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 (12 Viewers)

Prisoners:

ok thriller, but I think I liked it a bit less than most in here. good performances and the movie looked fantastic (is it up for a cinematography oscar?). I think I just had issue with wolverine going from 0 to nuts after one day, and the motivations of other characters. still worth a watch, but maybe I just could not shake that it was exploring similar themes as Zodiac and Gone Baby Gone, but wasn't as good as either. 5.5/10.

 
Enough Said:

Liked this one a bit. refreshing to see a rom/com with more realistic and flawed characters. could have done without the tie in with the exes, but overall well worth it. 7.5/10

 
Jack Goes Boating:

Pretty bland movie. couple funny parts, but found myself watching the clock a bit. didnt feel like psh had much to do, and of course that is why I was watching. 4.5/10

 
Kenny Powers said:
jdoggydogg said:
Chaka said:
jdoggydogg said:
El Floppo said:
Forgot I saw Blue Jasmine... not a good sign, I guess.

Thought the acting was all solid, but I don't really get the point of it at large. Didn't seem to really go anywhere, other than to paint a picture of Blanchette's character. I got little sense of tone as well- comedy/character-study/drama/? Didn't really hit on anything. Some of it was a bit close to home- literally- as I grew up in Marin and live in NYC. The NYC people/lifestyle portrayed in the movie are essentially a mashup of all my clients and projects distilled into a hyperfocused neurotic ugh.... so that part didn't go over too well for me.

Curious to hear thoughts on this- still failing to get the point of it.
Click to expand...
I liked it a lot, but then again I like a lot of Woody Allen movies.
Click to expand...
I agree that the film was more of a character study than anything else. Blanchett and her sister essentially repeating their mistakes.

However it was an excellent character study and some of the better acting performances I have seen this season from both Blanchett and Sally Hawkins, with well done supporting roles as well.

I think Amy Adams is still deserving of the best actress Oscar but I would have no problem if they gave it to Blanchett (and I think they will).
Click to expand...
I'm not an Amy Adams fan. But she was good in American Hustle.

Still, I think Blanchett's in an entirely different league than Adams. I'd vote for Blanchett.
Click to expand...
When comparing last year's performances, or their acting ability/roles overall? If its the latter, no way.
Click to expand...
IMO Blanchet acts circles around Adams most of the time but when looking at these two roles I think Adams performance was simply more compelling. She managed to stand out (stole every scene IMO) in an ensemble cast of some pretty heavy hitters, while Blanchett was without question the best actor in Blue Jasmine and had no one to fight for recognition with.

Perhaps it's a silly distinction but I think Adams did more in a tougher situation.

 
Saw the new Riddick flick last night. Fairly formulaic.Entertaining enough for a Red Box rental but glad I didn't spend theater money.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Prisoners:

ok thriller, but I think I liked it a bit less than most in here. good performances and the movie looked fantastic (is it up for a cinematography oscar?). I think I just had issue with wolverine going from 0 to nuts after one day, and the motivations of other characters. still worth a watch, but maybe I just could not shake that it was exploring similar themes as Zodiac and Gone Baby Gone, but wasn't as good as either. 5.5/10.
Click to expand...
I dont see how it was similar to Gone Baby Gone besides a kid is missing but I think I enjoyed Prisoners more than GBG as Zodiac. Besides Dano not giving up where the kids were, I cant think of any issues I had with characters motivations either.

 
Kenny Powers said:
KarmaPolice said:
Prisoners:

ok thriller, but I think I liked it a bit less than most in here. good performances and the movie looked fantastic (is it up for a cinematography oscar?). I think I just had issue with wolverine going from 0 to nuts after one day, and the motivations of other characters. still worth a watch, but maybe I just could not shake that it was exploring similar themes as Zodiac and Gone Baby Gone, but wasn't as good as either. 5.5/10.
Click to expand...
I dont see how it was similar to Gone Baby Gone besides a kid is missing but I think I enjoyed Prisoners more than GBG as Zodiac. Besides Dano not giving up where the kids were, I cant think of any issues I had with characters motivations either.
Click to expand...
Not going to do another version of the Moon vs. Gravity argument on this one. ;)

Few of the issues that I was referring to:

As I hinted at, I didn't like that Jackman went right to insane. I understand being upset about the kids, but from the start he was uncooperative with the police and decided to go rogue.

Little odd that the friends knew what he was doing, didn't like it, and we really didn't back to them at all in the movie. Hard to believe there would be nothing else from T.Howard and his wife.

As you said, Dano not folding after days is a little much. Also, why was he seemingly ####### with Jackman and only saying the suspicious stuff to him. He either has the IQ of a 10 year old and shouldn't be able to have that level of manipulation, or something was going on that they didn't really bother to explain.

Still not sure the twist with M.Leo makes a whole lot of sense either. So your kid dies from cancer so you decide to kidnap and kill other people's kids? Ok, I guess...
I think overall I remember other movies dealing with similar themes being more nuanced in their delivery. Just felt like this movie painted the characters with broad strokes that didn't work as well for me.

 
Time Kibitzer said:
Afternoon Delight (2013)

Pretty funny little indie flick. Kathryn Hahn was phenomenal in the lead role, super funny and authentic; a performance worthy of a nomination for the Oscar for Best Actress imo. There was one really long and cringe-worthy sequence involving the stripper that really leaves a bad taste in your mouth given how well the rest of the film was, but all in all it's still a funny and genuine indie flick that's worth a watch imo.
Click to expand...
Looking forward to watching this one over the weekend.

 
Two silly movies:

The Last Stand

Better than I thought it would be. Nothing much original to see, but I've seen worse popcorn flicks.

Strange Brew

I am an SCTV addict, so naturally I loved this movie when I was a kid. While a lot of the weak plot ages poorly, Bob and Doug remain funny on screen. They're funny despite the flaws.

 
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10

 
KarmaPolice said:
Time Kibitzer said:
Afternoon Delight (2013)

Pretty funny little indie flick. Kathryn Hahn was phenomenal in the lead role, super funny and authentic; a performance worthy of a nomination for the Oscar for Best Actress imo. There was one really long and cringe-worthy sequence involving the stripper that really leaves a bad taste in your mouth given how well the rest of the film was, but all in all it's still a funny and genuine indie flick that's worth a watch imo.
Click to expand...
Looking forward to watching this one over the weekend.
Click to expand...
Friend recommended this and was puzzled how he decided to rent this. Never heard anything about it. Apple TV I guess.

 
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
I didn't have as much a problem with the lead actor. I had a problem with the time traveling dynamics though. They set some rules early in the movie then completely ignored them later on. Overall I thought it was pretty enjoyable.

 
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
hmmm

so you downgraded the movie because the lead wasn't cute enough for you? ;)

I liked it- I thought they had chemistry, which is the most important thing for this genre. probably not a lot if hot Brits to choose from to begin with.

 
sports_fan said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
I didn't have as much a problem with the lead actor. I had a problem with the time traveling dynamics though. They set some rules early in the movie then completely ignored them later on. Overall I thought it was pretty enjoyable.
Click to expand...
yeah, couple things didn't make sense. such as:
Wouldn't it be the point of conception you couldn't go past if you want to keep the same kid. silly that the day of birth was the focus.
will give a rom/com a bit more slack on the time travel rules and mechanics though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Safety Not Guaranteed (netflix). File under quirky Indie romantic comedy that guys will actually enjoy. Very solid and will qualify as a "concession flick" to the significant other (Rating 7.5/10)

 
KarmaPolice said:
sports_fan said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
I didn't have as much a problem with the lead actor. I had a problem with the time traveling dynamics though. They set some rules early in the movie then completely ignored them later on. Overall I thought it was pretty enjoyable.
Click to expand...
yeah, couple things didn't make sense. such as:
Wouldn't it be the point of conception you couldn't go past if you want to keep the same kid. silly that the day of birth was the focus.
Click to expand...
will give a rom/com a bit more slack on the time travel rules and mechanics though.
I agree in a rom/com it isn't a huge deal. A couple things I noticed:

  • He traveled back before Posy's conception before knowing doing so would result in a different child. He was able to undo it by traveling forward in time (which they previously said he couldn't do).
  • He was able to take his sister back in time with him simply by holding hands with her. Earlier they specifically said only men can travel in time.
  • Near the end of the movie he traveled back in time with his father to when he was a child. Which again was before he had his children. But he was able to travel back to his unaltered present. Why did that have to be his last moment with his father? Since he had already traveled before his child's death and back without repercussion.
 
jdoggydogg said:
Strange Brew

I am an SCTV addict, so naturally I loved this movie when I was a kid. While a lot of the weak plot ages poorly, Bob and Doug remain funny on screen. They're funny despite the flaws.
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

One of my favorite comedies back in my stoner days. Loved SCTV.

 
sports_fan said:
KarmaPolice said:
sports_fan said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
I didn't have as much a problem with the lead actor. I had a problem with the time traveling dynamics though. They set some rules early in the movie then completely ignored them later on. Overall I thought it was pretty enjoyable.
Click to expand...
yeah, couple things didn't make sense. such as:
Wouldn't it be the point of conception you couldn't go past if you want to keep the same kid. silly that the day of birth was the focus.
Click to expand...
will give a rom/com a bit more slack on the time travel rules and mechanics though.
Click to expand...
I agree in a rom/com it isn't a huge deal. A couple things I noticed:

  • He traveled back before Posy's conception before knowing doing so would result in a different child. He was able to undo it by traveling forward in time (which they previously said he couldn't do).
  • He was able to take his sister back in time with him simply by holding hands with her. Earlier they specifically said only men can travel in time.
  • Near the end of the movie he traveled back in time with his father to when he was a child. Which again was before he had his children. But he was able to travel back to his unaltered present. Why did that have to be his last moment with his father? Since he had already traveled before his child's death and back without repercussion.
So when you go back in time you become younger as happened when he became a child. So you could live for as long as you wanted right?
 
Daywalker said:
sports_fan said:
KarmaPolice said:
sports_fan said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
I didn't have as much a problem with the lead actor. I had a problem with the time traveling dynamics though. They set some rules early in the movie then completely ignored them later on. Overall I thought it was pretty enjoyable.
Click to expand...
yeah, couple things didn't make sense. such as:
Wouldn't it be the point of conception you couldn't go past if you want to keep the same kid. silly that the day of birth was the focus.
Click to expand...
will give a rom/com a bit more slack on the time travel rules and mechanics though.
Click to expand...
I agree in a rom/com it isn't a huge deal. A couple things I noticed:

  • He traveled back before Posy's conception before knowing doing so would result in a different child. He was able to undo it by traveling forward in time (which they previously said he couldn't do).
  • He was able to take his sister back in time with him simply by holding hands with her. Earlier they specifically said only men can travel in time.
  • Near the end of the movie he traveled back in time with his father to when he was a child. Which again was before he had his children. But he was able to travel back to his unaltered present. Why did that have to be his last moment with his father? Since he had already traveled before his child's death and back without repercussion.
Click to expand...
So when you go back in time you become younger as happened when he became a child. So you could live for as long as you wanted right?
Yeah. He was able to travel backwards in time then forward again basically however he wanted. He went back to when he was a child then jumped back to his unaltered present. He didn't live his entire life over again but there's no reason he couldn't have. They set some rules early in the movie but the way he actually moved through time had nothing to do with them. He could move to any point in his life whenever he wanted (forwards or back). As long as he didn't die suddenly he could have kept doing that forever.
 
Saw Lego Movie... the writing was great- very aimed at adults in a Will Ferrell kind of way. Lots of pop-culture mash-up/cross-reference along with a lot of Lego insider stuff (I know way too much about ####### Lego because my kid is a fanatic) Definitely one of the better kids' movies I"ve seen with my son.

DId they use stop-motion with real Lego bricks? I know there was some CG in there, but the rest looked real.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jdoggydogg said:
Bob Magaw said:
Changing gears, watched the weird musical/spy spoof Top Secret! It was by Abrahams, Zucker and Zucker, who did Kentucky Fried Movie and Airplane, among others (Naked Gun, Hot Shots). Better than I remembered, though somewhat uneven, a lot of the same sight gags (guy looking through a magnifying glass has a distortedly large eye, when he pulls it away, that is how it is on his face) and word play as in their other movies.
Click to expand...
I love Top Secret. I think it's easily as funny as Airplane!
Click to expand...
Been working my way through some of their other movies. Naked Gun 2.5 was funnier than I remembered, similar formula with seemingly a few sight gags or word play jokes a minute.

Typical examples.

George Kennedy asks Leslie Nielsen if there is a sexual angle to the case, and says "Sex, Frank?" "Not right now." :)

At a speech/gathering, Kennedy says they have identified the criminal and points into the crowd. About a half dozen men simultaneously grab a female hostage and hold a gun to them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
hmmm

so you downgraded the movie because the lead wasn't cute enough for you? ;)

I liked it- I thought they had chemistry, which is the most important thing for this genre. probably not a lot if hot Brits to choose from to begin with.
Click to expand...
I'm talking why the movie flopped regardless of whether the lead actor was good or not.

You got R. McAdams with her track record in this genre you don't put a male lead opposite of her no one has ever heard of. Confused the audience.

J. McAvoy would have been a good choice. Doesn't need to be C. Tatum. Just someone familiar. It's a solid flick better then The Vow or Time Traveler's Wife and think the main reason it flopped is the female audience immediately tuned out. Romantic comedy with R. McAdams with 69% on rotten tomatoes. About Time did 15mill. Time Traveler did 63mill. You never know what movies are going to hit but the casting on this one really put a ceiling on things. I just think it's a head-scratcher when looking at the business of movie-making.

 
El Floppo said:
Saw Lego Movie... the writing was great- very aimed at adults in a Will Ferrell kind of way. Lots of pop-culture mash-up/cross-reference along with a lot of Lego insider stuff (I know way too much about ####### Lego because my kid is a fanatic) Definitely one of the better kids' movies I"ve seen with my son.

DId they use stop-motion with real Lego bricks? I know there was some CG in there, but the rest looked real.
Click to expand...
A fun movie, for sure. If that isn't real stop-motion, it's a damn good facsimile.

 
Bob Magaw said:
jdoggydogg said:
Bob Magaw said:
Changing gears, watched the weird musical/spy spoof Top Secret! It was by Abrahams, Zucker and Zucker, who did Kentucky Fried Movie and Airplane, among others (Naked Gun, Hot Shots). Better than I remembered, though somewhat uneven, a lot of the same sight gags (guy looking through a magnifying glass has a distortedly large eye, when he pulls it away, that is how it is on his face) and word play as in their other movies.
Click to expand...
I love Top Secret. I think it's easily as funny as Airplane!
Click to expand...
Been working my way through some of their other movies. Naked Gun 2.5 was funnier than I remembered, similar formula with seemingly a few sight gags or word play jokes a minute.

Typical examples.

George Kennedy asks Leslie Nielsen if there is a sexual angle to the case, and says "Sex, Frank?" "Not right now." :)

At a speech/gathering, Kennedy says they have identified the criminal and points into the crowd. About a half dozen men simultaneously grab a female hostage and hold a gun to them.
Click to expand...
Speaking of which, Police Squad. One of the funniest series ever made.

 
Robocop

I was prepared to hate this. It's fairly well made. Good action, nice art direction. But there's a lot more at stake in the original. One of my favorite aspects of the original is there are good supporting characters and sub-plots. Just the feud between Ronny Cox and Miguel Ferrer is better than almost everything in the remake. If you never saw the original movie, you might be satisfied with this iteration. The original, however, is far superior.

 
jdoggydogg said:
Robocop

I was prepared to hate this. It's fairly well made. Good action, nice art direction. But there's a lot more at stake in the original. One of my favorite aspects of the original is there are good supporting characters and sub-plots. Just the feud between Ronny Cox and Miguel Ferrer is better than almost everything in the remake. If you never saw the original movie, you might be satisfied with this iteration. The original, however, is far superior.
Click to expand...
Does the 6000 SUX make a cameo in the remake?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alex Cross

It was on Showtime last night. The reviews are rough, getting 12% from RT and 5/10 from ImDB.

I thought it was a very entertaining movie and really enjoyed it. I recommend.

 
Daywalker said:
KarmaPolice said:
Daywalker said:
About Time

I liked this flick but thought the lead actor was miscast. Had a domino effect because they really had to play McAdams down too to make it believable. Had some great moments. Bill Nighy is so cool. But if the trailer caught your eye I think you'll still enjoy it. When it came and went I expected a bomb but it was actually pretty good but like I said completely miscast lead. The lead actor not bad just not going to draw the ladies attention which can submarine a movie like this.

5.5/10
Click to expand...
hmmm

so you downgraded the movie because the lead wasn't cute enough for you? ;)

I liked it- I thought they had chemistry, which is the most important thing for this genre. probably not a lot if hot Brits to choose from to begin with.
Click to expand...
I'm talking why the movie flopped regardless of whether the lead actor was good or not.

You got R. McAdams with her track record in this genre you don't put a male lead opposite of her no one has ever heard of. Confused the audience.

J. McAvoy would have been a good choice. Doesn't need to be C. Tatum. Just someone familiar. It's a solid flick better then The Vow or Time Traveler's Wife and think the main reason it flopped is the female audience immediately tuned out. Romantic comedy with R. McAdams with 69% on rotten tomatoes. About Time did 15mill. Time Traveler did 63mill. You never know what movies are going to hit but the casting on this one really put a ceiling on things. I just think it's a head-scratcher when looking at the business of movie-making.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying. I think I was focusing on the goofy ******* in Love, Actually too much when I was thinking about that movie as a comparison and forget that Hugh Grant was front and center for that one and Notting Hill. It is sad, but I would guess that the rom/coms more than any other drama need the familiar good looking faces to get people in the seats. I usually find it refreshing when the oddball gets the girl/boy, but I also usually gravitate towards the indie romances too. I don't think this movie's concept would have worked with too good looking of a guy - then why in the hell would he need to use time travel to get Rachel McAdams? But that also probably took away over 1/2 the intended audience too.

Still was honestly shocked seeing that it did only 15M. Maybe they should have passed on the Brit and casted one of the nerds from Big Band Theory and made a killing.

 
jdoggydogg said:
Bob Magaw said:
jdoggydogg said:
Bob Magaw said:
Changing gears, watched the weird musical/spy spoof Top Secret! It was by Abrahams, Zucker and Zucker, who did Kentucky Fried Movie and Airplane, among others (Naked Gun, Hot Shots). Better than I remembered, though somewhat uneven, a lot of the same sight gags (guy looking through a magnifying glass has a distortedly large eye, when he pulls it away, that is how it is on his face) and word play as in their other movies.
Click to expand...
I love Top Secret. I think it's easily as funny as Airplane!
Click to expand...
Been working my way through some of their other movies. Naked Gun 2.5 was funnier than I remembered, similar formula with seemingly a few sight gags or word play jokes a minute.

Typical examples.

George Kennedy asks Leslie Nielsen if there is a sexual angle to the case, and says "Sex, Frank?" "Not right now." :)

At a speech/gathering, Kennedy says they have identified the criminal and points into the crowd. About a half dozen men simultaneously grab a female hostage and hold a gun to them.
Click to expand...
Speaking of which, Police Squad. One of the funniest series ever made.
Click to expand...
Police Squad was awesome, I remember when it aired that it bombed because people didn't get it. I guess a lot of people need the laugh track to tell them when the jokes happen and the dead pan delivery in PS without the laugh track left too many people confused.

They pretty much recycled all the jokes from PS in Naked Gun.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KarmaPolice
FBG Movie Club - DotM: George Miller
2 3
Replies
114
Views
6K
Eephus
Eephus
KarmaPolice
  • Poll Poll
FBG Movie Club - DotM: Ridley Scott
2 3
Replies
129
Views
8K
Eephus
Eephus
bigbottom
2024 Edition - Please help bigbottom win a Battle of the Bands and support Chance for Hope as a Bonus! Just a $10 donation makes a difference
Replies
28
Views
2K
Mrs. Rannous
Mrs. Rannous

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Back
Top