Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (4 Viewers)

[Chaka]

Machete ...this film takes itself waaaaaay too seriously.

A movie that has a large illegal immigrant using a man's intestine to rappel out of a hospital takes itself too seriously?Am I just missing the sarcasm here?

The movie is a farce. The political message is beaten into your head for 90+ minutes. I have no problem with the message itself but presenting it a little less over the top would have been appreciated.I don't think subtlety is Rodriguez's strong suit.

*** DISCLAIMER ***I HAVE NOT SEEN THIS MOVIE, SO I COULD BE WAY OFF HERE.....................

but are you absolutely sure that there is a message, or could it be that your political associations make you think that there is a message? I'm only asking here, not looking to argue. Once again, I haven't seen the movie, so for all I know it could be 90 minutes of "Open the border" flashing on the screen...........but in just what I know about the film, it seems to be over the top silliness that doesn't take itself seriously at all. But I haven't seen it. I'm just sayin.

This is correct. It's just a joke.

I get the style he is emulating, but it's still a ####ty movie. The joke is on anyone who would pay to see that garbage.70s style exploitation movies were ####ty too. They had poor acting & stunt choreography because they didn't have the money to do better, Rodriguez doesn't have that excuse. Making an homage to ####ty movies by making a ####ty movie still leads to the audience having to suffer through a ####ty movie. Rodriguez needs to be stopped.

 

[Kev4029]

On a side note, I going to see Daniel Tosh on Saturday night. Had the choice between the 7:30 show and the 10:30 show, I figured that the late show had the possibility of lasting longer and it'll likely be a little more offensive which is good, but I'm a little worried about the drunk frat boy factor.

You should always be worried about the Drunk Frat Boy Factor™ at a comedy show. Then again, drunken frat boys nearly ruined True Grit for me last week, so...

I'm not too worried about it at smaller 21+ venues, but being that its Daniel Tosh he will naturally attract tons of college kids and its at a fairly large venue (2-3000ish) with no age limit so it could be a very disappointing night.

 

[Nate]

I get the style he is emulating, but it's still a ####ty movie. The joke is on anyone who would pay to see that garbage.

70s style exploitation movies were ####ty too. They had poor acting & stunt choreography because they didn't have the money to do better, Rodriguez doesn't have that excuse. Making an homage to ####ty movies by making a ####ty movie still leads to the audience having to suffer through a ####ty movie. Rodriguez needs to be stopped.

That's fair. You don't have to like it. I never said it was good, just that it's meant as a joke.Also - watch Black Dynamite if you haven't already, I'd be interested to see if you say the same thing about it.

 

[jdoggydogg]

On a side note, I going to see Daniel Tosh on Saturday night. Had the choice between the 7:30 show and the 10:30 show, I figured that the late show had the possibility of lasting longer and it'll likely be a little more offensive which is good, but I'm a little worried about the drunk frat boy factor.

You should always be worried about the Drunk Frat Boy Factor™ at a comedy show. Then again, drunken frat boys nearly ruined True Grit for me last week, so...

I'm not too worried about it at smaller 21+ venues, but being that its Daniel Tosh he will naturally attract tons of college kids and its at a fairly large venue (2-3000ish) with no age limit so it could be a very disappointing night.

I concur. Hate to think about the kinds of people that'll be at that show.

 

[wikkidpissah]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

Watching this tonight.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

Watching this tonight.

I am so looking forward to this movie.

 

[-fish-]

Clash of the Titans

Whoever decided that remaking one of the greatest movies ever made from my childhood needs to be picked up in a limo, driven to a fine restaurant, allowed to choose from the menu and have the chef personally attend to him/her, given top shelf liquor to enjoy throughout the meal, given tickets to the greatest sports event going on in that city that night, best seats, maybe even a high priced call girl or guy to entertian them after the game.... and then taken outside and gutted like a fish in front of the world as a sacrifice to those in Hollywood that would do it again. Death is too easy on the producers and directors of this. It doesn't even deserve a ranking. All they did was use better special effects and get the MAtthew Broderick Godzilla out of storage and gives it tenticles and drop it in water. I want my two hours back. And a sacrifice.

This.

This movie was 10,000 BC bad. And I'm a huge fan of the original Clash Of The Titans. I probably would be a bit kinder to it (but not much) if they hadn't done such a blatant, cynical money grab on us middle agers (are there people besides those who grew up in the late 70's/early 80's who watched the original?) who they knew had a connection to the original and thus slapped this title on it knowing most of us would watch it eventually. They couldn't just name it something like "Perseus & The Bad CGI" which would more accurately describe their miserable reimagining of this story - no, they had to go all exploitative target market segment and call it Clash Of The Titans, for which I give the film makers an extra helping of #### you. Thank goodness I waited till this came out on HBO to watch it and didn't fork over their target market expected $50 in theater attendance fees to the scuzz bags who made this dreck.

Right out of the gate, they warn us they would be screwing it up magnificently. The narrator tells us in the first 30 seconds that the Kraken was created by the Gods to defeat the Titans. Of course this contradicts the very title of the movie. The Kraken IS a titan. So is Medusa. Hence, Clash of the Titans.

um, no.

 

[El Floppo]

Clash of the Titans

Whoever decided that remaking one of the greatest movies ever made from my childhood needs to be picked up in a limo, driven to a fine restaurant, allowed to choose from the menu and have the chef personally attend to him/her, given top shelf liquor to enjoy throughout the meal, given tickets to the greatest sports event going on in that city that night, best seats, maybe even a high priced call girl or guy to entertian them after the game.... and then taken outside and gutted like a fish in front of the world as a sacrifice to those in Hollywood that would do it again. Death is too easy on the producers and directors of this. It doesn't even deserve a ranking. All they did was use better special effects and get the MAtthew Broderick Godzilla out of storage and gives it tenticles and drop it in water. I want my two hours back. And a sacrifice.

This.

This movie was 10,000 BC bad. And I'm a huge fan of the original Clash Of The Titans. I probably would be a bit kinder to it (but not much) if they hadn't done such a blatant, cynical money grab on us middle agers (are there people besides those who grew up in the late 70's/early 80's who watched the original?) who they knew had a connection to the original and thus slapped this title on it knowing most of us would watch it eventually. They couldn't just name it something like "Perseus & The Bad CGI" which would more accurately describe their miserable reimagining of this story - no, they had to go all exploitative target market segment and call it Clash Of The Titans, for which I give the film makers an extra helping of #### you. Thank goodness I waited till this came out on HBO to watch it and didn't fork over their target market expected $50 in theater attendance fees to the scuzz bags who made this dreck.

Right out of the gate, they warn us they would be screwing it up magnificently. The narrator tells us in the first 30 seconds that the Kraken was created by the Gods to defeat the Titans. Of course this contradicts the very title of the movie. The Kraken IS a titan. So is Medusa. Hence, Clash of the Titans.

um, no.

yeah. no.

 

[joffer]

Law Abiding Citizen - I had low expectations, but this was a pleasant surprise. Some cool twists on the standard revenge theme. A lot of people didn't like the ending, but i did 3.5/5

 

[Joe Mammy]

Two films for which I had similarly low expectations. One passed with flying colors and the other failed miserably.

Machete For a movie that shouldn't have been trying to take itself too seriously, this film takes itself waaaaaay too seriously. Wicked fail.

Wicked fail? Oh, man. I could not disagree more. I've watched it twice since the DVD came out and find it LOL hysterical. It is a comedy and achieved it's goal- at least for me as my side was splitting.

"Cuban?" Offering a box of cigars to Machete.

"No, Mexican."

"Ahhhh." Then offers a box of joints.

Pure gold.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

It's been a long time since I have been as disappointed in a movie as I was when I watched Dinner for Schmucks the other night. I love Zach Galifianakis and Paul Rudd both. I think they are both consistently hilariously funny. Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point. Also, I find that guy from Flight of the Conchords also hysterical. So anywho, I've been wanting to see this since I first saw the trailer back in April. Maybe my hope would have been tempered had I known beforehand that it was a remake of a foreign film (which is almost never any good. The only instance I can think of was the American remake of The Ring.) This movie was horrrrrrrrrrrrible. I can't remember laughing at all. I started to wonder if Carrell's character was going to end up taking a dark turn like Jim Carrey in The Cable Guy.

There is literally nothing good I can say about this movie at all. (1/5)

 

[Chaka]

Two films for which I had similarly low expectations. One passed with flying colors and the other failed miserably.

Machete For a movie that shouldn't have been trying to take itself too seriously, this film takes itself waaaaaay too seriously. Wicked fail.

Wicked fail? Oh, man. I could not disagree more. I've watched it twice since the DVD came out and find it LOL hysterical. It is a comedy and achieved it's goal- at least for me as my side was splitting.

"Cuban?" Offering a box of cigars to Machete.

"No, Mexican."

"Ahhhh." Then offers a box of joints.

Pure gold.

I said I laughed a couple times, that was one of them (body guard quitting in the face of the bladed weed whacker was another).I guess it could fall in the "It's so awful it's funny" category but that still makes it an awful film.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

It's been a long time since I have been as disappointed in a movie as I was when I watched Dinner for Schmucks the other night. I love Zach Galifianakis and Paul Rudd both. I think they are both consistently hilariously funny. Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point. Also, I find that guy from Flight of the Conchords also hysterical. So anywho, I've been wanting to see this since I first saw the trailer back in April. Maybe my hope would have been tempered had I known beforehand that it was a remake of a foreign film (which is almost never any good. The only instance I can think of was the American remake of The Ring.) This movie was horrrrrrrrrrrrible. I can't remember laughing at all. I started to wonder if Carrell's character was going to end up taking a dark turn like Jim Carrey in The Cable Guy.
*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

There is literally nothing good I can say about this movie at all. (1/5)

XStephanie Szostak

 

[shake zula]

Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point.

I think Steve Carrell is hilarious on the office. I've watched the UK version and RG is funny but not funnier than Carrell.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

It's been a long time since I have been as disappointed in a movie as I was when I watched Dinner for Schmucks the other night. I love Zach Galifianakis and Paul Rudd both. I think they are both consistently hilariously funny. Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point. Also, I find that guy from Flight of the Conchords also hysterical. So anywho, I've been wanting to see this since I first saw the trailer back in April. Maybe my hope would have been tempered had I known beforehand that it was a remake of a foreign film (which is almost never any good. The only instance I can think of was the American remake of The Ring.) This movie was horrrrrrrrrrrrible. I can't remember laughing at all. I started to wonder if Carrell's character was going to end up taking a dark turn like Jim Carrey in The Cable Guy.
*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***

");document.close();

There is literally nothing good I can say about this movie at all. (1/5)

XStephanie Szostak

That's funny. I ALMOST edited it after posting to say "except for the girlfriend, who was hot."

 

[krista4]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

Watching this tonight.

I am so looking forward to this movie.

Watched it on the way down to Nicaragua. Better than expected (despite all the critical praise, I had low-ish expectations); kept me interested; agree about the character arcs; extremely funny script IMO; impeccable acting by everyone, having seen interviews with all the real-life major players. Also, I have to say that the ending (I'll say nothing other than "refresh") was about as perfect an ending as I've seen.Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point.

I think Steve Carrell is hilarious on the office. I've watched the UK version and RG is funny but not funnier than Carrell.

I think Ricky Gervais captures "awkward turtle" funny with that role. Steve Carrell goes more for "stupid funny". Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Maybe if I hadn't seen the UK version first.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

I would say that it's not nearly this good. I really enjoyed the movie until about the 1/2 way point (right around the time Timberlake's character came into the picture). Basically, I enjoyed the way Fincher set up the development an idea behind the company, but once it turned into more of a "who owes who money" I started to lose interest quickly. Seems like the tone of the movie besides scenes here and there turned very un-Fincher too. I would expect it still to crack the top 10 movies of the year for me, but I wouldn't consider it the best picture of the year by a long shot. For a MUCH better Fincher movie recently turn to Zodiac.

 

[shake zula]

Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point.

I think Steve Carrell is hilarious on the office. I've watched the UK version and RG is funny but not funnier than Carrell.

I think Ricky Gervais captures "awkward turtle" funny with that role. Steve Carrell goes more for "stupid funny". Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Maybe if I hadn't seen the UK version first.

During the first season I agreed. But seasons 2-current, Carrell hasn't relied on "stupid funny". On a side note US Dwight >>>>>>> UK Dwight.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

I would say that it's not nearly this good. I really enjoyed the movie until about the 1/2 way point (right around the time Timberlake's character came into the picture). Basically, I enjoyed the way Fincher set up the development an idea behind the company, but once it turned into more of a "who owes who money" I started to lose interest quickly. Seems like the tone of the movie besides scenes here and there turned very un-Fincher too. I would expect it still to crack the top 10 movies of the year for me, but I wouldn't consider it the best picture of the year by a long shot. For a MUCH better Fincher movie recently turn to Zodiac.

Are you kidding? Zodiac was a total snoozefest.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

Watching this tonight.

I am so looking forward to this movie.

Watched it on the way down to Nicaragua. Better than expected (despite all the critical praise, I had low-ish expectations); kept me interested; agree about the character arcs; extremely funny script IMO; impeccable acting by everyone, having seen interviews with all the real-life major players. Also, I have to say that the ending (I'll say nothing other than "refresh") was about as perfect an ending as I've seen.Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point.

I think Steve Carrell is hilarious on the office. I've watched the UK version and RG is funny but not funnier than Carrell.

I think Ricky Gervais captures "awkward turtle" funny with that role. Steve Carrell goes more for "stupid funny". Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Maybe if I hadn't seen the UK version first.

During the first season I agreed. But seasons 2-current, Carrell hasn't relied on "stupid funny". On a side note US Dwight >>>>>>> UK Dwight.

I've only tried 1 or 2 episodes, so perhaps you're right. And I did think the US Dwight is better.

 

[El Floppo]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

I would say that it's not nearly this good. I really enjoyed the movie until about the 1/2 way point (right around the time Timberlake's character came into the picture). Basically, I enjoyed the way Fincher set up the development an idea behind the company, but once it turned into more of a "who owes who money" I started to lose interest quickly. Seems like the tone of the movie besides scenes here and there turned very un-Fincher too. I would expect it still to crack the top 10 movies of the year for me, but I wouldn't consider it the best picture of the year by a long shot. For a MUCH better Fincher movie recently turn to Zodiac.

Are you kidding? Zodiac was a total snoozefest.

Kinda agree. I remember being shouted down in here when it first came out- but the movie did next to nothing for me.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

I would say that it's not nearly this good. I really enjoyed the movie until about the 1/2 way point (right around the time Timberlake's character came into the picture). Basically, I enjoyed the way Fincher set up the development an idea behind the company, but once it turned into more of a "who owes who money" I started to lose interest quickly. Seems like the tone of the movie besides scenes here and there turned very un-Fincher too. I would expect it still to crack the top 10 movies of the year for me, but I wouldn't consider it the best picture of the year by a long shot. For a MUCH better Fincher movie recently turn to Zodiac.

Are you kidding? Zodiac was a total snoozefest.

Different strokes and all....

 

[saintfool]

Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

that's pretty much fincher's thing, imo. i haven't seen "benjamin button" or "social network" but pretty much everything else in his body of work i have.

 

[El Floppo]

What are you guys thinking about Sofia Coppola's new film Somewhere?

Gotta say, I HATED Marie Antionette with such a passion, that seeing another one of her films will take some work. Saw the previews for Somewhere and it really smacked of much of what I hated about MA- like getting dragged by a precocious, pretentious celebrity kid 5 year old into her room so she can show you the crappy art she's made of her friends or fabulous place she's visited.

BUt ok- I genuinely liked Lost in Translation and marginally liked Virgin Suicides, so if the right people in here advise it, I guess I'll see Somewhere too.

 

[krista4]

What are you guys thinking about Sofia Coppola's new film Somewhere?

Gotta say, I HATED Marie Antionette with such a passion, that seeing another one of her films will take some work. Saw the previews for Somewhere and it really smacked of much of what I hated about MA- like getting dragged by a precocious, pretentious celebrity kid 5 year old into her room so she can show you the crappy art she's made of her friends or fabulous place she's visited.

BUt ok- I genuinely liked Lost in Translation and marginally liked Virgin Suicides, so if the right people in here advise it, I guess I'll see Somewhere too.

Read a terrible review in The New Yorker that pretty much destroyed any thoughts I had of seeing it. Haven't heard anything word-of-mouth on this.

 

[saintfool]

What are you guys thinking about Sofia Coppola's new film Somewhere?

Gotta say, I HATED Marie Antionette with such a passion, that seeing another one of her films will take some work. Saw the previews for Somewhere and it really smacked of much of what I hated about MA- like getting dragged by a precocious, pretentious celebrity kid 5 year old into her room so she can show you the crappy art she's made of her friends or fabulous place she's visited.

BUt ok- I genuinely liked Lost in Translation and marginally liked Virgin Suicides, so if the right people in here advise it, I guess I'll see Somewhere too.

i'll go see it because i have enjoyed pretty much everything she's put out. i will admit to thinking stephen dorff is a a curious casting choice, especially as a lead. i am one of the few people that liked "marie antoinette", i think. least interesting to me was "virgin suicides" but having read the book, it was doomed to fail.

 

[El Floppo]

What are you guys thinking about Sofia Coppola's new film Somewhere?

Gotta say, I HATED Marie Antionette with such a passion, that seeing another one of her films will take some work. Saw the previews for Somewhere and it really smacked of much of what I hated about MA- like getting dragged by a precocious, pretentious celebrity kid 5 year old into her room so she can show you the crappy art she's made of her friends or fabulous place she's visited.

BUt ok- I genuinely liked Lost in Translation and marginally liked Virgin Suicides, so if the right people in here advise it, I guess I'll see Somewhere too.

Read a terrible review in The New Yorker that pretty much destroyed any thoughts I had of seeing it. Haven't heard anything word-of-mouth on this.

hmmm- that reminds me that my NYers haven't been following me to my new address.let me know if you hear anything else. Did you see Marie Antoinette? I'm remembering that I loved the soundtrack- Coppola and I have pretty similar musical tastes- but everything else was horrible. I knew early in the movie as she flimed the lead's hand waving in the wind out the window of her stagecoach that this was going to be bad.

 

[sartre]

Right out of the gate, they warn us they would be screwing it up magnificently. The narrator tells us in the first 30 seconds that the Kraken was created by the Gods to defeat the Titans. Of course this contradicts the very title of the movie. The Kraken IS a titan. So is Medusa. Hence, Clash of the Titans.

um, no.

yeah. no.

Of course, neither version was completely true to the classic Greek myths, in which the Titans were fathers of the Gods of Olympus. But in the original Clash, the Kraken was absolutely considered a Titan. The witches told Perseus there was only one way to defeat him, with Medusa: "a Titan against a Titan!"What did you think the title meant?

 

[jdoggydogg]

It's been a long time since I have been as disappointed in a movie as I was when I watched Dinner for Schmucks the other night. I love Zach Galifianakis and Paul Rudd both. I think they are both consistently hilariously funny. Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point. Also, I find that guy from Flight of the Conchords also hysterical. So anywho, I've been wanting to see this since I first saw the trailer back in April. Maybe my hope would have been tempered had I known beforehand that it was a remake of a foreign film (which is almost never any good. The only instance I can think of was the American remake of The Ring.) This movie was horrrrrrrrrrrrible. I can't remember laughing at all. I started to wonder if Carrell's character was going to end up taking a dark turn like Jim Carrey in The Cable Guy.
*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

There is literally nothing good I can say about this movie at all. (1/5)

Dammit

 

[jdoggydogg]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

Watching this tonight.

I am so looking forward to this movie.

Watched it on the way down to Nicaragua. Better than expected (despite all the critical praise, I had low-ish expectations); kept me interested; agree about the character arcs; extremely funny script IMO; impeccable acting by everyone, having seen interviews with all the real-life major players. Also, I have to say that the ending (I'll say nothing other than "refresh") was about as perfect an ending as I've seen.Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

I see. "Soulless" is hard to define, so it's possible I won't even notice.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Steve Carrell is funny on occasion, even though I think he took the Ricky Gervais Office role and butchered it, but that's beside the point.

I think Steve Carrell is hilarious on the office. I've watched the UK version and RG is funny but not funnier than Carrell.

I think Ricky Gervais captures "awkward turtle" funny with that role. Steve Carrell goes more for "stupid funny". Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Maybe if I hadn't seen the UK version first.

During the first season I agreed. But seasons 2-current, Carrell hasn't relied on "stupid funny". On a side note US Dwight >>>>>>> UK Dwight.

While I love both series, I completely agree.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Just watched The Social Network on DVD. Had mixed feelings going in cuz i like Sorkin but i'm old & think the web gen is largely a bul#### gen. Structure. Pacing. Wit. Tactility. Took me to a world i didnt know & made me feel a damn fool for not knowing it. Every freakin' character arced beautifully. The closest to a perfect movie i've seen in a very long time.

I would say that it's not nearly this good. I really enjoyed the movie until about the 1/2 way point (right around the time Timberlake's character came into the picture). Basically, I enjoyed the way Fincher set up the development an idea behind the company, but once it turned into more of a "who owes who money" I started to lose interest quickly. Seems like the tone of the movie besides scenes here and there turned very un-Fincher too. I would expect it still to crack the top 10 movies of the year for me, but I wouldn't consider it the best picture of the year by a long shot. For a MUCH better Fincher movie recently turn to Zodiac.

Are you kidding? Zodiac was a total snoozefest.

No.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

that's pretty much fincher's thing, imo. i haven't seen "benjamin button" or "social network" but pretty much everything else in his body of work i have.

That's true. Fincher seems to have a tendency to be a cold presence in his movies. A critic compared him to Stanley Kubrick in this regard, and I think that's an apt comparison.

 

[saintfool]

Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

that's pretty much fincher's thing, imo. i haven't seen "benjamin button" or "social network" but pretty much everything else in his body of work i have.

That's true. Fincher seems to have a tendency to be a cold presence in his movies. A critic compared him to Stanley Kubrick in this regard, and I think that's an apt comparison.

i think part of it for him is the look of his films. he shoots on digital and everything is meticulously arranged. his visual style is an integral part of his storytelling and they inform the audience somehow. all of his films look good even if they have a habit of removing the viewer ever so slightly.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

that's pretty much fincher's thing, imo. i haven't seen "benjamin button" or "social network" but pretty much everything else in his body of work i have.

That's true. Fincher seems to have a tendency to be a cold presence in his movies. A critic compared him to Stanley Kubrick in this regard, and I think that's an apt comparison.

i think part of it for him is the look of his films. he shoots on digital and everything is meticulously arranged. his visual style is an integral part of his storytelling and they inform the audience somehow. all of his films look good even if they have a habit of removing the viewer ever so slightly.

Yes. This is the reason I thought Zodiac was so effective. Fincher's emotionally aloof, and that only enhances a movie with a cold, sociopathic killer.

 

[TylerRoseFan]

The Descent

Interesting movie. Didn't really think the characters were well developed. There were some pretty good pucker moments. A very well done claustrophobic moment. The ending was pretty good. Decent gore. I just hate it when people do stupid stuff to exacerbate bad situations in movies. There were a few cases of this. Monsters were pretty well done. Overall not a bad flick, but it's not something I'll watch again.

3/5

 

[KarmaPolice]

Despite all that, there was something soulless about the movie that bothered me and I can't quite put my finger on, and it's NOT just that pretty much all the people in the story were themselves soulless. Something that kept it from going from very good to great IMO. Have to keep thinking about it. 4/5

that's pretty much fincher's thing, imo. i haven't seen "benjamin button" or "social network" but pretty much everything else in his body of work i have.

That's true. Fincher seems to have a tendency to be a cold presence in his movies. A critic compared him to Stanley Kubrick in this regard, and I think that's an apt comparison.

i think part of it for him is the look of his films. he shoots on digital and everything is meticulously arranged. his visual style is an integral part of his storytelling and they inform the audience somehow. all of his films look good even if they have a habit of removing the viewer ever so slightly.

Yes. This is the reason I thought Zodiac was so effective. Fincher's emotionally aloof, and that only enhances a movie with a cold, sociopathic killer.

After thinking about it today, this is what was bugging me about The Social Network. He has a great style when it comes to serial killers and split personalities, but maybe not with normal people. I think what was bugging me about the movie is that it felt like a magazine article about how Facebook came to be, and it was as though he didn't feel the need to dig any deeper into the characters. I guess I wanted more from the 'what makes these people tick' angle, and less from the 'this is what happened' angle.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Yes. This is the reason I thought Zodiac was so effective. Fincher's emotionally aloof, and that only enhances a movie with a cold, sociopathic killer.

After thinking about it today, this is what was bugging me about The Social Network. He has a great style when it comes to serial killers and split personalities, but maybe not with normal people. I think what was bugging me about the movie is that it felt like a magazine article about how Facebook came to be, and it was as though he didn't feel the need to dig any deeper into the characters. I guess I wanted more from the 'what makes these people tick' angle, and less from the 'this is what happened' angle.

Hmmmm. I'll see it early February and compare notes then...

 

[Statorama]

Watched "I Saw The Devil" yesterday and thought it was an original, effective thriller. It's a subtitled korean film about a secret agent that's hunting the serial killer that killed his (the SA's) fiancee. Given that premise, I had my mental cue cards ready on how the plot would unfold. I was surprised with the angle it took, and anytime a movie can do that it's got me locked in for the full ride. Extremely brutal and graphic at points, but never dull. Even though it could have used some trimming, it was reasonably paced even at 144 minutes (!).

If you can handle the violence (lots of skulls getting hit with blunt objects several times) it's worth a watch.

 

[Papa Georgio]

Unthinkable - Excellent movie, will make you cringe at points but in this case the gore is part of the story not THE story. I highly recommend this one. 4/5

Monsters - very slow, monsters almost comical, never felt much chemistry between the 2 main characters. 2/5

Daybreakers - not bad if you are into movies like Blade. I figure most people will know what they getting into and if they watch it they will like it. 3/5

Exam - Surprisingly good. Very similar to The Cube but I didn't like Exam quite as well. If you like your movies to be like puzzles then this one is for you. 3.5/5

The Disappearance of Alice Creed - Like exam it all takes place in one room...well mostly. It gets a little contrived at times but overall it was very enjoyable. I can't really compare it to anything but it is a fairly dark tale of betrayal in many directions during a kidnapping. 3/5

Repo Men - I wanted to like this more but it never hooked me. With all the big names in it I guess I expected more. I think one problem is that so many movies like this one have been done better. It reminds me of a darker version of many movies - Minority Report, Total Recall, 8th Day, Surrogates...etc. 2/5

 

[Darrinll40]

Watching Gunless right now. I didn't know if I would like it, but so far it is enjoyable and funny.

I tried for 20 minutes to remember where I saw the star Paul Gross, then looked it up. It turns out he was the star of the late 90's series Due South. I enjoyed that show, so I am acquiring it now.

 

[D_House]

Asphalt Jungle - influential noir/heist film from 1950 directed by John Huston and starring Sterling Hayden (the General from Dr. Strangelove) and featuring Marilyn Monroe in one of her first roles.

Watched this on Netflix streaming and though it is entertaining, it is definitely dated. The acting is wooden and Hayden in particular has some unintentionally funny line readings. There is a palpable tension (particularly during the heist) despite limited use of the gimmicks we see in modern movies. I'd recommend it only to fans of the genre and/or Monroe - she looks great in a low cut dress.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Saw Surrogates.

Average Sci Fi.

Some good parts, some same-old-stuff

 

[Bojang0301]

Exit Through the Gift Shop - Never have I been so astounded by a documentary. This started out very slow and didn't seem to have a direction and then had a huge, POW, epiphany moment. I'm not sure if Banksy is playing the worlds biggest practical joke but he sends a heck of a message here: The joke is on us all.

 

[wikkidpissah]

Rented "The Town" along with "Social Network" and watched it today. Tight, taut, good Sydney Pollack kinda story telling. I'm from Metro Boston and was glad there were no affected Boston accents & that there was a mix of those who talk that way ovah heah & those who dont (even in Boston propah, about 1/3 of the population have little-to-no accent). They didnt quite get Boston sarcasm down though & left quite a few rippahs on the table. Charlestown never looked better, i can tell you that. Hate car chases like poison but this one thru the narrow, barely-navigable streets of the old town worked pretty well. They occasionally tugged when they didnt have to but, Affleck gave his best performance & Rebecca Hall (who i fell in love with in Frost/Nixon) was radiant. If i hadnt seen Social Network yesterday, i would have said that this was the best movie ive seen in at least a yr.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I'm going to need some help with my grading here:

I finally saw Iron Man last night. Yeah, I know, I'm really behind the times. That said, Iron Man was my favorite comic when I was a kid. I still remember (though not completely) the story where Tony Stark had lunch with a woman and bought the entirety of Disneyland for a day to enjoy the lunch in private. But I can't remember a lot of things that bugs me.

Did the public ever know that Stark was Iron Man? And was the dad's partner ever a real bad guy?

Those two are driving me crazy in the sphere of thinking about this movie. RDJ absolutely nailed the role for the movie. You have to give him that. I don't remember Stark being such an unapologetic playboy but I can look past that for the Hollywood angle whether or not it was true, but the two questions above bug me. First, letting the world know he's Iron Man. I hate that desire in superhero movies lately to do that. The thing that always kills any of the Batman movies for me (and there are several beyond this, but this is usually the first thing) is that they always have the hero out himself to someone when I don't recall too many people ever really knowing who the hero was. It's overkill in Batman, and in Iron Man it was completely unnecessary. Again, though, I don't remember if Stark ever outed himself like that.

As for the dad's partner, he just wasn't a convincing bad guy to me. The final confrontation just felt forced to me. Like they needed a bad guy and they fell into this one - but again I don't remember if that meshes with the comic at all.

Overall, the movie was a ton of fun and I can see why it got such high praise. They did a very good job of giving you the background of Iron Man and how Tony came to use it, and the effects weren't so ridiculous as to take away from the story. It was very realistic in that which was fun to see. Overall it gets at least 3.5 starts from me and probably somehwere over 4 if I had to put down a number. But those two questions above bother me for some reason. They just didn't feel right.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I'm going to need some help with my grading here:

I finally saw Iron Man last night. Yeah, I know, I'm really behind the times. That said, Iron Man was my favorite comic when I was a kid.

When I was in my mid-teens, I set out to collect ALL the Iron Man series. I think I got about 1/3 of the way done before I realized how expensive it was going to be (even at that time it was on issue 250+).

I think the oldest I have is like #8.