deep Impact 6/10
But Mel Gibson is so cool!
We're going to have to work on this 'Ha-Ha joke' thing.
Absinthe
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2004
- Messages
- 14,038
- Reaction score
- 30
Irreversible - 5/10
Yeah, the rape scene and the shot of the man getting his skull smashed in with a fire extinguisher were disturbing and horrific. But what's the point? Why does this need to be in reverse? Nothing's special about the plot. The character's aren't anything brilliant. The big highlight scenes are the only distinguishing marks in it. I'm trying to find a substance to this film that justifies its extremities, but I'm not having any luck. It dances a fine line between being outright exploitative or simply misguided artistry, and I can't decide which.
Yeah, the rape scene and the shot of the man getting his skull smashed in with a fire extinguisher were disturbing and horrific. But what's the point? Why does this need to be in reverse? Nothing's special about the plot. The character's aren't anything brilliant. The big highlight scenes are the only distinguishing marks in it. I'm trying to find a substance to this film that justifies its extremities, but I'm not having any luck. It dances a fine line between being outright exploitative or simply misguided artistry, and I can't decide which.
Shift
Space Core
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 5,017
- Reaction score
- 7
The Mothman Prophacies - 10/10
I thought this was absultely brilliant, I mean its hard for me to comprehend Richard Gear being in a GOOD film, but this was a cracker. There is a sinister theme of moths kept all the way through the film using exellent camera work on normal everyday images which I think is an awsome touch. Incredibly spooky plot build up with so many sidetrack that keep you thinking, and the fact that its based on true events scared the hell out of me.
I thought this was absultely brilliant, I mean its hard for me to comprehend Richard Gear being in a GOOD film, but this was a cracker. There is a sinister theme of moths kept all the way through the film using exellent camera work on normal everyday images which I think is an awsome touch. Incredibly spooky plot build up with so many sidetrack that keep you thinking, and the fact that its based on true events scared the hell out of me.
Direwolf
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,186
- Reaction score
- 0
Yeah, I'll throw in my support for that movie. I think it might be a little bit longer than necessary in the end, but its one of the few scary movies that creeped me out on the same level as Lovecraft. Theres no big monster eating people, and theres no firm explanation for everything, so it keeps the "fear of the unknown" rolling right from the start to the finish.
StardogChampion
Tank
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,037
- Reaction score
- 2
The Last Detail - 8.5/10
A True Canadian
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,874
- Reaction score
- 2
Just saw that movie last night too. This is the first time I've watched it the whole way through instead of in pieces. It's a great character study.
Fliko
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,708
- Reaction score
- 0
Agreed.
It wasn't well recieved because people wanted a thrilling movie, or they thought this mockumentary was way too shocking, or possibly in an unreal situation.
I thought it was amazing, and I also think that everyone should see it. 'specially since lots of people tried real hard to not have you see it.
One thing I never got is how people thought this movie was about Bush Hatred? I thought portrayed Bush as a nice guy who was quite literally just a figurehead. It was moreso a government hating movie.
simonjedi
Spy
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2006
- Messages
- 559
- Reaction score
- 1
Zathura: a space adventure 7/10
Suprisingly decent jumanji IN SPACE!! Film, loses points for the "love your brother" message at the end but the effects are alright (the kids sister gets frozen about 30 mins in, and it turns outto be a hyper detailed mannequin which was quite cool.)
parts of that movie scared the shit out of me when i first saw it
Suprisingly decent jumanji IN SPACE!! Film, loses points for the "love your brother" message at the end but the effects are alright (the kids sister gets frozen about 30 mins in, and it turns outto be a hyper detailed mannequin which was quite cool.)
parts of that movie scared the shit out of me when i first saw it
Icarusintel
Newbie
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2004
- Messages
- 5,302
- Reaction score
- 0
No Country For Old Men - 9/10
Thankfully I live close enough to DC that I can usually find a theater playing something when it's in limited release. Such was the case with No Country For Old Men. I can say with certainty that most of the press for this movie has been true. The visuals, the acting, the story (for the most part) are absolutely incredible. Anyone waiting for the Coens to come back in a big way should be incredibly excited to watch this movie.
Please, someone give Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin both Oscars for this movie. Honestly. I've seen my share of badass villians in movies, but Javier Bardem's portrayal of Anton Chigurh is certainly one of the absolute best. There's a quiet violence to him that permeates the screen whenever he's on, and even many times when he's not. The man is evil incarnate, in the sense that true evil is indiscriminate. Pity and sympathy are luxuries he cannot afford and wouldn't care to anyway. When people get in his way, or he even thinks they might, he kills them. I've never seen Bardem in anything else, but now I'm inclined to find out every film he's been in and see if he's as fine in all of those roles.
Josh Brolin gives a wonderfully understated performance. He plays a rather simple man. He's not stupid by any means, in fact he is quite the opposite. He knows generally what he's getting himself into, though he has underestimated the situation. Brolin plays this man realistically. There's a determination in his character that's easily recognizable, but there's also a twinge of sorrow and understanding that seems to be at play under the surface.
Tommy Lee Jones is good, but that's nothing new. His role here isn't anything spectacular, but it's still a good turn by him. The supporting cast does a good job as well.
The cinematography is pitch perfect. Texas has never looked as desolate as it does here. The angles always give an excellent view of the action and characters. You'll never miss something important because of a zoom, pan, or cut. The cinematography was done by the same guy who did The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, which I still have to see, if only for his work. It's obvious he has a mastery of the lens.
I can't really comment on the music. I wasn't paying attention for it and I never really consciously felt it grab me. That's probably a good thing. It certainly never seemed out of place and if anything it served to add to the atmosphere without being intrusive. I'll have to watch it again and pay attention for it.
Finally, the story. Everyone should know the main setup by now. If not, I'll not give it away here. You should watch the trailer if you haven't already. The story is a very simple one on the surface. The movie pretty much follows the novel word for word, which is a wonderful thing in many ways. It's a great novel, for the most part, and the movie just basically visualizes it. I'm glad the Coens didn't take a whole lot of creative license with it, since Cormac McCarthy did a damn fine job with the book.
Having said that, the only place the movie faulters is in being so faithful to the book. I've seen this criticism from some of the critics and I have to agree with it. The last 1/6 or so of the book I didn't like. It's not horrible, but it never felt like it exactly belonged. I understand what Cormac McCarthy is getting at with it, but the way he does it felt off. I've never been able to describe exactly what I don't like about it. I know we don't need to see everything and know everything, but I'd rather not have an ending that feels tacked on telling me what I should think about the rest of the book. The movie follows along with that, but doesn't quite get it right. My girlfriend said that the movie lacked the feeling that the book did. I'll have to agree with her on that. There's something missing in the movie that was present in the book. It's a carbon copy, which is great for the story, but when it comes to delivering the punchline (for lack of a better word) it falters. What makes up about 1/6th of the book makes up about 1/10th of the movie or less, which is part of the problem. Still, anyone who liked the entirety of the book should enjoy the entirety of the movie.
For anyone who hasn't read the book: I don't quite know how well you'll like this movie. It's a damn fine film and I think most people will appreciate it for that, but it may be a bit jarring for some and that may not sit well. Still, I highly reccommend this film to everyone. The only reason I docked a point was out of personal differences with the finale of both the movie and film. Even with those differences, this is still one of the greatest films I have seen this year.
Thankfully I live close enough to DC that I can usually find a theater playing something when it's in limited release. Such was the case with No Country For Old Men. I can say with certainty that most of the press for this movie has been true. The visuals, the acting, the story (for the most part) are absolutely incredible. Anyone waiting for the Coens to come back in a big way should be incredibly excited to watch this movie.
Please, someone give Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin both Oscars for this movie. Honestly. I've seen my share of badass villians in movies, but Javier Bardem's portrayal of Anton Chigurh is certainly one of the absolute best. There's a quiet violence to him that permeates the screen whenever he's on, and even many times when he's not. The man is evil incarnate, in the sense that true evil is indiscriminate. Pity and sympathy are luxuries he cannot afford and wouldn't care to anyway. When people get in his way, or he even thinks they might, he kills them. I've never seen Bardem in anything else, but now I'm inclined to find out every film he's been in and see if he's as fine in all of those roles.
Josh Brolin gives a wonderfully understated performance. He plays a rather simple man. He's not stupid by any means, in fact he is quite the opposite. He knows generally what he's getting himself into, though he has underestimated the situation. Brolin plays this man realistically. There's a determination in his character that's easily recognizable, but there's also a twinge of sorrow and understanding that seems to be at play under the surface.
Tommy Lee Jones is good, but that's nothing new. His role here isn't anything spectacular, but it's still a good turn by him. The supporting cast does a good job as well.
The cinematography is pitch perfect. Texas has never looked as desolate as it does here. The angles always give an excellent view of the action and characters. You'll never miss something important because of a zoom, pan, or cut. The cinematography was done by the same guy who did The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, which I still have to see, if only for his work. It's obvious he has a mastery of the lens.
I can't really comment on the music. I wasn't paying attention for it and I never really consciously felt it grab me. That's probably a good thing. It certainly never seemed out of place and if anything it served to add to the atmosphere without being intrusive. I'll have to watch it again and pay attention for it.
Finally, the story. Everyone should know the main setup by now. If not, I'll not give it away here. You should watch the trailer if you haven't already. The story is a very simple one on the surface. The movie pretty much follows the novel word for word, which is a wonderful thing in many ways. It's a great novel, for the most part, and the movie just basically visualizes it. I'm glad the Coens didn't take a whole lot of creative license with it, since Cormac McCarthy did a damn fine job with the book.
Having said that, the only place the movie faulters is in being so faithful to the book. I've seen this criticism from some of the critics and I have to agree with it. The last 1/6 or so of the book I didn't like. It's not horrible, but it never felt like it exactly belonged. I understand what Cormac McCarthy is getting at with it, but the way he does it felt off. I've never been able to describe exactly what I don't like about it. I know we don't need to see everything and know everything, but I'd rather not have an ending that feels tacked on telling me what I should think about the rest of the book. The movie follows along with that, but doesn't quite get it right. My girlfriend said that the movie lacked the feeling that the book did. I'll have to agree with her on that. There's something missing in the movie that was present in the book. It's a carbon copy, which is great for the story, but when it comes to delivering the punchline (for lack of a better word) it falters. What makes up about 1/6th of the book makes up about 1/10th of the movie or less, which is part of the problem. Still, anyone who liked the entirety of the book should enjoy the entirety of the movie.
For anyone who hasn't read the book: I don't quite know how well you'll like this movie. It's a damn fine film and I think most people will appreciate it for that, but it may be a bit jarring for some and that may not sit well. Still, I highly reccommend this film to everyone. The only reason I docked a point was out of personal differences with the finale of both the movie and film. Even with those differences, this is still one of the greatest films I have seen this year.
- Status
Similar threads
