Topic: Last movie you watched? (Read 104064 times)

  • Avatar of Massy2k6
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 16, 2008
  • Posts: 1205
Vanishing on 7th street

I convinced myself to watch the whole thing for an explanation to the movie, I'm still waiting..
http://steamsignature.com][/url]
  • Avatar of Faust
  • Comedy Bronze
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Global Moderator
  • Joined: Nov 27, 2001
  • Posts: 1018
I watched 'THE PATRIOT' again last night while we were in bed.

I love the film for its CLASSIC REBELLION STORY/DOWN WITH IMPERIALS yarn, but why is it named after that one American dude who is on the British side? Like surely it should be called 'The Rebel' or 'The Revolutionary' or 'The Freedom Fighter' or something considering it's about rebelling against Imperial control. Why the hell would they name it after the Patriots in the film, considering that they're the villains in the narrative?!!


EDIT: I found out that the group CALLED themselves 'The Patriots', so that may give Gibson a pass. Even so, surely EVERYONE was a patriot in that film in that case? Like the Patriot party guys (rebels) as well as the British Patriots?


New title: 'EVERYONE'S A PATRIOT'
Hey hey hey
  • Avatar of Warped655
  • Scanner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2004
  • Posts: 2416
'The Patriot' sold more tickets then 'The Rebel' or 'The Revolutionary' or 'The Freedom Fighter' probably would have.
  • Avatar of noise
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Apr 10, 2011
  • Posts: 33
the new Pirates movie.


um it was FUN I guess. entertaining in an action-movie kind of way. but at this point we're tired of captain sparrow and none of the other characters really seemed to have any flavor to them. imo it was pretty unnecessary storywise (and the original trilogy had an incredible story imo. people seem to bitch about it being convoluted and whatnot, since characters keep changing sides but i think that was a huge strong point and prevented the first three pirates movies from being just sfx action flicks). the story of 4 was straightforward and there was pretty much no real character development whatsoever. ultimately it was entertaining but not much more than that, and didn't have any of the power of the originals.
  • Ultimaweapon9
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2004
  • Posts: 322
I saw it too at the midnight release at the local drive-in.  Well, sort of.  I fell asleep around when Penelope Cruz showed up.  First half hour was okay though.
  • Avatar of crone_lover720
  • PEW PEW PEW
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2002
  • Posts: 5554
I saw Bolt, the movie where John Travolta plays a dog. it has been a while since I've seen such a sexist, racist, and destructive movie. bolt also constantly makes the dreamworks face.
  • Avatar of Vellfire
  • TV people want to leave
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Feb 13, 2004
  • Posts: 9602
I watched Fire Walk With Me.  I can agree with Hundley in some ways but not in others.  However, I think this is why:

Quote
i have only seen the pilot episode of the show and only have a peripheral understanding of how the show worked(see: i skimmed some article some dude wrote comparing the similarities between deadly premonition and twin peaks)

This movie is 100% a movie for people who have seen all of the show (or well all of the Laura Palmer case, so all of the IMPORTANT AND GOOD parts of the show).  I absolutely cannot imagine watching this movie on its own.  Ever.  I've read about some people watching this movie without seeing the show and I can't see anything much that they'd get out of it, aside from just enjoying David Lynch's style.  I can definitely say though that having just recently seen the show, this was a really really good uh...closing to it.  Even though it was more of a prequel than anything (not strictly speaking just chronologically), it felt like a really nice way to end for me.  Throughout the show things have to be kept secrets or vague or just be brief hints or else the show is just giving everything away.  The whole thing is the suspense and mystery of Laura Palmer's death and the town in general.  But this movie is all about giving a different angle of things and giving you more of what happened after you already know the ending.  I think David Lynch said something about this in an interview but he basically just really wanted to revisit Twin Peaks because he couldn't get it out of his head, and I think this makes total sense for the way the movie ended up.  He already made Twin Peaks, but he wanted to come back to it and so he could do that without having to be secretive about where the story was going.  The viewer is supposed to already know what happened and is basically revisiting it with him.  You get to see things that were only hinted at or vaguely talked about in the show and it's just a nice feeling of having extra bits of the story.  I'd definitely say that if you've watched Twin Peaks, go ahead and watch this to end the series instead of watching the post-Laura Palmer episodes in the second season.

I definitely see what Roman was talking about with "you have to be a fan of Lynch more than a fan of Twin Peaks".  I hadn't seen anything Lynch has done except Twin Peaks going into this but it's pretty obvious watching it that the sort of people who just watched this show on TV when it was out to see what all the fuss was about wasn't going to like this movie at all.  It's way, way, WAY more abstract.  But, if you're into that sort of thing (which I absolutely am) then it's pretty good.

I guess I'm not at all capable of looking at this movie as just a movie though, because to me it's more like a bizarro long prequel episode to Twin Peaks.  I didn't like the beginning very much (felt totally useless and seeing a fingernail ripped off almost made me puke for real), and even the bits after that with Agent Cooper were a bit off because he apparently didn't want to be in it much to avoid being typecast.  I feel like he would have been better off either in the movie totally or not in it at all instead of just very vaguely there.  Though I think maybe he could have been left in JUST the last scene and that would have been fine.  But I really enjoyed all of the Laura Palmer stuff.  One reason why it's really nice is that you don't see very much of Laura alive in Twin Peaks (aside from a few short things like the picnic video) and this movie gives you more than just the IDEA of Laura as constructed by what you hear from the other people in the town.  I've been reading The Secret Diary of Laura Palmer and that might have influenced how much I liked this movie too seeing as how it went along with what I was seeing very very well.

So uh I guess my point is that if you aren't put off by abstract movies and you liked Twin Peaks then it's definitely worth a watch.  If you haven't seen Twin Peaks though then I don't think you should be watching this movie because it blatantly wasn't made with you in mind.


edit: jeepers I wrote a lot here.  I guass I wanted to write it all before I slept so I didn't forget anything.  GOODNIGHT.
I love this hobby - stealing your mother's diary
BRRING! BRRING!
Hello!  It's me, Vellfire!  FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER! ... Bye!  CLICK!  @gidgetnomates
  • Ultimaweapon9
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2004
  • Posts: 322
X-Men: First Class.  It sucked.

It was pretty hilarious though.  Other than the acting (McAvoy, Fassbender, and Bacon [to ][/to] were all great), it was a godawful movie.  I got some chuckles though; especially seeing how bad Beast looked.  I kept waiting for him to start howling and playing basketball.

My friends and I would laugh every single time it started playing the ominous music behind Erik and Raven's speechifying.  "If I were you, I wouldn't change a thing."  DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN.  Man, he's so evil.

What a crappy movie.  I'm genuinely shocked that it's getting such praise.

It's like the movie was both too much and too little at the same time.  It was too much in the sense that they threw everything at the wall; all kinds of characters, powers, motivations, war plots, etc.  But so little of it stuck, and what it ended up seeming like was a veritable checklist:  we have to make sure we explain Cerebro, we have to explain why Raven goes with Erik, why Xavier's in a wheelchair, why Erik has the helmet, etc.  None of it seemed necessary, and some of the mutants they chose were, quite frankly, ridiculous.  I guess it was mostly Darwin and Angel that I had a beef with, but Azazel was stupid too (but then again, if Nightcrawler wasn't so well known, I'd probably think he was dumb as well).

For the most part, the actors were good enough to carry it, but the script was pretty awful.  The story moved far too fast; the movie never really felt like a movie.  It was pretty much montage climax montage climax montage.  I wouldn't say you get to know any character very well at all, certainly not enough to like ANY of them except perhaps Xavier, and I'd still say 95% of that was due to McAvoy's fantastic acting.  Patrick Stewart should be proud.

Everything was rushed; same problem with X-Men: The Last Stand.  I'd say this is barely better.  A two star movie at the absolute most.
  • I fear and I tremble
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Aug 21, 2005
  • Posts: 6162
The Ong Bak movies.

Tony Jaa is a beast. I really like when he does the drunken martial arts style in the second one. I'm watching them in thai with no subtitles though so I don't really know whats fully going on in the stories but its easy enough to tell just by watching what happens. So far I liked the second one the most but I heard the third is really good too. They're beautiful movies the filming itself and the scenery is gorgeous and from what I can tell of the story its not too bad either. The martial arts is where its at though of course. Like I said Tony Jaa is incredible.
DEUCE: MEETING THE URINE UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND REALIZING IT'S JUST LIKE ME AND MY PREJUDICES  THIS WHOLE TIME WERE COMPLETELY FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF PTTTTHTHTHH GOD IT'S EVERYWHERE<br />DEUCE: FUCK THIS TASTES LIKE PISS<br />PANTS: WHERE IT SHOULD TASTE LIKE COTTON CANDY OR PICKLES<br />DEUCE: OR AT LEAST LIKE URINE NOT PISS
  • Avatar of goldenratio
  • now das fresh
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jun 27, 2002
  • Posts: 4550
The Wrestler

I really loved this movie. It's actually now my #1 favorite movie ever.
yes coulombs are "germaine", did you learn that word at talk like a dick school?
  • Avatar of noise
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Apr 10, 2011
  • Posts: 33
yeah dude i remember LOVING the wrestler and getting really into it, it was totally not what i expected but it was just the kind of movie that i really love.


right now im watching shawshank redemption because i'm in a prison phase. so everyone recommend me your prison films!! (docs, tv, movies, etc. i recently rewatched the entire series of oz so anything along those lines would be awesome)
  • Avatar of TheMonster
  • .....
  • Pip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jan 31, 2005
  • Posts: 172
Noise, check American History X,,, there is some prison action in that one. Also check Blood in Blood Out and Cool Hand Luke
so you've come here for pointless ego boosting and happy sunshine glee? this aint deviantart man.
  • Avatar of Massy2k6
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 16, 2008
  • Posts: 1205
Watched Priest because a few average people told me it was good, I forgot how stupid the average person is.
http://steamsignature.com][/url]
  • None of them knew they were robots.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Nov 5, 2006
  • Posts: 3242
Freddy Got Fingered

It's odd, somewhy I think that's what most comedy films are going to be like in a few years
Play Raimond Ex (if you haven't already)


I'll not TAKE ANYTHING you write like this seriously because it looks dumb
  • Avatar of Ihateyou
  • Generic INAP lamer. (nazis suck)
  • PipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 9, 2002
  • Posts: 273
X-Men: First Class.  It sucked.

It was pretty hilarious though.  Other than the acting (McAvoy, Fassbender, and Bacon [to a lesser extent] were all great), it was a godawful movie.  I got some chuckles though; especially seeing how bad Beast looked.  I kept waiting for him to start howling and playing basketball.

My friends and I would laugh every single time it started playing the ominous music behind Erik and Raven's speechifying.  "If I were you, I wouldn't change a thing."  DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN.  Man, he's so evil.

What a crappy movie.  I'm genuinely shocked that it's getting such praise.

It's like the movie was both too much and too little at the same time.  It was too much in the sense that they threw everything at the wall; all kinds of characters, powers, motivations, war plots, etc.  But so little of it stuck, and what it ended up seeming like was a veritable checklist:  we have to make sure we explain Cerebro, we have to explain why Raven goes with Erik, why Xavier's in a wheelchair, why Erik has the helmet, etc.  None of it seemed necessary, and some of the mutants they chose were, quite frankly, ridiculous.  I guess it was mostly Darwin and Angel that I had a beef with, but Azazel was stupid too (but then again, if Nightcrawler wasn't so well known, I'd probably think he was dumb as well).

For the most part, the actors were good enough to carry it, but the script was pretty awful.  The story moved far too fast; the movie never really felt like a movie.  It was pretty much montage climax montage climax montage.  I wouldn't say you get to know any character very well at all, certainly not enough to like ANY of them except perhaps Xavier, and I'd still say 95% of that was due to McAvoy's fantastic acting.  Patrick Stewart should be proud.

Everything was rushed; same problem with X-Men: The Last Stand.  I'd say this is barely better.  A two star movie at the absolute most.


You know, after seeing all the reviews of First Class, I was eager to see it, but now that I have, I'd have to agree with most of this.


Magneto probably comes off the best out of this movie as it paints him as someone doing bad things with good intentions.
With First Class, Magneto was obviously supposed to fill the role that Wolverine did in the other films as the "go it alone" bad ass type who learns the value of teamwork and friendship, and other than the scenes where he's using his powers for stuff like levitating submarines, there's little difference between them in terms of writing.


Xavier was pretty decent, but Austin Powers kept doing a happy dance inside my head every time he started calling things "groovy" >:[


Mystique was... well... pretty much a younger version of Mystique from the other movies in terms of looks, which means more red oil slick hair and almost boobs, but they seemed to use her shape shifting less than in the rest of the movies, where she was more bad ass (still waiting for the "glue bits of rubber over actress' boobs" job opening o_o).


Moira MacTaggart goes from being a SCOTTISH geneticist with a mutant son, to being an American (played by an Australian) CIA agent, despite the fact that she's clearly back to her usual medical faffing in canonically later films (though I'll avoid ranting about Last Stand and how Prof. X wouldn't have his voice in another man's body... BLARGH!).


January Jones as Emma Frost... Well, at least she looks decent enough, but they could have easily used a cardboard cut out and saved some cash.
Also, Magneto can damage her diamond form with generic bits of hollow metal from a bed... WTF?
Emma Frost's diamond form is supposed to be nigh on indestructible unless she's hit between the eyes with a diamond or something harder such as adamantium, so strangling her wouldn't cause her neck to crack :/


Beast was one of the good things about Last Stand as it was pretty much like transplanting Beast from the cartoon into live action.
In Last Stand, he lacks most of his physical attributes prior to turning blue (didn't McCoy have enlarged hands and slightly longer arms as well as he was supposed to be more ape like, becoming more feline later on) and his enhanced form didn't sit with me as well as his more human form from Last Stand.
Also, with First Class being a prequel to the other X-Men movies, it kind of screws up as McCoy is shown in his human guise in X2: X-Men United, but I'll get to that later.
Also, a general Beast question: If he's such a genius, why did McCoy never test out his cure before using it on himself?
That's like inventing a cure for cancer, using it, and then complaining when it turns everyone into flesh eating monsters.


Banshee and Angel Salvadore (NOT the mutant code named Angel) are only in it so that they can include aerial combat scenes and panty shots (seriously, Salvadore starts as a stripper, MacTaggart strips off to get into the Hell Fire Club, Emma Frost's outfit is basically a bra and stockings and Mystique does what she's done in all the X-Men movies and decides she doesn't need clothes at all as a few strategically placed scales will do).


Darwin... Now I actually laughed at Darwin.
Darwin was black and the first X-Man to die... I know that shouldn't be funny, but with his power being evolution, I could only think "I've seen this movie and the black guy dies first!"... Yeah, I'm going to hell for watching David Duchovny movies.


Havok was only in First Class because they wanted to use Cyclops without actually using Cyclops.
Both Havok and Cyclops have the same sort of powers (technically, Havok fires plasma instead of concussive energy, but he usually uses his powers for the same effect) and both need some kind of bolt on piece of equipment to use their powers properly (Cyclops constantly fires massive eye beams of death without his visor while Havok just looks more retarded using his powers in the movie without his power management guff).


In First Class, Beast designs both the Blackbird and Cerebro, but in X-Men, Xavier says that Magneto helped him to build them without so much as a mention of Beast.
Xavier trying to recruit Wolverine adds another plot hole as this is apparently not present in the other X-Men movies where Xavier doesn't seem to know anyrthing about Logan \ James Howitt prior to the X-Men rescuing him and Rogue.
As mentioned, Beast being blue in this movie causes a plot issue with X2, where he's shown in his human form in a cameo on a TV.
In a case of bad writing, as pointed out by Empire, Beast's serum is designed to make mutants look normal without removing their powers, but his powers in the movie basically require that he keeps his monkey feet.
Magneto pulls a sub out of the water while hanging off of the landing gear of the Blackbird, but I'm pretty sure that unless he was levitating the plane as well, it's engines wouldn't allow it to carry so much weight.


Were First Class a full on reboot, the plot issues wouldn't bother me, but it's supposed to be a prequel to X-Men and X2: X-Men United (1, Manchester City: nil... sorry).
From what I've read, Singer wanted to do a reboot, but Fox wanted a prequel, so it ended up being somewhere in the middle and it just doesn't work for me and it ends up more confusing than a reboot would be (Fox wanted a prequel as they thought a reboot would confuse fans... Because comic book fans can't handle reboots, even if we are on about the 90th incarnation of the X-Men for no real reason, unlike DC which devotes entire series to explaining what the hell is going on with Power Girls tits stopping her from being destroyed along with the rest of her universe or whatever).


Also, I am not dead... yet.
I say they look more like german/caveman then asians.
The Germans are coming to beat you with clubs and spears!
Quote
Hundley: Damnit kid, get off my lawn!
Faust: NOT UNTIL YOU GIVE MY MY PANTS BACK HUNDLEY!
  • Avatar of Mongoloid
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Apr 1, 2002
  • Posts: 1465
I really liked First Class. I went in expecting it to be horrible but I was genuinely impressed.
But I also thought Transformers 3 was miles and miles better than I thought it would be and also loads better than the reviews are making it out to be.

Also is Ong Bak genuinely good or good in a cheap way?? I keep seeing it on netflix but its buried in a pile of shitty kung fu and cheap scifi movies.
  • I fear and I tremble
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Aug 21, 2005
  • Posts: 6162
I like it. There wasn't any english in the ones I watched so I dunno how bad the dubs are. I think the filming is pretty good and all of the martial arts is incredible. Tony Jaa is just like jet li badass with the work ethic and personally done stunts like jackie chan. As the films progress they get more big budget hollywood lookin but the first one looked like a classic martial arts movie the way it was filmed reminded me of rumble in the bronx. As far as the story goes its first about some young man who is the strongest in his tribe in thailand and when their sacred buddha statue gets stolen he has to go save it from some gangsters in Bangkok. The other two movies are a prequel with some sacred ancestor of the tribe and takes place hundreds of years before the first.
DEUCE: MEETING THE URINE UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND REALIZING IT'S JUST LIKE ME AND MY PREJUDICES  THIS WHOLE TIME WERE COMPLETELY FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF PTTTTHTHTHH GOD IT'S EVERYWHERE<br />DEUCE: FUCK THIS TASTES LIKE PISS<br />PANTS: WHERE IT SHOULD TASTE LIKE COTTON CANDY OR PICKLES<br />DEUCE: OR AT LEAST LIKE URINE NOT PISS
  • Ultimaweapon9
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2004
  • Posts: 322
I quite liked Green Lantern and Transformers 3 actually.
  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 30, 2005
  • Posts: 2529
Just watched Sucker Punch for the 2nd time, now it's the extended cut., The extended is actually so much better than the original because of a particular scene near the end of the movie which i think is critical to the whole story and mood.
  • Avatar of thecatamites
  • clockamite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: May 6, 2007
  • Posts: 1445
I just watched that Tree Of Life film thing because I was going to another thing which happened to be cancelled and it was playing in a cinema nearby. Kind of weird and conflicted feelings about it. I liked it for the perversity of being a very blatantly didactic Christian morality play, and I thought the middle segment had a lot of good stuff about childhood and memory etc.
 
Overall I felt uneasy about a lot of it. There's some pretty reasonable points about the conflict between Desire And Grace/Acceptance but it's all presented in this incredibly bombastic way. Near the beginning of the film it cuts away from this kind of typical family tragedy thing and starts showing all this beautifully-shot nature footage and computer graphic reconstructions of the birth of the universe all set to really loud classical music with I guess the intention of Look At How The Awesome Power Of The CosmoS Dwarfs The Affairs Of These Puny Self-Absorbed Humans. The nature shots and footage of kids playing and motherly love and so on are a constant presence thru the film. There's the dad who keeps giving speeches about the importance of imposing your will on the world and of perfectionism and hardwork and also he beats his kids and makes them miserable and hateful and is the Bad Guy next to the totally passive, near voiceless and eternally loving mother. I'm not criticising this for not being realistic or whatever, since that's clearly not what the film is interested in and also a lot of it is kind of shown distorted through the memory of the eldest son. I guess I just question the way that this message of love and acceptance of the world and grace is presented in such a way that it's like being relentlessly bludgeoned with positivity for two hours until you finally give in and surrender totally to whatever the film is trying to say. There's a parallel here with the way it wants you to see the world and nature in general - with a kind of passive enraptured acceptance - and I think that's the point of why they're showing things this way. I'm pretty sure everything in the film was carefully thought out with respect to the message they're trying to send. The problem is that a film is not the world and I think it's kind of appalling to ask people to pretend that it is.
 
I dunno. I'm rambling but really I like the idea of a film which is very directly and openly about how we place ourselves in the world and think about it, and I guess I roughly agree with what they're trying to say on this idea. I guess I'm just unsure about the merit of any state of grace which comes about as a result of prostrating yourself humbly and passively before the Grand Important Vision of some dude with a camera and the complete Life On Earth dvd boxset. guass its an issue of faith.. *terrence malick or whoever smiles beautifically and rises 100ft into air while im still swearing at the casino level of Sonic 2, whos laughing now*
http://harmonyzone.org