What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (5 Viewers)

HBO had something on last night be M. Night Sham about people trapped in an elevator with an old woman who was satan. I only caught the last 15 minutes but I must tell you that in those 15 minutes I determined that what I was watching might have been the biggest pile of movie dog poo ever created. How does he keep finding funds for movies? Do these things even go into the theaters anymore?
Clearly you havent seen much N. Might if your thought this was his worst
Yeah. Watch The Last Airbender and get back to me.
The source material deserves so much more than the suckfest Shyamalan delivered.
Definitely. My son watches the animated series. From the bits I've seen, it's very good. There's a movie that deserves to be remade.
It's worth actively watching with him. Remarkable storytelling.
Oh yes. The first time I ever sat down to watch it with him, there was this touching scene with an old man weeping over the loss of his son. Incredibly touching.
:blackdot: my teenage :nerd: nieces loved this. But they also loved Dragon Tales.
 
Your Highness

I had to watch it. Like Kenny Powers, Netflix recommended it has a 4 star+ movie for me. I'm curious to know what rankings this was based off of, because this WAS awful. What was really strange is the amount of money and effort put forth by everyone but Franco and McBride. I don't think Portman's character had any idea what kind of movie she was in. There were actually a couple special effects scenes that probably would have been awesome in another movie (The eye cave and the hand monster). The really weird part is that the worst part of the movie is actually the most enjoyable, and that is Franco and McBride talking like idiots. For that reason alone I have a feeling that I'll end up watching this a time or two after bar close before my time here is done.

2/5



Faster

I was too lazy to go to the theater to catch Drive last night, so I rented this. The Rock is an absolute beast in this. Like the characters with no name schtick. Always good to see Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje on film, could never get enough of that guy. Always have a soft spot for the one man on an ###-kicking spree films, and this one plays out like an old fashioned western.

4/5

 
1 - Mankind is diminished by this movie's very existence. Ex: Human Centepede

2 - Horrible in every way, except that the story is less offensive. Ex: Shark Boy & Lava Girl

3 - Horrible in almost every way and probably a vanity project. Ex: Glitter or Gigli

4 - Usually a comedy that but ends up being irredeemably un-funny. Or an action movie with no internal logic. Or a kids movie with excessive profanity. Ex: Step Brothers/The Other Guys/Ant Bully/Terminator: Salvation/Troy

5 - You could see what they were trying to do, but nothing ended up working and you wanted it to end sooner rather than later(but you end up forgetting about it as soon as you turn it off). Ex: The DaVinci Code

6 - Not awful, but nothing too memorable and/or rewatchable either. Ex: Road To Perdition

7 - Hey! That was pretty good, and in a pinch I'd watch that again and enjoy it as much the 2nd time. Ex: Inglorious Basterds

8 - That was really good and I'll probably buy that one on Blu Ray because I'd watch that a few times. Ex: Memento/Inception, •Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

9 - I enjoyed that one and clearly that is one of the best movies in the genre. And/or it was likely groundbreaking. Ex: The Matrix, Black Hawk Down, Die Hard, Jaws

10 - Fits the criteria of level 9 rating, but adds something extra that makes it personal to me. Ex: Miller's Crossing, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars
I guess I was thrown off a bit by your 6.5 is getting into insulting territory. I love seeing what other people's rating systems are. I THINK mine breaks down to something like this:

10/10: One of the best movies of all time - perfect or damn near perfect.

9/10: Great movie. Maybe not GOAT, but one of the best movies that came out that year/best of the decade.

8/10: Damn good movie. Equivalent of making a 'best of the year list' or one of the best of the genre.

7/10: Good movie. One that that I would watch a few more times, or that I like but know isn't that good, so a lot of guilty pleasures end up here.

6/10: Slightly above average. Probably would consider watching it 1-2 more times, but didn't get much out of it.

5/10: Average movie. OK, I got through it, but wouldn't pop it in again.

4/10: Below average movie. I made it through it, didn't like it, but could see something in it that I would still consider suggesting to others

3/10: Bad movie. Got through it, didn't like it, and didn't see anything to warrant suggesting to anybody else.

2/10: damn bad movie - couldn't get through it without using the FF button.

1/10: Terrible movie - had to turn it off.
The only differences, and they are slight, between yours and mine are in the 4, 5, 6 range.
 
'hooter311 said:
Your Highness

I had to watch it. Like Kenny Powers, Netflix recommended it has a 4 star+ movie for me. I'm curious to know what rankings this was based off of, because this WAS awful. What was really strange is the amount of money and effort put forth by everyone but Franco and McBride. I don't think Portman's character had any idea what kind of movie she was in. There were actually a couple special effects scenes that probably would have been awesome in another movie (The eye cave and the hand monster). The really weird part is that the worst part of the movie is actually the most enjoyable, and that is Franco and McBride talking like idiots. For that reason alone I have a feeling that I'll end up watching this a time or two after bar close before my time here is done.

2/5
This movie is total ####. The weird part is how bad the writing is. There's really no script.
 
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.

 
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.
Actually, yes I was expecting Die Hard or Predator.I remember when those hit the theaters and that is exactly what they were trying to sell us with The Expendables. They were selling Predator and Die Hard blatantly even, with those B.S. Willis and Schwarzenegger 'cameos' which were for nothing more than to put their names in the commercials alongside Stallone.

Total Failure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.
Actually, yes I was expecting Die Hard or Predator.I remember when those hit the theaters and that is exactly what they were trying to sell us with The Expendables. They were selling Predator and Die Hard blatantly even, with those B.S. Willis and Schwarzenegger 'cameos' which were for nothing more than to put their names in the commercials alongside Stallone.

Total Failure.
I don't think they were trying to sell us Predator. I think you were trying to buy Predator, and bought an average B movie, instead. This movie is intended to be over the top and ridiculous.

 
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.
Actually, yes I was expecting Die Hard or Predator.I remember when those hit the theaters and that is exactly what they were trying to sell us with The Expendables. They were selling Predator and Die Hard blatantly even, with those B.S. Willis and Schwarzenegger 'cameos' which were for nothing more than to put their names in the commercials alongside Stallone.

Total Failure.
I don't think they were trying to sell us Predator. I think you were trying to buy Predator, and bought an average B movie, instead. This movie is intended to be over the top and ridiculous.
Fine, call it Commando instead. Machete was supposed to be over the top and ridiculous, my impression was that this was a pathetic attempt by an aging action star to recapture past glory. Everything about this film felt forced. For me it missed the mark on every level.Personally I thought The Losers was what The Expendables intended to be but star power wins the day and Expendables gets a sequel. I guess I am in the minority on that one.

 
'Chaka said:
'jdoggydogg said:
'Chaka said:
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.
Actually, yes I was expecting Die Hard or Predator.I remember when those hit the theaters and that is exactly what they were trying to sell us with The Expendables. They were selling Predator and Die Hard blatantly even, with those B.S. Willis and Schwarzenegger 'cameos' which were for nothing more than to put their names in the commercials alongside Stallone.

Total Failure.
I don't think they were trying to sell us Predator. I think you were trying to buy Predator, and bought an average B movie, instead. This movie is intended to be over the top and ridiculous.
Fine, call it Commando instead. Machete was supposed to be over the top and ridiculous, my impression was that this was a pathetic attempt by an aging action star to recapture past glory. Everything about this film felt forced. For me it missed the mark on every level.Personally I thought The Losers was what The Expendables intended to be but star power wins the day and Expendables gets a sequel. I guess I am in the minority on that one.
+1
 
Scream 3:

I am starting my annual dip into horror movies again. I will be able to watch Scream 4 tonight or over the weekend, so I thought I would revisit the series. I have seen the first 2 enough that I didn't need to the see them, but couldn't remember this one. I think there is a reason for that - it isn't that good. So in this one Ghostface is killing off characters that are in the movie sequel Stab 3 based on the original murders. There are a couple of fun/clever things in the movie, but mostly what made Scream so great has become rehashed enough that it is stale. It has become the type of predictable, mediocre movie that they seem to like giving the nod to with all the 'rules' about what it going to happen. I would rate: Scream 8/10, Scream 2 6/10, and this one 5/10. Think I have heard that the 4th is a decent installment for the series, but really hope that in decade that has passed since this one they have thought of something a little better to bring life back into this series.

 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:

Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.

 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
I do think that's part of it. It seemed like some of the characters would have (and should have) received virtually no screen time. But due to the fact it was a name they tried forcing something that didn't feel natural.ETA - It was nice they threw in some cameos from Willis and Arnold but even that interaction felt like it should have been edited out. Too much awkward and forced screen time trying to get everyone into the picture.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:

Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
This movie was a bait and switch, they try to sell us Stallone, Arnold & Willis and then give us Randy Couture, Steve Austin and Terry Crews instead.Terrible.

 
'Chaka said:
'jdoggydogg said:
'Chaka said:
The Expendables

Ok. So this movie sucks, right? That's what I've read in this forum more than once. #### that. This movie is sweet. What were people expecting? Die Hard? Predator? This movie is totally cliche, totally cheesy, and totally awesome. I always wonder what motivates bad reviews. If someone criticizes an Oscar contender like The Blind Side, I think there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. But what kind of expectations did you have when you rented The Expendables? This is a B movie - nothing more, nothing less. It never aspires to be anything more than that, and that's why it succeeds.
Actually, yes I was expecting Die Hard or Predator.I remember when those hit the theaters and that is exactly what they were trying to sell us with The Expendables. They were selling Predator and Die Hard blatantly even, with those B.S. Willis and Schwarzenegger 'cameos' which were for nothing more than to put their names in the commercials alongside Stallone.

Total Failure.
I don't think they were trying to sell us Predator. I think you were trying to buy Predator, and bought an average B movie, instead. This movie is intended to be over the top and ridiculous.
Fine, call it Commando instead. Machete was supposed to be over the top and ridiculous, my impression was that this was a pathetic attempt by an aging action star to recapture past glory. Everything about this film felt forced. For me it missed the mark on every level.Personally I thought The Losers was what The Expendables intended to be but star power wins the day and Expendables gets a sequel. I guess I am in the minority on that one.
+1
:goodposting: Saw them around the same time and had the same thought.

 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:

Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
This movie was a bait and switch, they try to sell us Stallone, Arnold & Willis and then give us Randy Couture, Steve Austin and Terry Crews instead.Terrible.
Those guys are barely in it either.It's a Stallone/Statham film. They have the most screen time and actual side plots.

Losers was a great action film, but they didn't try to be on the "B" level. Expendables knows full well where the bar was set as far as biceps, guns, and blood.

 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:

Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
This movie was a bait and switch, they try to sell us Stallone, Arnold & Willis and then give us Randy Couture, Steve Austin and Terry Crews instead.Terrible.
Those guys are barely in it either.It's a Stallone/Statham film. They have the most screen time and actual side plots.

Losers was a great action film, but they didn't try to be on the "B" level. Expendables knows full well where the bar was set as far as biceps, guns, and blood.
They set the bar on the ground and proceeded to dig a tunnel under it.I was kind of drunk when I saw it, which should enhance the experience, but I found it to be no better than Stallone's recent Rambo installment and that was awful.

 
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I think The Losers is equally cheesy when compared to The Expendables. In fact, I'd say the two movies are nearly identical.Again, I think this says more about our expectations than it does about the actual product.
 
'jdoggydogg said:
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I think The Losers is equally cheesy when compared to The Expendables. In fact, I'd say the two movies are nearly identical.Again, I think this says more about our expectations than it does about the actual product.
You might be right but I think you should look at my movie reviews in general because I unashamedly admit that I enjoy plenty of shlocky garbage, which is what I was thinking I would get from The Expendables. My expectations were for a mindless and entertaining action flick and all I got was the mindless part. And then Stallone started suing the whole world for telling him that his movie sucked or something like that. So that's another knock against it.I did say I was kind of drunk when I saw it so perhaps it is worth another viewing, but typically I think alcohol enhances this type of movie so I am not sure a sober viewing would help.
 
i can't believe you guys are discussing the relative merits of stallone, "the losers" and "the expendables" in such great detail.

 
'hooter311 said:
'Chaka said:
Yes, The Losers was much better. I'd like to see a sequel to that one. It was cheesy, funny, and filled with nonstop action. I loved the Journey escape. :lol:

Expendables was barely decent by the low standards that are action movies and even that is being generous. Nothing felt quite right. Maybe they were trying to appease all the egos. I'm not sure. I was entertained at parts but for most of the movie I felt just what chaka felt - like the whole thing was forced and uncomfortable.
I haven't seen either - I should change that soon. Is part of the reason Expendables felt forced because there were SO many of the action stars shoehorned in? Seems like they could have done with just 6 or so.
This movie was a bait and switch, they try to sell us Stallone, Arnold & Willis and then give us Randy Couture, Steve Austin and Terry Crews instead.Terrible.
Those guys are barely in it either.It's a Stallone/Statham film. They have the most screen time and actual side plots.

Losers was a great action film, but they didn't try to be on the "B" level. Expendables knows full well where the bar was set as far as biceps, guns, and blood.
Thats what I was gonna say. Almost all the names are there for the first scene, the you get 1 with Ahnold and Willis, but Li/Lundgren/Rourke/Couture/Crews arent in very many scenes. Its essentially all Stallone/Statham. He wasnt all that good in this IIRC, but its always nice to see Eric Roberts as the villain as well.Losers was probably better but outside of the less screen time for some of those guys, I felt like Expendables was what I expected it to be and for what it was it was good enough.

 
Hunger

Wow. Extremely powerful movie about the no wash/hunger strikes by Irish prisoners during The Troubles. Very few words spoken throughout the film, with the exception of one 15+ minute single unbroken shot discussion between a priest and a prisoner. Fassbender was outstanding in the lead role; going back to the great actor debate, Fassbender deserves mention if he didn't receive any. Hard to believe this was the director's first ever movie too. Should be mentioned that it's a hard to watch film though, so if you don't like cringing it would be a bad idea to see this.

Highly Recommended/4 stars.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am going to Seattle for a week and as a bonus the Cinerama THeater is having a 70mm film festival.

I'm going to try and catch How the West Was Won and at least one or two of these: 2001, This Is Cinerama, Playtime, Lawrence of Arabia, Cleopatra



 
Watched Criminal on Netflix streaming. Really liked this movie and I wish I had watched it sooner. Reilly did a great job, but even more impressive was Diego Luna. I have to say, I did not see the ending coming at all.
Just saw this movie. Very good. I'm a sucker for any con movie but most of them are terrible.
 
Bad Teacher: Better than I expected but still not very good. 100% predictable and only one or two good laughs. If they had someone hot as the teacher it would have been better than a nasty washed chick. 2.5/5
 
Rise of the Planet of the Apes

This film has been covered in depth here. Excellent film, even with the high expectations I had from this thread. I fully intend to catch another matinee this week. I don't think this has been commented on in here but one of the aspects that I truly appreciated was

that the apes did not become malevolent due to the serum. It would have been a very simple and lazy choice by the director to go with the "scientific formula make monkey go loco" angle. I enjoyed that the apes became intelligent and only wanted to be free to chill in the woods.

One aspect that I thought was odd was that Franco waited a full five years of successful treatment for his father and it was only when the treatment started failing that he decided that it might have some merit to go back to the lab and keep working on it. That revelation should have happened the morning after the treatment when Lithgow started playing Rachmaninoff (or whatever). As a former scientist I found that almost laughable.

It was also a little odd that, while they did a tremendous job showing the growth and evolution of Caesar, the human characters remained almost perfectly static in every aspect over a period of 10 years or so. I know not every character can have an expansive arc but I would at least think that the guy who came up with a cure for Alzheimer's and had a talking monkey might experience a tiny bit of character growth.

Oh and I did not find the neighbor guy to be unreasonable. I am pretty sure that if anyone saw a chimp (that they had no idea was an adorable and benevolent creature like the audience did) in their back yard around their children the first response would be to grab a bat. That seems perfectly reasonable. And he was kind of a jerk during the car incident but imagine how you would feel at 8:00am to look out your window and see someone ostensibly stealing your car and smashing the hell out of it in the process. You might get a little hot under the collar too. And he didn't do anything other that poke Lithgow in the chest and for that he loses a finger. Then some guy sneezes blood in his face and he proceeds to unknowingly go on and kill the entire planet. I think we need to cut that guy some slack. He had a pretty rough go being Franco's neighbor.
I highly recommend this film.

 
1 - Mankind is diminished by this movie's very existence. Ex: Human Centepede

2 - Horrible in every way, except that the story is less offensive. Ex: Shark Boy & Lava Girl

3 - Horrible in almost every way and probably a vanity project. Ex: Glitter or Gigli

4 - Usually a comedy that but ends up being irredeemably un-funny. Or an action movie with no internal logic. Or a kids movie with excessive profanity. Ex: Step Brothers/The Other Guys/Ant Bully/Terminator: Salvation/Troy

5 - You could see what they were trying to do, but nothing ended up working and you wanted it to end sooner rather than later(but you end up forgetting about it as soon as you turn it off). Ex: The DaVinci Code

6 - Not awful, but nothing too memorable and/or rewatchable either. Ex: Road To Perdition

7 - Hey! That was pretty good, and in a pinch I'd watch that again and enjoy it as much the 2nd time. Ex: Inglorious Basterds

8 - That was really good and I'll probably buy that one on Blu Ray because I'd watch that a few times. Ex: Memento/Inception, •Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

9 - I enjoyed that one and clearly that is one of the best movies in the genre. And/or it was likely groundbreaking. Ex: The Matrix, Black Hawk Down, Die Hard, Jaws

10 - Fits the criteria of level 9 rating, but adds something extra that makes it personal to me. Ex: Miller's Crossing, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars
Sooooooooo I'm guessing this would get a -10?
Even though I only clicked on the link, saw what it was, but didn't watch the trailer I'm confident that I'm 20 IQ points dumber. Why did I click on that crap?
 
Fast Five:

Watched this last night and it might be the 2nd best in the franchise - not sure how much is that's saying, but I had fun with it. Lot of over the top action, starting with the train heist. I thought The Rock was decent in Faster, but in this movie he was almost unwatchable for me. Decent :popcorn: flick for sure. 6/10

 
Rise of the Planet of the ApesThis film has been covered in depth here. Excellent film, even with the high expectations I had from this thread. I fully intend to catch another matinee this week. I don't think this has been commented on in here but one of the aspects that I truly appreciated was

that the apes did not become malevolent due to the serum. It would have been a very simple and lazy choice by the director to go with the "scientific formula make monkey go loco" angle. I enjoyed that the apes became intelligent and only wanted to be free to chill in the woods.One aspect that I thought was odd was that Franco waited a full five years of successful treatment for his father and it was only when the treatment started failing that he decided that it might have some merit to go back to the lab and keep working on it. That revelation should have happened the morning after the treatment when Lithgow started playing Rachmaninoff (or whatever). As a former scientist I found that almost laughable.It was also a little odd that, while they did a tremendous job showing the growth and evolution of Caesar, the human characters remained almost perfectly static in every aspect over a period of 10 years or so. I know not every character can have an expansive arc but I would at least think that the guy who came up with a cure for Alzheimer's and had a talking monkey might experience a tiny bit of character growth.Oh and I did not find the neighbor guy to be unreasonable. I am pretty sure that if anyone saw a chimp (that they had no idea was an adorable and benevolent creature like the audience did) in their back yard around their children the first response would be to grab a bat. That seems perfectly reasonable. And he was kind of a jerk during the car incident but imagine how you would feel at 8:00am to look out your window and see someone ostensibly stealing your car and smashing the hell out of it in the process. You might get a little hot under the collar too. And he didn't do anything other that poke Lithgow in the chest and for that he loses a finger. Then some guy sneezes blood in his face and he proceeds to unknowingly go on and kill the entire planet. I think we need to cut that guy some slack. He had a pretty rough go being Franco's neighbor.
I highly recommend this film.

Agree with pretty much everything you said. I thought the movie was very entertaining. Loved all the scenes with the apes being trained and learning.
 
Quarantine 2 - I liked the first one and gave the second a shot. Not bad. As is typical of a lot of horror movies, it starts off with a really great premise to get you excited but kinda falls short of delivering. Worth a viewing, imo. 2.5/5
 
Quarantine 2 - I liked the first one and gave the second a shot. Not bad. As is typical of a lot of horror movies, it starts off with a really great premise to get you excited but kinda falls short of delivering. Worth a viewing, imo. 2.5/5
Have you seen Rec or Rec2?
 
Quarantine 2 - I liked the first one and gave the second a shot. Not bad. As is typical of a lot of horror movies, it starts off with a really great premise to get you excited but kinda falls short of delivering. Worth a viewing, imo. 2.5/5
Have you seen Rec or Rec2?
Funny you should askThey had a preview for Rec 2 on this DVD and I thought it was for Quarantine 2 and was wondering why they were showing it.

Seemed like the same movie although I've never seen either REC

 
The A Team-Finally saw it last night. Holy cow this was an entertaining balls to the wall action movie. Lots of killing and explosions. Lots of testosterone. Stupid premise, but the kick-assery made up for it. Enjoyed it. Not an academy award type flick. Fun for what it was. I'll watch it again. 4/5.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top