Hunger Games:
Lame. I enjoyed the book for what it was, but what kept me going in the book was the side stuff and characters. In the movie you get to spend about 2.5 seconds with the characters so when anything happens to them, there is really no weight to it. They bill this as a love triangle ala Twilight, but did there really feel like anything was between Katniss and Gale? (btw, that dude looked pretty big and buff for being from the poor starving district). I understand why they had to do it, because a lot of the book was Katniss' point of view and what she was thinking. Can't really do that in the movie, so we speed through all that to get to the games, which for me was the low point of the book. A lot of the stuff in the arena was silly - devil dogs, letting your enemy sit in the tree while 4 of you sleep, etc.. Combine all this with a director who felt like the only way to create tension was to shake the damn camera a lot. Though it was not as bad, this was toeing the line of being Twilight bad for me. Didn't have high hopes going in, but still was quite disappointed. 4/10
Also have to ask an obvious question: If these have been going on for awhile (the games), why haven't all the districts adapted some sort of training program for the kids to increase their chances?

1 or 2?!??Expendables.... Really liked it, wish I saw it sooner
Why? Though I'm no individual fan of BlackWidow, in Avengers, that character was very well done and entertaining.I didn't like ... Black Widow.
Same awesome movie character.Iron Man was just more of the same.
This is the correct answer.Same awesome movie character.Iron Man was just more of the same.
2 was actually better. Of course, that's relative.1 or 2?!??Expendables.... Really liked it, wish I saw it sooner
This, IMO, is one of the best movies of the last 5 years. Although I would say that it had a much more 80s feel to it.drive - with a terse ryan gosling, has a 70s neo-noir vibe... nice atmospheric soundtrack/score by cliff martinez (also did traffic, has been very busy lately)... heavies played by ron perlman and an against type albert brooks... recommended...
She served very little purpose other then allowing them to force a little bit of a love story into the movie.Why? Though I'm no individual fan of BlackWidow, in Avengers, that character was very well done and entertaining.I didn't like ... Black Widow.Same awesome movie character.Iron Man was just more of the same.
Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
11 or 2?!??Expendables.... Really liked it, wish I saw it sooner

I really liked Drive so I thought I'd check out Valhalla Rising, but I thought it was incredibly slow, and the dialogue was so sparse I had next to no idea as to what was going on half the time. Visually the moving was still impressive, but that wasn't enough for me to enjoy watching the film. I still look forward to checking out Bronson though, and probably will check out his Danish films eventually.i had never seen anything by nicholas winding refn until a few days ago, just watched three...drive - with a terse ryan gosling, has a 70s neo-noir vibe... nice atmospheric soundtrack/score by cliff martinez (also did traffic, has been very busy lately)... heavies played by ron perlman and an against type albert brooks... recommended...valhalla rising... the actor who played le chiffre in casino royale plays a viking who meets up with some crusaders and ends up in the new world... different but very powerful score (synths, electric guitar wall of noise reminiscent of terje rypdal)... also recommended... bronson... about the notorious british criminal, most violent in their system, moved over 100 times... played by tom hardy (from inception) who transformed his physique for the role... supposedly bronson has set world records for press ups... also recommended...all of these have scenes of ultra-violence...
Loved Drive, found Valhalla Rising to be overly stylistic and quite boring to the point of insufferable, been looking forward to Bronson for awhile.I really liked Drive so I thought I'd check out Valhalla Rising, but I thought it was incredibly slow, and the dialogue was so sparse I had next to no idea as to what was going on half the time. Visually the moving was still impressive, but that wasn't enough for me to enjoy watching the film. I still look forward to checking out Bronson though, and probably will check out his Danish films eventually.i had never seen anything by nicholas winding refn until a few days ago, just watched three...drive - with a terse ryan gosling, has a 70s neo-noir vibe... nice atmospheric soundtrack/score by cliff martinez (also did traffic, has been very busy lately)... heavies played by ron perlman and an against type albert brooks... recommended...valhalla rising... the actor who played le chiffre in casino royale plays a viking who meets up with some crusaders and ends up in the new world... different but very powerful score (synths, electric guitar wall of noise reminiscent of terje rypdal)... also recommended... bronson... about the notorious british criminal, most violent in their system, moved over 100 times... played by tom hardy (from inception) who transformed his physique for the role... supposedly bronson has set world records for press ups... also recommended...all of these have scenes of ultra-violence...
I think Beasts of the Southern Wild would have been a better choice.Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
Haven't seen it yet (but am really, sincerely and honestly looking forward to it) but when it comes to subject matter in African American history it is difficult to top the Tuskegee Airmen. And yes, I understand that there are examples that are, perhaps, equally significant, perhaps even more so. They deserve a much better big budget Hollywood treatment than Lucas gave them (he failed on so many levels), but I at least appreciate that he tried.I think Beasts of the Southern Wild would have been a better choice.Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
I don't disagree.Haven't seen it yet (but am really, sincerely and honestly looking forward to it) but when it comes to subject matter in African American history it is difficult to top the Tuskegee Airmen. And yes, I understand that there are examples that are, perhaps, equally significant, perhaps even more so. They deserve a much better big budget Hollywood treatment than Lucas gave them (he failed on so many levels), but I at least appreciate that he tried.I think Beasts of the Southern Wild would have been a better choice.Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
I thought Hardy crushed it in Lawless and Warrior, but Bronson may very well be his best performance.Loved Drive, found Valhalla Rising to be overly stylistic and quite boring to the point of insufferable, been looking forward to Bronson for awhile.I really liked Drive so I thought I'd check out Valhalla Rising, but I thought it was incredibly slow, and the dialogue was so sparse I had next to no idea as to what was going on half the time. Visually the moving was still impressive, but that wasn't enough for me to enjoy watching the film. I still look forward to checking out Bronson though, and probably will check out his Danish films eventually.i had never seen anything by nicholas winding refn until a few days ago, just watched three...drive - with a terse ryan gosling, has a 70s neo-noir vibe... nice atmospheric soundtrack/score by cliff martinez (also did traffic, has been very busy lately)... heavies played by ron perlman and an against type albert brooks... recommended...valhalla rising... the actor who played le chiffre in casino royale plays a viking who meets up with some crusaders and ends up in the new world... different but very powerful score (synths, electric guitar wall of noise reminiscent of terje rypdal)... also recommended... bronson... about the notorious british criminal, most violent in their system, moved over 100 times... played by tom hardy (from inception) who transformed his physique for the role... supposedly bronson has set world records for press ups... also recommended...all of these have scenes of ultra-violence...
I take it this was the NAACP best picture in 1997 then?!I see what youre saying, but still.Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
I don't know what it won and I have never seen it but it looks fascinating.I take it this was the NAACP best picture in 1997 then?!I see what youre saying, but still.Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.
Totally agree with Chaka and Officer Pete.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.'Chaka said:Loved Drive, found Valhalla Rising to be overly stylistic and quite boring to the point of insufferable, been looking forward to Bronson for awhile.'Time Kibitzer said:I really liked Drive so I thought I'd check out Valhalla Rising, but I thought it was incredibly slow, and the dialogue was so sparse I had next to no idea as to what was going on half the time. Visually the moving was still impressive, but that wasn't enough for me to enjoy watching the film. I still look forward to checking out Bronson though, and probably will check out his Danish films eventually.'Bob Magaw said:i had never seen anything by nicholas winding refn until a few days ago, just watched three...
drive - with a terse ryan gosling, has a 70s neo-noir vibe... nice atmospheric soundtrack/score by cliff martinez (also did traffic, has been very busy lately)... heavies played by ron perlman and an against type albert brooks... recommended...
valhalla rising... the actor who played le chiffre in casino royale plays a viking who meets up with some crusaders and ends up in the new world... different but very powerful score (synths, electric guitar wall of noise reminiscent of terje rypdal)... also recommended...
bronson... about the notorious british criminal, most violent in their system, moved over 100 times... played by tom hardy (from inception) who transformed his physique for the role... supposedly bronson has set world records for press ups... also recommended...
all of these have scenes of ultra-violence...
I had to watch it for a college course, and it was ok I guess. Basically the point I was trying to make was just because it is an important time/story in black history, doesnt mean it should win best picture for anything, NAACP or otherwise.'Chaka said:I don't know what it won and I have never seen it but it looks fascinating.'Kenny Powers said:I take it this was the NAACP best picture in 1997 then?!I see what youre saying, but still.'Chaka said:Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.'Kenny Powers said:
Emily Blunt was the farm lady.They altered Gordon-Levitt's jawline to make it more similar to Bruce Willis'.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.
With most time-travelly things, I switch off trying to second guess or analyze the sci-fi aspects and just try to go along for the ride. I liked the idea- not horribly original- of parallel vs divergent lives through time and thought this one did a good enough job with it (even it tried too hard with some of the "scarring" scenes) by presenting it concurrently. The mutation aspect seemed a bit out of place and not really needed IMO. I liked Gordon Levitt or whatever the hell his name is- liked him quite a bit, even if something about him was unsettlingly different phyically from his previous roles. Willis was basically Willis. I liked the female farm mom a lot... spacing on her name.
It looked to me like they CGI'd up his nose. It was weird to watch at first but didnt bother me after 20 minutes or so.Emily Blunt was the farm lady.They altered Gordon-Levitt's jawline to make it more similar to Bruce Willis'.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.
With most time-travelly things, I switch off trying to second guess or analyze the sci-fi aspects and just try to go along for the ride. I liked the idea- not horribly original- of parallel vs divergent lives through time and thought this one did a good enough job with it (even it tried too hard with some of the "scarring" scenes) by presenting it concurrently. The mutation aspect seemed a bit out of place and not really needed IMO. I liked Gordon Levitt or whatever the hell his name is- liked him quite a bit, even if something about him was unsettlingly different phyically from his previous roles. Willis was basically Willis. I liked the female farm mom a lot... spacing on her name.
The British version may very well be good, but reading this just made me think a serious spy show starring Rob Corrdry sounds awful.Watched the British series 'Spy'. Only two series (17 episodes) and it's a really good show. It's getting remade here starring Rob Cordry but the British version is worth watching for the great acting.
It's a comedy. Kind of like a dumber Chuck but in his 30's with a genius kid. It takes itself even less seriously than Chuck.The British version may very well be good, but reading this just made me think a serious spy show starring Rob Corrdry sounds awful.Watched the British series 'Spy'. Only two series (17 episodes) and it's a really good show. It's getting remade here starring Rob Cordry but the British version is worth watching for the great acting.
imdb says it's a comedy about a man who mistakenly goes to the wrong interview and gets a job as a spy, so I'm guessing the American version won't be a "serious" spy show either despite its name. SkyfallThe British version may very well be good, but reading this just made me think a serious spy show starring Rob Corrdry sounds awful.Watched the British series 'Spy'. Only two series (17 episodes) and it's a really good show. It's getting remade here starring Rob Cordry but the British version is worth watching for the great acting.
Liked this one as wellTrollhunter100% awesomeness.
"NAACP Image Awards"I had to watch it for a college course, and it was ok I guess. Basically the point I was trying to make was just because it is an important time/story in black history, doesnt mean it should win best picture for anything, NAACP or otherwise.'Chaka said:I don't know what it won and I have never seen it but it looks fascinating.'Kenny Powers said:I take it this was the NAACP best picture in 1997 then?!I see what youre saying, but still.'Chaka said:Not a good film but the subject matter is among the most significant in American history, even moreso for African American history so I completely understand why it won.'Kenny Powers said:
whoa. that seems like a lot of work ... but ok, good to know.It looked to me like they CGI'd up his nose. It was weird to watch at first but didnt bother me after 20 minutes or so.Emily Blunt was the farm lady.They altered Gordon-Levitt's jawline to make it more similar to Bruce Willis'.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.
With most time-travelly things, I switch off trying to second guess or analyze the sci-fi aspects and just try to go along for the ride. I liked the idea- not horribly original- of parallel vs divergent lives through time and thought this one did a good enough job with it (even it tried too hard with some of the "scarring" scenes) by presenting it concurrently. The mutation aspect seemed a bit out of place and not really needed IMO. I liked Gordon Levitt or whatever the hell his name is- liked him quite a bit, even if something about him was unsettlingly different phyically from his previous roles. Willis was basically Willis. I liked the female farm mom a lot... spacing on her name.
best troll movie ever.Liked this one as wellTrollhunter100% awesomeness.
Campy and totally entertaining.best troll movie ever.Liked this one as wellTrollhunter100% awesomeness.
Saw this over the weekend having no idea what it was about. Thought it was fantastic.Silver Lining PlaybookDramedy about manic depression and dealing with those dealing with it. A smart, funny movie that did a good job of acknowledging the issues of the disorder without sugar-coating it, minimizing it, or using it for cheap humor. Well done on those fronts and above that a semi-smart romcom/dramedy psychofusion.3.88/ 5 stars
Huh? How does it not make sense? It's like 5 action scenes and that's all there is to it.I'm watching the new Bourne movie....it doesn't make a lot of sense. Oh well.
Oh, then I guess it was almost over when I turned it off.Huh? How does it not make sense? It's like 5 action scenes and that's all there is to it.I'm watching the new Bourne movie....it doesn't make a lot of sense. Oh well.They try to kill Jeremy Renner at the cabin, he escapes. He wants to find out what's going on, so he tracks down his only lead, the nurse, Rachel Weisz, who supplies him with the super-drugs.They try to klll Rachel Weisz at her house. But Jeremy Renner gets there just in time and saves her.The two of them go to the Philippines where the nurse gets the drugs from, but they're discovered and have to escape the facility. Then the next day they're found again and a guy chases them through the streets. So they escape him, too.The end.
3 hours in the makeup chair each morning...http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dark-knight-joseph-gordon-levitt-looper-rian-johnson-bruce-willis-311133whoa. that seems like a lot of work ... but ok, good to know.It looked to me like they CGI'd up his nose. It was weird to watch at first but didnt bother me after 20 minutes or so.Emily Blunt was the farm lady.They altered Gordon-Levitt's jawline to make it more similar to Bruce Willis'.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.
With most time-travelly things, I switch off trying to second guess or analyze the sci-fi aspects and just try to go along for the ride. I liked the idea- not horribly original- of parallel vs divergent lives through time and thought this one did a good enough job with it (even it tried too hard with some of the "scarring" scenes) by presenting it concurrently. The mutation aspect seemed a bit out of place and not really needed IMO. I liked Gordon Levitt or whatever the hell his name is- liked him quite a bit, even if something about him was unsettlingly different phyically from his previous roles. Willis was basically Willis. I liked the female farm mom a lot... spacing on her name.![]()
I just didn't feel it was necessary considering how distracting it was. Are these guys really so different at age 30 that they needed to do it? Joseph (2012)3 hours in the makeup chair each morning...http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dark-knight-joseph-gordon-levitt-looper-rian-johnson-bruce-willis-311133whoa. that seems like a lot of work ... but ok, good to know.It looked to me like they CGI'd up his nose. It was weird to watch at first but didnt bother me after 20 minutes or so.Emily Blunt was the farm lady.They altered Gordon-Levitt's jawline to make it more similar to Bruce Willis'.I caught Looper last night and expected a mess (i'm not a Willis fan), but I enjoyed it.
With most time-travelly things, I switch off trying to second guess or analyze the sci-fi aspects and just try to go along for the ride. I liked the idea- not horribly original- of parallel vs divergent lives through time and thought this one did a good enough job with it (even it tried too hard with some of the "scarring" scenes) by presenting it concurrently. The mutation aspect seemed a bit out of place and not really needed IMO. I liked Gordon Levitt or whatever the hell his name is- liked him quite a bit, even if something about him was unsettlingly different phyically from his previous roles. Willis was basically Willis. I liked the female farm mom a lot... spacing on her name.![]()
Really? I thought this was arguably the most underrated film of 2011. You say terrible script, but I thought the dialogue was actually one of its strongest parts. Im pretty much clueless in the business side of this film, but the way it was laid out was good and I wasnt totally confused. I thought the acting, namely Paul Bettany, Spacey, and Quinto was great."margin call" from the queue and found it to be pretty bad. just a terrible script, i thought. it was just so damned obvious about some things (character archetypes, for ex) and terribly vague about others (what was happening). and this script got an oscar nomination? oof. most of the actors were at sea in this film.
Agree, it was a great film. Don't know what Saintfool is talking about.Really? I thought this was arguably the most underrated film of 2011. You say terrible script, but I thought the dialogue was actually one of its strongest parts. Im pretty much clueless in the business side of this film, but the way it was laid out was good and I wasnt totally confused. I thought the acting, namely Paul Bettany, Spacey, and Quinto was great."margin call" from the queue and found it to be pretty bad. just a terrible script, i thought. it was just so damned obvious about some things (character archetypes, for ex) and terribly vague about others (what was happening). and this script got an oscar nomination? oof. most of the actors were at sea in this film.