Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (7 Viewers)

[KarmaPolice]

Alice in Wonderland

First, I must say that the 3D cinematography was a huge letdown. I saw it at the IMAX and that aspect did not hold a candle to Avatar. It seemed murky and out of focus at times and was a huge step back from the amazing Avatar effect.

But the story, actors and characters and art directions were incredible. A much better story and infinitely better acting than Avatar. While I respect Tim Burton,. I do not usually enjoy his efforts. But this one worked completely for me. I have seen a lot of medicore to bad reviews for this and I do not get it. It was a great experience, I just wish I had not already had the Avatar 3D experience a couple couple months beforehand, as that has set a new 3D standard.

Anyway, I highly recommend it. I think it is more for adults than kids and maybe I would hesitate to take kids under 10-12? Some pretty frightening images and sequences. May be a bit much for younger kids, but definitely held my interest throughout.

4.4/5 stars

One of our employees said he dropped an eighth of 'shrooms and saw this Thursday night, and claimed the movie was well worth it.

 

[Sabertooth]

Finally watched Zombieland. That was fantastic.

The only somewhat letdown was the big cameo. Seemed to stop the movie for a while

I liked it as well. Most entertaining movie I've seen in a while.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Thirteen.

Stunning. I am sure that my kids will not act like those hookers.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Thirteen.Stunning. I am sure that my kids will not act like those hookers.

Good movie. And you're right, it's an eye opener.

 

[cosjobs]

Alice in Wonderland

First, I must say that the 3D cinematography was a huge letdown. I saw it at the IMAX and that aspect did not hold a candle to Avatar. It seemed murky and out of focus at times and was a huge step back from the amazing Avatar effect.

But the story, actors and characters and art directions were incredible. A much better story and infinitely better acting than Avatar. While I respect Tim Burton,. I do not usually enjoy his efforts. But this one worked completely for me. I have seen a lot of medicore to bad reviews for this and I do not get it. It was a great experience, I just wish I had not already had the Avatar 3D experience a couple couple months beforehand, as that has set a new 3D standard.

Anyway, I highly recommend it. I think it is more for adults than kids and maybe I would hesitate to take kids under 10-12? Some pretty frightening images and sequences. May be a bit much for younger kids, but definitely held my interest throughout.

4.4/5 stars

One of our employees said he dropped an eighth of 'shrooms and saw this Thursday night, and claimed the movie was well worth it.

i thorooughly enjoyed it under my own consciousness, but i'd love to see it again under the influence of dr. p. it could be a bonus, but the film holds up well without the altering support.

 

[D_House]

Quantum of Solace - I have no idea what this movie was about.

:whoosh: They completely failed at storytelling in this one. And I enjoyed Casino Royale a lot. The plot in this one was just a huge mess.

 

[saintfool]

Thirteen.Stunning. I am sure that my kids will not act like those hookers.

i hated this. the acting and writing were out of some abc afterchool special.

 

[Bob Magaw]

where the wild things are - watched this a few times already with my son . jonze said it was a movie about childhood more so than being for children. upthread somebody said it might be better suited to a child about 9-10, which may be right (it would be about the age of the protagonist max)... i think some classic disney animation was not JUST for children, but also had material and levels that could be appreciated by adults... ebert in his review suggested that it might even be appreciated more as nostalgia for adults who fondly remembered the book from childhood (without a doubt one of the more popular childrens books of its era), even more than children used to CGI epics? a review site i like (hi-def digest) seemed to be higher on it, and thought despite misfiring and not finding the hoped for theatrical audience, it was destined to be rediscovered in the home video venue, and possibly become a classic that will be revisited for decades.

i really enjoyed it, for a few reasons...

1 - the book is very short, just a few sentences with illustrations. the way the story was extended and expanded felt very organic to the original, and in keeping with its spirit, not at all arbitrarily padded.

2 - remarkably unaffected and unpretentious performance by a first time actor (looks a lot like macauley caulkin at times)... as the only non-muppet for most of the movie, he had to carry the picture and he did. reminded me of the girl in the fall (another fantasy movie that could be appreciated by bigger children and the young at heart, with at times mature content and subject matter - protagonist engages in a kind of reverse shehezerade/1,001 tales - telling the little girl stories not to keep from getting killed, but to help him kill himself)...

3 - great music by coen bros. regular carter burwell (characteristically haunting, ethereal, evocative, atmospheric & distinctive)

4 - gandolfini was inspired voice casting. he is very good, and when the mood darkens, the resonance from the sopranos for adults makes him even a little more menacing (is he going to wack somebody?)

5 - the characters are very kinetic and there is a lot of physical comedy.

6 - there is a depth of feeling in the language and interactions between max, the creatures & with each other, while it may be more mature than a child in 1st-2nd grade would appreciate, takes children's emotions and perspective more seriously than most "children's" movies.

with age appropriate proviso, highly recommended for mature children... and mature/immature adults...

* a scanner darkly - has kind of a twitchy/tweaker frenetic tempo and pace in the dialogue at times, which was hard to "soak in" the first time. i have recently been getting into philip k. ****'s work (inspired movies such as blade runner, total recall and minority report)... i thought three stigmata of palmer eldritch was ingenious, and recently finished ubik was definitely one of the greatest novels i've ever read in the sci-fi/speculative fiction genre (highest possible rec if you like that genre - it is one of THREE movies based on his work currently in production, and i can't wait to see what they do with it... don't know who is helming it, but it would be great for somebody like terry gilliam). the movie is by linklater (slackers, waking life), and like waking life, was rotoscoped... good cast, with keanu reeves, robert downey, jr., woody harrelson & wynona rider... reeves is an undercover law enforcement type who's efforts to crack a drug ring (substance B) have become complicated by the fact that his drug use has caused possible permanent brain damage and an irreversible split-mind psychotic condition, with his knowledge of his dual life as undercover cop and drug user having become compartmentalized and unkown to each other... he is essentially tasked with looking for himself! in this respect, somewhat like angel heart? more cult movie than blade runner masterpiece, i thought it was interesting, though not great... sort of like a contemporary sci-fi version of the big lebowski... more serious (about big brother and rampant drug use - well, guess the dude had that, too), far less humor, funny in spots, but usually bleak and cynical humor. worth a watch if you don't hate sci fi, and liked other of his novel/short story to movie translations...

ugetsu & tokyo story... these two make a lot of top 10 lists, and after watching them, i can see why. as i noted above, i was interested in seeing them, because mizoguchi & ozu are thought of by some as equal in stature with kurosawa, but i knew very little of them (saw ozu's floating weeds on strong ebert rec, but wasn't blown away)...

ugetsu is a ghost story that was made, and covers a time in japan's past, roughly parallel with rashomon. it is hard to see with the lack of perspective & only having just seen it (once), but i'll definitely rewatch this, and my early sense is that it is one of the best movies i've ever seen. i would highly recommend this. the black & white photography is more haunting, evocative and beautiful (the famous boat in the mists scene) than 99.9% of color movies.

ozu more contemporary, & like floating weeds, a kind of chamber drama about family and relationships... the quick plot summary... elderly parents visit children, children are too busy to spend time with them and in fact find them a burden, parents go home, mom gets sick en route and dies upon arrival, children return home and reflect on what has happened. i didn't like it as much as ugetsu (i liked the fantastical elements of the latter), but thought it was outstanding. he has an interesting style, basicaly locking the camera about two feet off the floor. it was weird at first (only movie i have seen with no dolly or tracking shots - mizoguchi was an acknowledged master of this, with welles & ophuls), but i quickly got used to it... he also cuts away from the family dramas at times (which could become claustrophopic) with shots of buildings, almost to buffer them... i think it was compared to having something to cleanse your mind's pallette... i really enjoyed this as a double feature, and it was an interesting contrast in styles.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Thirteen.Stunning. I am sure that my kids will not act like those hookers.

i hated this. the acting and writing were out of some abc afterchool special.

I agree that it was sort of amateurish. Still, I'm glad I saw it.

 

[jdoggydogg]

where the wild things are - watched this a few times already with my son . jonze said it was a movie about childhood more so than being for children. upthread somebody said it might be better suited to a child about 9-10, which may be right (it would be about the age of the protagonist max)... i think some classic disney animation was not JUST for children, but also had material and levels that could be appreciated by adults... ebert in his review suggested that it might even be appreciated more as nostalgia for adults who fondly remembered the book from childhood (without a doubt one of the more popular childrens books of its era), even more than children used to CGI epics? a review site i like (hi-def digest) seemed to be higher on it, and thought despite misfiring and not finding the hoped for theatrical audience, it was destined to be rediscovered in the home video venue, and possibly become a classic that will be revisited for decades.i really enjoyed it, for a few reasons...1 - the book is very short, just a few sentences with illustrations. the way the story was extended and expanded felt very organic to the original, and in keeping with its spirit, not at all arbitrarily padded. 2 - remarkably unaffected and unpretentious performance by a first time actor (looks a lot like macauley caulkin at times)... as the only non-muppet for most of the movie, he had to carry the picture and he did. reminded me of the girl in the fall (another fantasy movie that could be appreciated by bigger children and the young at heart, with at times mature content and subject matter - protagonist engages in a kind of reverse shehezerade/1,001 tales - telling the little girl stories not to keep from getting killed, but to help him kill himself)...3 - great music by coen bros. regular carter burwell (characteristically haunting, ethereal, evocative, atmospheric & distinctive)4 - gandolfini was inspired voice casting. he is very good, and when the mood darkens, the resonance from the sopranos for adults makes him even a little more menacing (is he going to wack somebody?)5 - the characters are very kinetic and there is a lot of physical comedy.6 - there is a depth of feeling in the language and interactions between max, the creatures & with each other, while it may be more mature than a child in 1st-2nd grade would appreciate, takes children's emotions and perspective more seriously than most "children's" movies. with age appropriate proviso, highly recommended for mature children... and mature/immature adults... contrast in styles.

Yes to all that. The child actor was fantastic.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Really, that bad? This was the only reason I was going to pick it up, to watch on my supersized tv with surround sound and see #### blow up. It can't be any worse than Transformers 2, can it?

The Day After Tomorrow (another Emmerich vehicle) is a better comparison than T2, not a particularly good story but a great disaster epic. Personally I preferred 2012 to both by a fairly wide margin.It delivers precisely what you are looking for, good sound and lots of stuff blowing up. Totally unrealistic in most every way but why go see a movie like this if you are looking for realism?

Did you just say Day After Tomorrow and 2012 were better than Terminator 2...by a wide margin?....

No sir. No I did not.

For the record though, Transformers 2 IMO should not be abbreviated as T2

 

[jdoggydogg]

Really, that bad? This was the only reason I was going to pick it up, to watch on my supersized tv with surround sound and see #### blow up. It can't be any worse than Transformers 2, can it?

The Day After Tomorrow (another Emmerich vehicle) is a better comparison than T2, not a particularly good story but a great disaster epic. Personally I preferred 2012 to both by a fairly wide margin.It delivers precisely what you are looking for, good sound and lots of stuff blowing up. Totally unrealistic in most every way but why go see a movie like this if you are looking for realism?

Did you just say Day After Tomorrow and 2012 were better than Terminator 2...by a wide margin?....

No sir. No I did not.

For the record though, Transformers 2 IMO should not be abbreviated as T2

Could we use "CRAPx2" as an abbreviation?

 

[Kenny Powers]

Alice in Wonderland

First, I must say that the 3D cinematography was a huge letdown. I saw it at the IMAX and that aspect did not hold a candle to Avatar. It seemed murky and out of focus at times and was a huge step back from the amazing Avatar effect.

But the story, actors and characters and art directions were incredible. A much better story and infinitely better acting than Avatar. While I respect Tim Burton,. I do not usually enjoy his efforts. But this one worked completely for me. I have seen a lot of medicore to bad reviews for this and I do not get it. It was a great experience, I just wish I had not already had the Avatar 3D experience a couple couple months beforehand, as that has set a new 3D standard.

Anyway, I highly recommend it. I think it is more for adults than kids and maybe I would hesitate to take kids under 10-12? Some pretty frightening images and sequences. May be a bit much for younger kids, but definitely held my interest throughout.

4.4/5 stars

One of our employees said he dropped an eighth of 'shrooms and saw this Thursday night, and claimed the movie was well worth it.

Well worth the $10 for the ticket or the $25 spent on the fungus for the movie was worth it?

 

[jdoggydogg]

Alice in Wonderland

First, I must say that the 3D cinematography was a huge letdown. I saw it at the IMAX and that aspect did not hold a candle to Avatar. It seemed murky and out of focus at times and was a huge step back from the amazing Avatar effect.

But the story, actors and characters and art directions were incredible. A much better story and infinitely better acting than Avatar. While I respect Tim Burton,. I do not usually enjoy his efforts. But this one worked completely for me. I have seen a lot of medicore to bad reviews for this and I do not get it. It was a great experience, I just wish I had not already had the Avatar 3D experience a couple couple months beforehand, as that has set a new 3D standard.

Anyway, I highly recommend it. I think it is more for adults than kids and maybe I would hesitate to take kids under 10-12? Some pretty frightening images and sequences. May be a bit much for younger kids, but definitely held my interest throughout.

4.4/5 stars

One of our employees said he dropped an eighth of 'shrooms and saw this Thursday night, and claimed the movie was well worth it.

Dude, mushrooms would make Alvin and the Chipmunks 2: The Squeakquel look great.

 

[Kenny Powers]

caught guy ritchie's "rock'n'rolla" last night. such a waste of time. it's like he was ripping off himself somehow. all of the trademark ritchie touches are there but it's poorer, diluted version of them. i was bored by this, quite frankly.

Didnt like it nearly as much as Snatch or Lock, Stock, but that doesnt mean all that much considering how much I like both of those. I thought this started off slow and the characters weren't as immediately intriguing, but it picked up quite nicely. I thought Mark Strong (Tom Wilkinson's No. 1) was probably the highlight of the acting and good to know he'll have a big role in the next one. I dont like how Ritchie's films seem to follow the same formula of multiple people wanting an object (shotguns, diamond, painting). I realize there are other things to each film's storyline, but I think he's a good enough writer/director to not need to rely on that. I'll def be checking out the sequel.Also, RockNRolla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Revolver. Revolver was almost unfinishable.

 

[jdoggydogg]

caught guy ritchie's "rock'n'rolla" last night. such a waste of time. it's like he was ripping off himself somehow. all of the trademark ritchie touches are there but it's poorer, diluted version of them. i was bored by this, quite frankly.

Didnt like it nearly as much as Snatch or Lock, Stock, but that doesnt mean all that much considering how much I like both of those. I thought this started off slow and the characters weren't as immediately intriguing, but it picked up quite nicely. I thought Mark Strong (Tom Wilkinson's No. 1) was probably the highlight of the acting and good to know he'll have a big role in the next one. I dont like how Ritchie's films seem to follow the same formula of multiple people wanting an object (shotguns, diamond, painting). I realize there are other things to each film's storyline, but I think he's a good enough writer/director to not need to rely on that. I'll def be checking out the sequel.Also, RockNRolla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Revolver. Revolver was almost unfinishable.

I can't argue that Ritchie has become to self-referential. And yet, his movies are usually entertaining. So while I think Ritchie could use some fresh material, I'll still see his movies.Revolver was awful.

 

[scoobygang]

* a scanner darkly - has kind of a twitchy/tweaker frenetic tempo and pace in the dialogue at times, which was hard to "soak in" the first time. i have recently been getting into philip k. ****'s work (inspired movies such as blade runner, total recall and minority report)... i thought three stigmata of palmer eldritch was ingenious, and recently finished ubik was definitely one of the greatest novels i've ever read in the sci-fi/speculative fiction genre (highest possible rec if you like that genre - it is one of THREE movies based on his work currently in production, and i can't wait to see what they do with it... don't know who is helming it, but it would be great for somebody like terry gilliam). the movie is by linklater (slackers, waking life), and like waking life, was rotoscoped... good cast, with keanu reeves, robert downey, jr., woody harrelson & wynona rider... reeves is an undercover law enforcement type who's efforts to crack a drug ring (substance B) have become complicated by the fact that his drug use has caused possible permanent brain damage and an irreversible split-mind psychotic condition, with his knowledge of his dual life as undercover cop and drug user having become compartmentalized and unkown to each other... he is essentially tasked with looking for himself! in this respect, somewhat like angel heart? more cult movie than blade runner masterpiece, i thought it was interesting, though not great... sort of like a contemporary sci-fi version of the big lebowski... more serious (about big brother and rampant drug use - well, guess the dude had that, too), far less humor, funny in spots, but usually bleak and cynical humor. worth a watch if you don't hate sci fi, and liked other of his novel/short story to movie translations...

My wife rented this from Amazon about a week ago and I liked it about 100 times more than I expected to. I had read bad reviews for it (I since went back to Rotten Tomatoes and found most of the actually interesting critics actually liked it, which should teach me). It's Linklater, so there's plenty of slacker talk, but it was extremely faithful to the studied ambivalence of the story. The idea that, yes, drugs ruin lives, but yes, government uses that as an excuse to encroach upon our dignity. Winona Ryder gives, by far, her best performance in something like 10 years.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Clear and Present Danger

Watched this again this weekend. Just about as enjoyable as a thriller gets. Great cast, good action, and good stunts. Lots of fun.

 

[Oh Yes!]

zombieland

this movie was alot better than expected. pretty funny.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Bamboozled.....Id say for the most part, I love Spike Lee joints. After looking over his filmography, Ive seen 10 of his movies and the only one I didnt like a good bit was Jungle Fever. Bamboozled wasnt terrible, and I realize its satire, but Lee beats you over the head with this to the point where you dont even want to finish the movie. The movie isnt better than good in any facet, the acting and memorable characters is surprisingly missing for a Lee flick, and Damon Wayans accent is downright annoying. The only enjoyable parts for me were the scenes with Mos Def or Paul Mooney. Might be the only Spike Lee movie I wouldnt recommend. I was reading over some other peoples comments on IMDB and a lot seem to think its one of his best movies .....4/10

Little Children...I actually started watching this wondering it if Id finish it (and knowing if I did it wouldnt be one sitting so it better be good) as I expected sort of a romantic-drama and not a genre that generally interests me, but this movie had me intrigued from the start. The voice-over is slightly tedious at first, but gradually decreases to being used sparingly over the last 45-60 minutes. Instead of a movie with people having affairs and examining morals and such like youll typically see, this went beyond that and was more of a character study almost that demonstrated everyone's flaws in an obvious but brilliant manner. And in the end, these flawed decisions, behaviors, and lack of thinking about the consequences - made by essentially every character except one - was on the level of a child or immature individual. Acting was great all around, especially Kate Winslet (as usual) and Jackie Earle Haley, both of whom were nominated for best supporting actress/actor. Haley was particularly good in his role as a pedophile just released from jail and returning to the community. Although it's been awhile since Ive seen it, many things about this movie had me continuously reminded of Magnolia.....8.8/10

 

[dude]

* a scanner darkly - has kind of a twitchy/tweaker frenetic tempo and pace in the dialogue at times, which was hard to "soak in" the first time. i have recently been getting into philip k. ****'s work (inspired movies such as blade runner, total recall and minority report)... i thought three stigmata of palmer eldritch was ingenious, and recently finished ubik was definitely one of the greatest novels i've ever read in the sci-fi/speculative fiction genre (highest possible rec if you like that genre - it is one of THREE movies based on his work currently in production, and i can't wait to see what they do with it... don't know who is helming it, but it would be great for somebody like terry gilliam). the movie is by linklater (slackers, waking life), and like waking life, was rotoscoped... good cast, with keanu reeves, robert downey, jr., woody harrelson & wynona rider... reeves is an undercover law enforcement type who's efforts to crack a drug ring (substance B) have become complicated by the fact that his drug use has caused possible permanent brain damage and an irreversible split-mind psychotic condition, with his knowledge of his dual life as undercover cop and drug user having become compartmentalized and unkown to each other... he is essentially tasked with looking for himself! in this respect, somewhat like angel heart? more cult movie than blade runner masterpiece, i thought it was interesting, though not great... sort of like a contemporary sci-fi version of the big lebowski... more serious (about big brother and rampant drug use - well, guess the dude had that, too), far less humor, funny in spots, but usually bleak and cynical humor. worth a watch if you don't hate sci fi, and liked other of his novel/short story to movie translations...

My wife rented this from Amazon about a week ago and I liked it about 100 times more than I expected to. I had read bad reviews for it (I since went back to Rotten Tomatoes and found most of the actually interesting critics actually liked it, which should teach me). It's Linklater, so there's plenty of slacker talk, but it was extremely faithful to the studied ambivalence of the story. The idea that, yes, drugs ruin lives, but yes, government uses that as an excuse to encroach upon our dignity. Winona Ryder gives, by far, her best performance in something like 10 years.

agreed with both on Scanner...good film imo

 

[jdoggydogg]

Bamboozled.....Id say for the most part, I love Spike Lee joints. After looking over his filmography, Ive seen 10 of his movies and the only one I didnt like a good bit was Jungle Fever. Bamboozled wasnt terrible, and I realize its satire, but Lee beats you over the head with this to the point where you dont even want to finish the movie. The movie isnt better than good in any facet, the acting and memorable characters is surprisingly missing for a Lee flick, and Damon Wayans accent is downright annoying. The only enjoyable parts for me were the scenes with Mos Def or Paul Mooney. Might be the only Spike Lee movie I wouldnt recommend. I was reading over some other peoples comments on IMDB and a lot seem to think its one of his best movies .....4/10

Little Children...I actually started watching this wondering it if Id finish it (and knowing if I did it wouldnt be one sitting so it better be good) as I expected sort of a romantic-drama and not a genre that generally interests me, but this movie had me intrigued from the start. The voice-over is slightly tedious at first, but gradually decreases to being used sparingly over the last 45-60 minutes. Instead of a movie with people having affairs and examining morals and such like youll typically see, this went beyond that and was more of a character study almost that demonstrated everyone's flaws in an obvious but brilliant manner. And in the end, these flawed decisions, behaviors, and lack of thinking about the consequences - made by essentially every character except one - was on the level of a child or immature individual. Acting was great all around, especially Kate Winslet (as usual) and Jackie Earle Haley, both of whom were nominated for best supporting actress/actor. Haley was particularly good in his role as a pedophile just released from jail and returning to the community. Although it's been awhile since Ive seen it, many things about this movie had me continuously reminded of Magnolia.....8.8/10

I am a Spike Lee fan. I love Do The Right Thing. I HATED Bamboozled. Preachy, obvious, without a shred of humor. I don't like movies that tell me specifically how I'm supposed to feel about something. Well, this movie doesn't tell you, it's smacks you in the face with it. Awful movie. The only redeeming thing about Bamboozled is the final collage of racist films, TV clips, etc. Little Children is a good movie. It's really not like most movies, and I give it points for that.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

 

[fsufan]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

no #### that won best picture

 

[KarmaPolice]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I think a poster in the awards thread said it best - the Academy got to correct another thing they feel guilty about by not having a woman win Best Director yet. Hurt Locker was good, but IMO that's what a lot of the campaign was about - Cameron vs. his ex wife.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

While I disagree with a lot of you........those who continually post about how much they disliked Burn After Reading, I'm looking at you............but I found A Serious Man to be, well.........not very good. Or at least, not very interesting. We shut it off halfway through, on the second attempt to watch it. Maybe it's because I didn't grow up Jewish, but I just found little or nothing at all to hold my interest. The opening fable was okay, but in reading on Wikipedia today, that story was not revisited. And the ending to the story (granted, this coming from an excerpt on wiki) seemed like there was no closure to the story at all. Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm really hoping that this was just a labor of love type pic from the Coens, and that they are back on track pretty soon. (1/5)

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

While I disagree with a lot of you........those who continually post about how much they disliked Burn After Reading, I'm looking at you.

some day I may choose to give this movie another chance and might find things to like about, but it was a huge miss for me the first time I saw it. I can't even think of another Coen brothers movie that I dislike.

 

[Buckychudd]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I agree that Hurt Locker shouldn't have won Best Picture or Director.However, Inglourious Basterds was a horrble piece of ####, the only redemming thing about it was Christoph Waltz (a very deserved Supporting Actor award) and the Mexican standoff scene.

 

[Worm]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I agree that Hurt Locker shouldn't have won Best Picture or Director.However, Inglourious Basterds was a horrble piece of ####, the only redemming thing about it was Christoph Waltz (a very deserved Supporting Actor award) and the Mexican standoff scene.

Oh come on.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.

I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

 

[Buckychudd]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I didn't hate Hurt Locker....just don't think it was deserving of Best Picture. I compare it to a movie like Black Hawk Down and it comes up short.

 

[saintfool]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.

I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I didn't hate Hurt Locker....just don't think it was deserving of Best Picture. I compare it to a movie like Black Hawk Down and it comes up short.

i think there are a number of better "war" movies. i don't think "hurt locker" compares favorably with "the sands of iwo jima" or "all quiet on the western front" at all.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

Eh, opinions are like... elbows, everybody has one. I think Tarantino should be proud that Basterds was nominated and got best supporting actor. Plus, I'll bet he doesn't really care what the Academy thinks. I also didn't think Basterds was nearly as good as you think it was.

I guarantee Tarantino wanted that Oscar.

 

[jdoggydogg]

While I disagree with a lot of you........those who continually post about how much they disliked Burn After Reading, I'm looking at you............but I found A Serious Man to be, well.........not very good. Or at least, not very interesting. We shut it off halfway through, on the second attempt to watch it. Maybe it's because I didn't grow up Jewish, but I just found little or nothing at all to hold my interest. The opening fable was okay, but in reading on Wikipedia today, that story was not revisited. And the ending to the story (granted, this coming from an excerpt on wiki) seemed like there was no closure to the story at all. Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm really hoping that this was just a labor of love type pic from the Coens, and that they are back on track pretty soon. (1/5)

I just enjoy the overall Coen aesthetic. It's not that the movie is very coherent or exciting. But I like their weirdness just as a change of pace from normal movies.

 

[jdoggydogg]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I liked Hurt Locker. I thought it was a very thoughtful movie.

 

[RudiStein]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I agree that Hurt Locker shouldn't have won Best Picture or Director.However, Inglourious Basterds was a horrble piece of ####

Oh come on.

No, he's right. Terrible movie.

 

[fasteddie_21]

caught guy ritchie's "rock'n'rolla" last night. such a waste of time. it's like he was ripping off himself somehow. all of the trademark ritchie touches are there but it's poorer, diluted version of them. i was bored by this, quite frankly.

Didnt like it nearly as much as Snatch or Lock, Stock, but that doesnt mean all that much considering how much I like both of those. I thought this started off slow and the characters weren't as immediately intriguing, but it picked up quite nicely. I thought Mark Strong (Tom Wilkinson's No. 1) was probably the highlight of the acting and good to know he'll have a big role in the next one. I dont like how Ritchie's films seem to follow the same formula of multiple people wanting an object (shotguns, diamond, painting). I realize there are other things to each film's storyline, but I think he's a good enough writer/director to not need to rely on that. I'll def be checking out the sequel.Also, RockNRolla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Revolver. Revolver was almost unfinishable.

Very

 

[saintfool]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I agree that Hurt Locker shouldn't have won Best Picture or Director.However, Inglourious Basterds was a horrble piece of ####

Oh come on.

No, he's right. Terrible movie.

you're just biased because it misspelled "bastards". you couldn't let that go, could you?

 

[RudiStein]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

I agree that Hurt Locker shouldn't have won Best Picture or Director.However, Inglourious Basterds was a horrble piece of ####

Oh come on.

No, he's right. Terrible movie.

you're just biased because it misspelled "bastards". you couldn't let that go, could you?

Actually that was the cleverest thing about the movie.

 

[Drifter]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I liked Hurt Locker. I thought it was a very thoughtful movie.

Watched it Saturday night. I thought it was good. I just didn't get Best Picture great out of it. That said, I don't think there was really a lot of quality choices in Best Picture this year. Lots of good movies, just no great ones.

 

[jdoggydogg]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I liked Hurt Locker. I thought it was a very thoughtful movie.

Watched it Saturday night. I thought it was good. I just didn't get Best Picture great out of it. That said, I don't think there was really a lot of quality choices in Best Picture this year. Lots of good movies, just no great ones.

Yeah, not a strong year for movies.

 

[Chaka]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I liked Hurt Locker. I thought it was a very thoughtful movie.

Watched it Saturday night. I thought it was good. I just didn't get Best Picture great out of it. That said, I don't think there was really a lot of quality choices in Best Picture this year. Lots of good movies, just no great ones.

Yeah, not a strong year for movies.

I am pretty sure I hear that exact statement (not necessarily from you) every single year.It was a fine year for movies.

 

[Chaka]

I'm not going to start a thread about this, but I think it's insane that Hurt Locker won Best Picture and Best Director. Bigelow isn't on par with Tarantino as a director. And while I liked Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds was a far better movie.

Eh, opinions are like... elbows, everybody has one. I think Tarantino should be proud that Basterds was nominated and got best supporting actor. Plus, I'll bet he doesn't really care what the Academy thinks. I also didn't think Basterds was nearly as good as you think it was.

I have to agree. I have seen 9 of the 10 nominees (Up In The Air) and I have no problem with The Hurt Locker winning best picture.Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

 

[jdoggydogg]

people seem to LOVE or HATE inglorius basterds.

I liked it a lot, but I thought Hurt Locker was excellent as well. Don't get a lot of the hate for it in here.

I liked Hurt Locker. I thought it was a very thoughtful movie.

Watched it Saturday night. I thought it was good. I just didn't get Best Picture great out of it. That said, I don't think there was really a lot of quality choices in Best Picture this year. Lots of good movies, just no great ones.

Yeah, not a strong year for movies.

I am pretty sure I hear that exact statement (not necessarily from you) every single year.It was a fine year for movies.

There were some good movies this year. I just think 2008 was stronger. When I look at the following list of critically-acclaimed movies, 2008 looks better to me:2009

Crazy Heart

An Education

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up in the Air

Where the Wild Things Are

Julie & Julia

A Single Man

The Blind Side

The Messenger

District 9

Invictus

Star Trek

Fantastic Mr. Fox

Avatar

2008

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

There Will Be Blood

The Band's Visit

In Bruges

The Dark Knight

Doubt

Frost/Nixon

Iron Man

Milk

The Reader

Revolutionary Road

WALL-E

4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days

Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead

Burn After Reading

 

[Buckychudd]

Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

The problem with Tarantino is that he does great scenes, but those don't necessarily make great movies.In IG, the opening scene in the farmhouse was great, the scene with the Mexican standoff was great. But the large majority of the rest of the movie was crap. The scenes with Pitt were particularly dreadful.

 

[Worm]

Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

The problem with Tarantino is that he does great scenes, but those don't necessarily make great movies.In IG, the opening scene in the farmhouse was great, the scene with the Mexican standoff was great. But the large majority of the rest of the movie was crap. The scenes with Pitt were particularly dreadful.

I thought the stuff in between the important scenes (which were amazing) was fine, and Pitt's character was great. My only issue was the kid from 'The Office'. I thought he was terrible.

 

[Chaka]

Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

The problem with Tarantino is that he does great scenes, but those don't necessarily make great movies.In IG, the opening scene in the farmhouse was great, the scene with the Mexican standoff was great. But the large majority of the rest of the movie was crap. The scenes with Pitt were particularly dreadful.

Pitt's character seemed like little more than comic relief to me.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

The problem with Tarantino is that he does great scenes, but those don't necessarily make great movies.In IG, the opening scene in the farmhouse was great, the scene with the Mexican standoff was great. But the large majority of the rest of the movie was crap. The scenes with Pitt were particularly dreadful.

Pitt's character seemed like little more than comic relief to me.

Agreed

 

[Chaka]

Inglorious Basterds was an interesting story but Tarantino's trademark too-cool-for-school-but-often-comes-off-as-forced-and-awkward dialogue heavy sequences can be very hit-or-miss with audiences. While I enjoyed IB for the most part I found there were enough of those awkward moments to warrant a legitimate swing-and-a-miss for best picture.

The problem with Tarantino is that he does great scenes, but those don't necessarily make great movies.In IG, the opening scene in the farmhouse was great, the scene with the Mexican standoff was great. But the large majority of the rest of the movie was crap. The scenes with Pitt were particularly dreadful.

Pitt's character seemed like little more than comic relief to me.

Agreed

Marlon Wayans and Chris Tucker both turned down the role before Pitt was cast.

 

[SKribbles]

2012: Got almost everything I expected out of it. Great effects, great sound and completely unrealistic. It was about 45 minutes too long and should have cut out all the crap about the personal relationships. Loved Woody in it. 3/5

Cirque de Freak: The Vampire's Assistant: Pretty boring. Great visuals but very little substance behind it. The actors playing the two boys were awful. John C. Reilly was the only reason I stayed awake as long as I did... I fell asleep with about 30 minutes left and don't plan on turning it back on. And seriously, why in the hell would you Selma Hayek the bearded lady?!?! Ridiculous. 1/5