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 (3 Viewers)

Step Brothers - I've heard mostly good things about this movie. I think I laughed one time, and chuckled another. Not a very funny movie, imo.

The Fighter - Saw this for the second time. I love this movie. I know part of that has to do with the fact that I saw and remember those actual Ward fights. This movie is damn near perfect.

The Town - Saw the cut version, which I think I prefer to the uncut version. Entertaining movie. Affleck's BFF was outstanding in this. My only problem with the movie is Affleck's infatuation with the bank girl. I thought that was cheesy and uneccessary.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
But Ben took off his shirt a lot... that counts for something, right? A LOT.
 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
But Ben took off his shirt a lot... that counts for something, right? A LOT.
Ben Affleck is dreamy. But his bare chest isn't enough to carry a movie.
 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.

 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
The chance to dream that the transnifferous Rebecca Hall was my gf, the exblouslest Ben Affleck was my pal, the greenescent Fenway Park was my storage locker and that anyone could actually have a car chase thru the clotted lanes of North MetroBoston fueled a thorough enjoyment of this crimexcelltastic thriller.
 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
Only The Thin Red Line.
 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Well, I'd just add that Tree of Life isn't trying to be arty. It is arty. Look, I love this movie more than just about anybody. Would I want all my movies to be like this? No way. It'd be tedious. But no one makes movies like Malick. Yes, it's long. And yes, it's contemplative. I just liked the change of pace from your average moviegoing experience.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
The chance to dream that the transnifferous Rebecca Hall was my gf, the exblouslest Ben Affleck was my pal, the greenescent Fenway Park was my storage locker and that anyone could actually have a car chase thru the clotted lanes of North MetroBoston fueled a thorough enjoyment of this crimexcelltastic thriller.
I dig.
 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
Only The Thin Red Line.
That's really his only other work I've truly enjoyed. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet, but based on his other works his films are almost like a stream of conscious thought rather than a three act structure. I agree with jdoggy, I wouldn't like all films to be like this. But, if you are in the right state of mind or have a couple tombstones of Xanax laying around, Malick films can really hit the spot.I apologize about the snide :lmao: remark before, I appreciate your thoughts on why you didn't care for it.

 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
Only The Thin Red Line.
That's really his only other work I've truly enjoyed. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet, but based on his other works his films are almost like a stream of conscious thought rather than a three act structure. I agree with jdoggy, I wouldn't like all films to be like this. But, if you are in the right state of mind or have a couple tombstones of Xanax laying around, Malick films can really hit the spot.I apologize about the snide :lmao: remark before, I appreciate your thoughts on why you didn't care for it.
No worries. I figured that I'd be one of the few in this thread that thought it was terrible. I like that fact that was different, (not something we get a lot of anymore) but I just thought it completely missed. It will definitely be either a love it / hate it movie.

And I ####### hate opera. I can enjoy any other type of music except ####### opera.

 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
Only The Thin Red Line.
That's really his only other work I've truly enjoyed. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet, but based on his other works his films are almost like a stream of conscious thought rather than a three act structure. I agree with jdoggy, I wouldn't like all films to be like this. But, if you are in the right state of mind or have a couple tombstones of Xanax laying around, Malick films can really hit the spot.I apologize about the snide :lmao: remark before, I appreciate your thoughts on why you didn't care for it.
No worries. I figured that I'd be one of the few in this thread that thought it was terrible. I like that fact that was different, (not something we get a lot of anymore) but I just thought it completely missed. It will definitely be either a love it / hate it movie.

And I ####### hate opera. I can enjoy any other type of music except ####### opera.
Like Malick, opera isn't for everyone. Have you seen a top notch opera live? It's pretty incredible.
 
'Cliff Clavin said:
Tree of Life: Terrible. 1/5
Care to elaborate?
It tried waaay to hard to be artsy. The whole creation of the universe montage was ridiculous. It felt like the first 40 minutes was spent watching clips and listening to spoken word crap or opera music. And the dinosaurs... really? I understand what they were going for but it just didn't work. The few minutes of actual movie (you know, with actors, dialogue and plot) was well done but there wasn't enough of it. Had they spent more time on this and actually building up the characters it would have been much better. But instead, they tried to get to artsy with the pretty clip show and dinosaurs at the start. It seemed rushed and then throw in the poorly used non-linear story line, it ended up being pretty damn terrible.
Have you seen other Malick films? I don't think his style has anything to do with trying too hard, there is just more going on in his films than the story being told. Reminds me a bit of Bob Ross with a palette painting.....happy little tree goes here, let's put a pond in over there.
Only The Thin Red Line.
That's really his only other work I've truly enjoyed. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet, but based on his other works his films are almost like a stream of conscious thought rather than a three act structure. I agree with jdoggy, I wouldn't like all films to be like this. But, if you are in the right state of mind or have a couple tombstones of Xanax laying around, Malick films can really hit the spot.I apologize about the snide :lmao: remark before, I appreciate your thoughts on why you didn't care for it.
No worries. I figured that I'd be one of the few in this thread that thought it was terrible. I like that fact that was different, (not something we get a lot of anymore) but I just thought it completely missed. It will definitely be either a love it / hate it movie.

And I ####### hate opera. I can enjoy any other type of music except ####### opera.
Like Malick, opera isn't for everyone. Have you seen a top notch opera live? It's pretty incredible.
Nope. Never will. Can't stand high pitch squealing fat women.
 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.I liked Brooklyn's Finest well enough, but this was much better than BF.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.I liked Brooklyn's Finest well enough, but this was much better than BF.
Well, that's part of the problem for me. Sure, most good movies are good because the supporting cast is strong. But here, the supporting cast can't support what is a very weak leading man.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.I liked Brooklyn's Finest well enough, but this was much better than BF.
Well, that's part of the problem for me. Sure, most good movies are good because the supporting cast is strong. But here, the supporting cast can't support what is a very weak leading man.
Rip on Ben Affleck all you want, I wont disagree for the most part, but he was not a very weak lead here. He didnt do much to elevate the film, but he didnt pull it down by any means. Im not saying he deserved an oscar nom here, but he was perfectly fine.
 
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
Rec is the (I believe Spanish) movie that that Quarantine is based off of. Like most foreign to American remakes I prefer the original by a bit.

 
Scream 4:

I really don't know what they were trying to do with this movie. There are some decent ideas here and there, but they seem to abandon them almost as soon as they introduce them in the movie. As with the others, there is a lot of banter about the 'rules' of the movie which has gotten tired after the first 2. Problem is, they were talking about the rules of a reboot, but the 3 main characters are in it, so it's not a reboot. Also they seem to be calling out other franchises like Saw for putting out a crap product, and then proceed to do just that. The one thing I wished about the movie which would have made me like it a lot better:

Kill off one of the main 3 already!! What I expected going in was for this to be a Scream for the next generation and introduce new characters to take over. They had the prime opportunity to kill Sidney at the end and instead we get 15 more minutes of meh. The ballsy thing to do would have been to let the cousin live, but instead everybody expect the Sidney, Dewey, and Gale get the axe.
And Wes Craven claims they already have 5 and 6 worked out as well. As with most franchises that get to this point - now it is just starting to get painful to watch. 5/10.

 
The Town

I mentioned a few weeks back that I wasn't impressed by the first 30 minutes of this movie and had given up. Due to some encouragement in this this thread, I gave it another shot. Alas, this is what it appeared to be in the first 30 minutes: a tired, perfunctory crime drama. This movie reminds me of Brooklyn's Finest. It has many aspects that sometimes combine to make a good movie (production values, script, plot, acting, etc.) But just like Brooklyn's Finest, The Town just isn't nearly as good as it thinks it is.

Ben Affleck was excellent in a supporting role in Hollywoodland. But often, I don't find him to be a convincing actor. While I thought that Gone, Baby, Gone had some real flaws - especially in the last act - there's no doubt that Casey Affleck is the far better actor in this family. Perhaps The Town might have succeeded with Casey in the lead role, as he's clearly the better actor. But with Ben here, it's utterly forgettable and incredibly overrated.
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.I liked Brooklyn's Finest well enough, but this was much better than BF.
Well, that's part of the problem for me. Sure, most good movies are good because the supporting cast is strong. But here, the supporting cast can't support what is a very weak leading man.
Rip on Ben Affleck all you want, I wont disagree for the most part, but he was not a very weak lead here. He didnt do much to elevate the film, but he didnt pull it down by any means. Im not saying he deserved an oscar nom here, but he was perfectly fine.
Yeah don't think he made much of an impression either way as far as his performance. Is the movie overratted? A bit. But it was good entertainment. Not a flick I can't pass up on cable like The Departed was. Not that anyone was seriously comparing it to the Departed.
 
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.
I thought Affleck was pretty good, though I think his high point by a wide margin is "Chasing Amy".I thought the movie had a good pace, it never dragged.I did think that Jon Hamm struck a false note. I got the same vibe from him that I got from James Gandolfini in a movie called "The Last Castle": he was trying way too hard to play the opposite of his TV character.
 
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.
I thought Affleck was pretty good, though I think his high point by a wide margin is "Chasing Amy".I thought the movie had a good pace, it never dragged.I did think that Jon Hamm struck a false note. I got the same vibe from him that I got from James Gandolfini in a movie called "The Last Castle": he was trying way too hard to play the opposite of his TV character.
From what I can recall, Affleck in Chasing Amy wasnt much different than Jersey Girl or a couple other films of his in that ilk.Agreed on Hamm. I havent even started watching Mad Men yet, but he was probably the only actor/character that felt awkward/forced more often than not and had an underwhelming performance.
 
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.
I thought Affleck was pretty good, though I think his high point by a wide margin is "Chasing Amy".I thought the movie had a good pace, it never dragged.I did think that Jon Hamm struck a false note. I got the same vibe from him that I got from James Gandolfini in a movie called "The Last Castle": he was trying way too hard to play the opposite of his TV character.
From what I can recall, Affleck in Chasing Amy wasnt much different than Jersey Girl or a couple other films of his in that ilk.Agreed on Hamm. I havent even started watching Mad Men yet, but he was probably the only actor/character that felt awkward/forced more often than not and had an underwhelming performance.
Big fan of Mad Men and Hamm but his scene with Blake Lively in the bar was brutal.
 
Hanna.

First 30 minutes were terrific. The rest was very uneven. Could have been a good one.

The skills she showed while breaking out of the facility were lacking the rest of the movie. Very frustrating. She takes out the best the government has to offer then has trouble with street thugs. Just didn't jive.
2.5 out of 4 stars. C+.

 
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
Rec is the (I believe Spanish) movie that that Quarantine is based off of. Like most foreign to American remakes I prefer the original by a bit.
Ah, that explains a lot. Odd that they would show a preview for it on the same DVD though. Thx for the heads up. I'll have to check them out.
 
Saw the last 20 minutes or so of Scott Pilgrim vs the World on HBO and did a lot of :huh: :wtf: before eventually settling in and finding myself kind of liking the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness of it. Enough so that I decided to watch it from the beginning on another night, when I caught the first 10 or so minutes (but not from the absolute beginning)... this time I found myself not so interested in the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness which just felt overwrought and forced.

So... I know the movie was discussed in here- any recommendations as to whether it's worth a full watch (caveat- with a 3month old baby, my movie watching time is precious... I've been catching 20 or so minutes of this and that at night while I put the baby down and would have to make an effort to find and watch a full movie)

 
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.
I thought Affleck was pretty good, though I think his high point by a wide margin is "Chasing Amy".I thought the movie had a good pace, it never dragged.I did think that Jon Hamm struck a false note. I got the same vibe from him that I got from James Gandolfini in a movie called "The Last Castle": he was trying way too hard to play the opposite of his TV character.
Agreed that Hamm was a big swing and a miss in this. I didn't have any problem with Gandolfini in Last Castle though.
 
Saw the last 20 minutes or so of Scott Pilgrim vs the World on HBO and did a lot of :huh: :wtf: before eventually settling in and finding myself kind of liking the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness of it. Enough so that I decided to watch it from the beginning on another night, when I caught the first 10 or so minutes (but not from the absolute beginning)... this time I found myself not so interested in the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness which just felt overwrought and forced.

So... I know the movie was discussed in here- any recommendations as to whether it's worth a full watch (caveat- with a 3month old baby, my movie watching time is precious... I've been catching 20 or so minutes of this and that at night while I put the baby down and would have to make an effort to find and watch a full movie)
Meh. If your time is limited I'd skip it. I spent the first 20 minutes with a WTF mentality before getting used to the video game styles. It's an entertaining movie. I enjoyed seeing such a funky style actually working. In that aspect I really liked it. As far as the plot and everything that wasn't style related, it was mediocre. I'm tired of seeing the main kid play the same character in every single role.
 
Saw the last 20 minutes or so of Scott Pilgrim vs the World on HBO and did a lot of :huh: :wtf: before eventually settling in and finding myself kind of liking the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness of it. Enough so that I decided to watch it from the beginning on another night, when I caught the first 10 or so minutes (but not from the absolute beginning)... this time I found myself not so interested in the video-game anime pop-culture bizarreness which just felt overwrought and forced.

So... I know the movie was discussed in here- any recommendations as to whether it's worth a full watch (caveat- with a 3month old baby, my movie watching time is precious... I've been catching 20 or so minutes of this and that at night while I put the baby down and would have to make an effort to find and watch a full movie)
I enjoyed it. Something different. By no means is it a must watch though.
 
I thought this was Affleck's best performance to date, but he was outdone by numerous other actors, Renner, Postlethwaite, Blake Lively to name a few. Affleck didnt carry the film, and he didnt need to. It was carried by the other actors, the story, and the action. The last 30-45 minutes were anything but perfunctory crime drama.
I thought Affleck was pretty good, though I think his high point by a wide margin is "Chasing Amy".I thought the movie had a good pace, it never dragged.

I did think that Jon Hamm struck a false note. I got the same vibe from him that I got from James Gandolfini in a movie called "The Last Castle": he was trying way too hard to play the opposite of his TV character.
Agreed that Hamm was a big swing and a miss in this. I didn't have any problem with Gandolfini in Last Castle though.
I thoroughly enjoyed The Last Castle - including Gandolfini's performance.
 
Agreed on Hamm. I havent even started watching Mad Men yet, but he was probably the only actor/character that felt awkward/forced more often than not and had an underwhelming performance.
Hamm's amazing in Mad Men, but he seemed out of his element in The Town and Sucker Punch.
Haven't seen any of his work outside of these, is he a one trick pony?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Saw Thor last night. Nothing special but an overall enjoyable flick. I'd rate it somewhere between Green Hornet and the 80s Batman movies, below average for the genre but not a complete waste.

 
A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984):

After looking at some of the lists in the other thread, I wanted to revisit this one. Kinda sad to report that I don't think this one has held up quite as well as some of the other horror movies of the time, but it still gets a lot right. I think I just forgot how crappy it looked (very small budget though), and how bad the acting was. However, what it does deliver is a cool concept. Take the slasher movie into a place you can't avoid - dreams. Also by doing this you give the killer basically unlimited powers. There are a couple scenes I really like in this one - mainly the opening scene with Freddy making the glove and then jumping right into the dream sequence with Tina. The other one is when Nancy falls asleep in school. I think the HS version of KP would have this in the top 5 horror movies, but I think I would have to bump it down a bit. Not that I have a list, but would say between 20-30. I think it is just iconic for Freddy, but didn't hold up well for me.

Trick R Treat:

Really dug this one. Not sure if I posted about it before in here, but revisited this one again. Refreshing to see the multiple storyline flick ala Creepshow pop up again. This one has 3-4 different stories and ended up liking them all, but probably the one with the kids down by the quarry the most.

Saw 3:

Was talking to a co-worker and couldn't remember which ones I had seen. I thought only a couple, but wasn't sure so I went back through and started the series again to see. So far, I think this was the best of the series. Seems like a decent blend of the first two. The first one tried to do some back story, but the acting was HORRIBLE and production was about 0. The second had a better budget and acting, but they threw so many people into it you couldn't keep anything straight. This one had a messy beginning, but stabilized after a bit when it was following just the 2 main sets of characters. Also evident they decided to ramp up the gore in this one too. Kinda liked the very end twist too.

Not sure ratings on these as I have a hard time with Comedy/horror that usually wouldn't see a 'best of year' list from me. Maybe if I do a horror genre version of my ratings Nightmare would get 7/10 with a bump to 'must see' for being iconic, Trick would get 8/10, and Saw 3 6/10

 
I finally watched a movie from start to finish in one sitting that wasn't a kids movie for the first time in months. Pickings were slim. So I got Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Eh, better than the second one. The chick was hot. I didn't waste the money. I think.

 
Horrible Bosses:

Wanted to mix in a little comedy with the horror movies. Ended up not really digging this one. Sure there were a few funny scenes, but after I got over the initial shock of a foul-mouthed Jennifer Aniston, for me the movie got stale for the last hour or so. Not in any rush to watch it again. 5/10.

I think this was the first time I saw all of the trailer for Hangover 2, and holy #### does that look terrible.

The Office:

I never look forward to popping in shows/movies after people telling me for years how funny it is and how much I HAVE to watch it. This is the rare exception when I am mad I didn't listen sooner. After starting about 3 weeks ago, I have plowed through the first 3 seasons. Hardly a bad episode in the bunch, and there is always something that cracks me up in each episode. Thought they made a mistake at the beginning of 3 by having the Conn. branch and the Penn. branch, as I didn't like the chemistry of the other branch, but that was corrected quick enough. I think I have heard that it has begun to tail off, but still looking forward to the next few seasons if they are able to keep up the humor.

 
Horrible Bosses:

Wanted to mix in a little comedy with the horror movies. Ended up not really digging this one. Sure there were a few funny scenes, but after I got over the initial shock of a foul-mouthed Jennifer Aniston, for me the movie got stale for the last hour or so. Not in any rush to watch it again. 5/10.

I think this was the first time I saw all of the trailer for Hangover 2, and holy #### does that look terrible.

The Office:

I never look forward to popping in shows/movies after people telling me for years how funny it is and how much I HAVE to watch it. This is the rare exception when I am mad I didn't listen sooner. After starting about 3 weeks ago, I have plowed through the first 3 seasons. Hardly a bad episode in the bunch, and there is always something that cracks me up in each episode. Thought they made a mistake at the beginning of 3 by having the Conn. branch and the Penn. branch, as I didn't like the chemistry of the other branch, but that was corrected quick enough. I think I have heard that it has begun to tail off, but still looking forward to the next few seasons if they are able to keep up the humor.
The Office is hilarious. Hangover 2 looks awful.
 
Horrible Bosses:

Wanted to mix in a little comedy with the horror movies. Ended up not really digging this one. Sure there were a few funny scenes, but after I got over the initial shock of a foul-mouthed Jennifer Aniston, for me the movie got stale for the last hour or so. Not in any rush to watch it again. 5/10.
I dont say this directly at you, but I feel like theres a few curmudgeons on here that almost any comedy ends up 2.5/5 (I think I told cosjobs Im switching my scale to 5) or worse. Basically, a comedy needs to be the best in a few years to get a decent rating by many of the familiar people in this thread is what it seems like.

Disclaimer: Havent seen Horrible Bosses, it just seems very rare that a comedy gets more positives than negative in here, its like movies arent funny enough for us snobs in here

 
Horrible Bosses:

Wanted to mix in a little comedy with the horror movies. Ended up not really digging this one. Sure there were a few funny scenes, but after I got over the initial shock of a foul-mouthed Jennifer Aniston, for me the movie got stale for the last hour or so. Not in any rush to watch it again. 5/10.

I think this was the first time I saw all of the trailer for Hangover 2, and holy #### does that look terrible.

The Office:

I never look forward to popping in shows/movies after people telling me for years how funny it is and how much I HAVE to watch it. This is the rare exception when I am mad I didn't listen sooner. After starting about 3 weeks ago, I have plowed through the first 3 seasons. Hardly a bad episode in the bunch, and there is always something that cracks me up in each episode. Thought they made a mistake at the beginning of 3 by having the Conn. branch and the Penn. branch, as I didn't like the chemistry of the other branch, but that was corrected quick enough. I think I have heard that it has begun to tail off, but still looking forward to the next few seasons if they are able to keep up the humor.
The Office is hilarious. Hangover 2 looks awful.
The hipster hater in me would love to hate the American version of the office. I just can't. Even the one line from Creed each episode cracks me up. Jim and Pam are exhausting, but everyone knows that.
 
Horrible Bosses:

Wanted to mix in a little comedy with the horror movies. Ended up not really digging this one. Sure there were a few funny scenes, but after I got over the initial shock of a foul-mouthed Jennifer Aniston, for me the movie got stale for the last hour or so. Not in any rush to watch it again. 5/10.
I dont say this directly at you, but I feel like theres a few curmudgeons on here that almost any comedy ends up 2.5/5 (I think I told cosjobs Im switching my scale to 5) or worse. Basically, a comedy needs to be the best in a few years to get a decent rating by many of the familiar people in this thread is what it seems like.

Disclaimer: Havent seen Horrible Bosses, it just seems very rare that a comedy gets more positives than negative in here, its like movies arent funny enough for us snobs in here
Horrible Bosses made me laugh, recommended. Funny ha-ha. Only reason I can think of people hating it is those that can't stand or don't get Charlie Day's whininess to his character. Coke scenes were spot on.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top