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, Streaming, Theater etc (8 Viewers)

Mr. Mojo said:
I hated the overdone camera work in this. Constant movement, fast closeups, etc. That works in small doses but not for an entire picture.
Click to expand...
They had to keep a mainstream audience interested in what was actually a very technical movie. 

 
mr fancypants said:
OK MOP you want to talk films. Since I have to spell it out for you. Jungle book was a beautifully crafted movie based on an animated film some 50 years ago.Your saying the kid was an awful actor. Guess what he was playing a kid. This didn't call for a Daniel Day Louis type performance. This is a just a movie you lose yourself in for 2 hrs. I liked Keanu as well although I can understand how others might not. I thought it was a whimsical comedy that just kind of passed the time. I'm not a Melissa McCarthy fan at all but I thought Spy was hilarious,especially Jason Stratham who played a bumbling macho spy.. It seems to me you go into these movies with a preconceived notion on how they should be to your standards vs. what they are actually trying to accomplish. I think the RT ratings support what I'm saying. Maybe if you could learn to relax and use your imagination you might find yourself enjoying these type of films.IMHO
Click to expand...
Basically you're a commercial, got it. Anything that rates high on RT must be great like the last Star Wars POS. The fact I challenge the overwhelming majority simply means that I am not just slurping up what is being thrown out. And yes you do need to spell out your thoughts because basically all you did was point to a bunch of other folks opinions. 

 
cstu said:
They had to keep a mainstream audience interested in what was actually a very technical movie. 
Click to expand...
Many people were OK with the film but it was irritating and distracting to me.

I don't think that you  have to bounce around like a jackrabbit to keep things interesting or informative.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
Basically you're a commercial, got it. Anything that rates high on RT must be great like the last Star Wars POS. The fact I challenge the overwhelming majority simply means that I am not just slurping up what is being thrown out. And yes you do need to spell out your thoughts because basically all you did was point to a bunch of other folks opinions. 
Click to expand...
No, I think the problem resonates with you being overly cynical and needing to develop a sense of humor. Do you always attend a movie with the thought of how to tear it apart? I also do find fault with acclaimed 90+ rated movies on RT. I actually walked out in the middle of The Nice Guys and didn't care much about Deadpool.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
prolims resonate?! my boss dont treat me no goommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmrandom acne eruptions are ruining my social lizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzi can never find the time or energy towawawawawawawawammmmmmmmzzzzzzzzzzzz He's right - prolims do resonate!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mr fancypants said:
No, I think the problem resonates with you being overly cynical and needing to develop a sense of humor. Do you always attend a movie with the thought of how to tear it apart? I also do find fault with acclaimed 90+ rated movies on RT. I actually walked out in the middle of The Nice Guys and didn't care much about Deadpool.
Click to expand...
Nice Guys was not as bad as some voiced, Deadpool was definitely not as good as the hype and it was full of itself. 

 
1. Nice Guys was ####### great.

2. When rotten tomatoes gives a movie a 90 rating, it's not like a score of 90/100. It means 90% of the critics who reviewed it would recommend it. Big difference and that's where the disconnect is with movies like Spy and Keanu comes in. 

 
Revenant.

I think this was a great movie. But the ending feels like it sucked. The cinematography however was brilliant. And Tom Hardy was great.

Leo was good too but Hardy was better. I might have to watch again.

 
cosjobs said:
1. Nice Guys was ####### great.

2. When rotten tomatoes gives a movie a 90 rating, it's not like a score of 90/100. It means 90% of the critics who reviewed it would recommend it. Big difference and that's where the disconnect is with movies like Spy and Keanu comes in. 
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's why I really don't like RT.  People really seem to confuse that a 90% = 9/10 average.  Like you said, it just means that 90% gave it at least an above average rating, or would tell people to see it.  Big diff between 90% of people giving it a 6/10 and 90% giving it a 9.5/10, but they would show up the same way, right?

I just go to imdb - shows the mouth-breather's score (just kidding!!), and it shows the Metacritic score which is the average critic rating.  The Nice Guys is 7.5 on imdb and has a 70 metascore, which I am guessing is more what people are expecting.  But yeah, it has a 92% Fresh score on RT.  (and yes, RT does list the average rating, but people usually don't see the small font)

 
watched Tom Ford's Nocturnal Animals at TIFF today.   Incredible.  The film was visually stunning but also very intense with engaging plot lines.  Perhaps my only complaint would be that they could have been a bit more subtle about telling the audience that it is a revenge movie.  The movie just continuously pounds that thought over the audience's head and so by the end it becomes a bit predictable.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Yeah, that's why I really don't like RT.  People really seem to confuse that a 90% = 9/10 average.  Like you said, it just means that 90% gave it at least an above average rating, or would tell people to see it.  Big diff between 90% of people giving it a 6/10 and 90% giving it a 9.5/10, but they would show up the same way, right?

I just go to imdb - shows the mouth-breather's score (just kidding!!), and it shows the Metacritic score which is the average critic rating.  The Nice Guys is 7.5 on imdb and has a 70 metascore, which I am guessing is more what people are expecting.  But yeah, it has a 92% Fresh score on RT.  (and yes, RT does list the average rating, but people usually don't see the small font)
Click to expand...
A 90% on RT means that 90% of critics gave it a 'positive' review.  There also an audience score whether they 'liked' it.  If you can get 80% of people to agree that a movie is worth watching then it's probably good. 

My general rule of thumb if a movie gets at least 7.0 on IMDB, 70 on Metacritic, and 70 on RT I will watch it.  Rarely do I find a movie with those ratings that doesn't have some redeeming quality.

 
Finally got around to watching Sicario yesterday. The "plot" line really explains it better then I could:

An idealistic FBI agent is enlisted by a government task force to aid in the escalating war against drugs at the border area between the U.S. and Mexico.
Click to expand...
Thought the story line, cinematography, and a lot of the acting was very well done. 

4 out 5  :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cosjobs said:
1. Nice Guys was ####### great.

2. When rotten tomatoes gives a movie a 90 rating, it's not like a score of 90/100. It means 90% of the critics who reviewed it would recommend it. Big difference and that's where the disconnect is with movies like Spy and Keanu comes in. 
Click to expand...
You liked NG? We saw it in theater but the audience was horrible. They didn't laugh once. The naked woman in the Trans Am to start the film had me laughing and people were looking at us...I wanted to say how do you not find the humor in that but I understand because a lot of main stream comedies stink these days. Ted 2, Neighbors 2? Awful

 
cstu said:
A 90% on RT means that 90% of critics gave it a 'positive' review.  There also an audience score whether they 'liked' it.  If you can get 80% of people to agree that a movie is worth watching then it's probably good. 

My general rule of thumb if a movie gets at least 7.0 on IMDB, 70 on Metacritic, and 70 on RT I will watch it.  Rarely do I find a movie with those ratings that doesn't have some redeeming quality.
Click to expand...
My rule for is that if the critics score a film substantially higher than the audience, it is likely a pandering piece of trash. See: Tree of Life, Drive, Hail Ceaser, Intolerable Cruelty, etc.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
My rule for is that if the critics score a film substantially higher than the audience, it is likely a pandering piece of trash. See: Tree of Life, Drive, Hail Ceaser, Intolerable Cruelty, etc.
Click to expand...
Generally a good rule, but Drive has identical 7.8 IMDB rating and Metacritic rating.  Its RT score is 92% though.  Drive is either the type of movie that hooks or you find it boring, for me it was the former.

 
cstu said:
Generally a good rule, but Drive has identical 7.8 IMDB rating and Metacritic rating.  Its RT score is 92% though.  Drive is either the type of movie that hooks or you find it boring, for me it was the former.
Click to expand...
92% critics vs 79% audience on RT. I know I'm in the minority on disliking it.

 
belljr said:
Lol. You guys are tough. Im a 40 to 50%  user RT guy 
Click to expand...
Depends on the movie. If I'm going to watch a drama, it better have good reviews. If I'm watching the latest CGI flick, I don't care want critics have to say as they hate 90% of them. A comedy, I'll watch based on cast and not care about the critics.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
Depends on the movie. If I'm going to watch a drama, it better have good reviews. If I'm watching the latest CGI flick, I don't care want critics have to say as they hate 90% of them. A comedy, I'll watch based on cast and not care about the critics.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. That's more where I am. And I never look at the Critics.  I was talking about the Viewers rating

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ministry of Pain said:
You liked NG? We saw it in theater but the audience was horrible. They didn't laugh once. The naked woman in the Trans Am to start the film had me laughing and people were looking at us...I wanted to say how do you not find the humor in that but I understand because a lot of main stream comedies stink these days. Ted 2, Neighbors 2? Awful
Click to expand...
Agree completely with you MOP on the state of today's main stream comedies. But with NG it wasn't the audience that was horrible it was the film. I was fed up with it after Gosling did his Three Stooges Curly impression.Was expecting a lot more from 2 actors (Crow/Gosling) that I enjoy.

 
Cliff Clavin said:
My rule for is that if the critics score a film substantially higher than the audience, it is likely a pandering piece of trash. See: Tree of Life, Drive, Hail Ceaser, Intolerable Cruelty, etc.
Click to expand...
No surprise, but the opposite for me.  I think the critics get it right more often than the audience score does.  Of course they slobber over anything Coen Brothers or Wes Anderson too, so I take those reviews with a grain of thought.  Also, not all critics are created equal.  I just know the 3-4 that I seem to agree with a lot and look for their reviews.  I don't care what that ####### Shawn Edwards has to say about a movie. 

 
mr fancypants said:
Agree completely with you MOP on the state of today's main stream comedies. But with NG it wasn't the audience that was horrible it was the film. I was fed up with it after Gosling did his Three Stooges Curly impression.Was expecting a lot more from 2 actors (Crow/Gosling) that I enjoy.
Click to expand...
Most of the humor was cringe-worthy IMO.  Movie was a mess.

 
KarmaPolice said:
No surprise, but the opposite for me.  I think the critics get it right more often than the audience score does.  Of course they slobber over anything Coen Brothers or Wes Anderson too, so I take those reviews with a grain of thought.  Also, not all critics are created equal.  I just know the 3-4 that I seem to agree with a lot and look for their reviews.  I don't care what that ####### Shawn Edwards has to say about a movie. 
Click to expand...
I think that the critics see so many of the same types of movies, when something that is truly different, they go overboard in their ratings and make it sound much better than it really is.

Examples: Lost In Translation, The Master, Gone Girl

 
Mr. Mojo said:
I think that the critics see so many of the same types of movies, when something that is truly different, they go overboard in their ratings and make it sound much better than it really is.

Examples: Lost In Translation, The Master, Gone Girl
Click to expand...
:lol: I thought all of those were great movies.   

I get your point though.  I couldn't imagine having to sit through 200-300 new releases a year.  I am sure that after seeing 10 summer remakes in a row, damn near anything that remotely looked like they were trying would get a high mark from me. 

 
Suicide Squad

Pretty awful. I liked Will Smith's comic relief, and some of the characters were decent. But Marvel continues to dominate this genre.

 
"Big Short" was very meh for me. Lots of talent wasted with truly terrible dialogue. Fun ideas to tell the story, for sure, but was a miss for me.

 
saintfool said:
"Big Short" was very meh for me. Lots of talent wasted with truly terrible dialogue. Fun ideas to tell the story, for sure, but was a miss for me.
Click to expand...
I had the opposite (Ok, maybe just different) reaction to this vs. Spotlight.  I thought Big Short had the flash and actors, but fell short and Spotlight was quieter but the acting and dialogue were fantastic.  Both were good, but much prefer Spotlight.  I just bring it up for the "based on a true story" comparison. 

 
Green Room:

After his last two movies, Jeremy Saulnier is definitely a director that I am just going to watch whatever he puts out (until he proves me wrong).  What he seems to be able to do is no easy task - make movies where ordinary people get themselves into trouble and have to resolve it in a realistic manner.  I loved Blue Ruin a few years ago because it was a great revenge movie, but also because it showed an average Joe trying to do stuff that usually we see the Stathams of the world doing.  It was bloody, messy, and all the more realistic and tense for it.  Same thing goes for this movie.  Here we have a punk band witness something at a show they shouldn't have, and are stuck there and need to get out as the bad guys start circling.  Again, ordinary people have to use whatever they can to get out, and again, it is bloody, messy, and very tense.   This is more of a horror movie than his last one, but I still think people who liked Blue Ruin will probably like this too.  The only thing holding it back a little for me is that it plays like a home invasion horror movie, and that is one of my least favorite types.  Still damn good.  7/10

 
KarmaPolice said:
I had the opposite (Ok, maybe just different) reaction to this vs. Spotlight.  I thought Big Short had the flash and actors, but fell short and Spotlight was quieter but the acting and dialogue were fantastic.  Both were good, but much prefer Spotlight.  I just bring it up for the "based on a true story" comparison. 
Click to expand...
Both good, but I'm more interested in the housing crisis than the old story of Catholic priest pedophiles.

 
saintfool said:
"Big Short" was very meh for me. Lots of talent wasted with truly terrible dialogue. Fun ideas to tell the story, for sure, but was a miss for me.
Click to expand...
It was the overdone camera work that ruined it for me. Bale's mumbling didn't help either. Easily the worst of the Best Picture nominees last year.

 
The Gift.

Like a throw back early 90's pic.  Very promising directorial debut by Edgerton. 

Jason Bateman stole the show.  Great performance.  Should have gotten some acclaim.

The chick from The Town in this.  She looked better then I've ever scene her.  Couldn't take my eyes off her.

Really good flick.  Underrated.

7/10

 
Rented "The Day After" from the Library yesterday. Still an incredibly powerful movie. Most of the special effects were cheesy except the people during to X-Ray when the bomb went off. And still Steve Guttenbergs best role

 
Daywalker said:
Spotlight was solid but felt 20 years too late.  Keaton gave the performance of the movie.  Everyone else was average at best.
Click to expand...
I thought Rachel McAdams was the piece that dragged the movie to average for me. 

And I thought the combo of Ruffalo and Tucci were great.

I also thought overall it was one of those horrible Hollywood examples of actors going in and out of bad regional accents.  Why they feel the need to ruin a good movie with bad accents is beyond me.  Just talk like you normally talk.  It's make believe....can't we make believe we know you're from Boston rather than have you ruin it by making us fully aware that you're not from Boston by using a bad fake accent?

Overall when I first saw this movie I didn't give it a very good grade.  I re-watched it recently and tried to ignore the accents and I enjoyed it a bit more.

 
On The Rocks said:
I also thought overall it was one of those horrible Hollywood examples of actors going in and out of bad regional accents.  Why they feel the need to ruin a good movie with bad accents is beyond me.  Just talk like you normally talk.  It's make believe....can't we make believe we know you're from Boston rather than have you ruin it by making us fully aware that you're not from Boston by using a bad fake accent?
Click to expand...
:yes: Especially when a good half of Bostonians have no pronounced accent whatsoever.

 
On The Rocks said:
I thought Rachel McAdams was the piece that dragged the movie to average for me. 

And I thought the combo of Ruffalo and Tucci were great.

I also thought overall it was one of those horrible Hollywood examples of actors going in and out of bad regional accents.  Why they feel the need to ruin a good movie with bad accents is beyond me.  Just talk like you normally talk.  It's make believe....can't we make believe we know you're from Boston rather than have you ruin it by making us fully aware that you're not from Boston by using a bad fake accent?

Overall when I first saw this movie I didn't give it a very good grade.  I re-watched it recently and tried to ignore the accents and I enjoyed it a bit more.
Click to expand...
Compared to the 2 previous Best Picture winners, 12 years A Slave and Birdman, I thought it was a masterpiece.

 
Watched the documentary "O Lucky Malcolm!" about Malcolm McDowell, which I thought was great, but couldn't help but wonder how such a talented actor could make so few good films.

This is the extent of it:

If... (1968)

A Clockwork Orange (1971)

O Lucky Man! (1973)

In a span of 5 years he starred in three classic films then it wasn't until 1979 he made another good one (Time After Time).  After that, nothing worth mentioning, mostly B-movie career.  I would have thought that Time After Time (which he was only 36 in) would have been a turning point in his career for the better since it showed his range as an actor.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu said:
Watched the documentary "O Lucky Malcolm!" about Malcolm McDowell, which I thought was great, but couldn't help but wonder how such a talented actor could make so few good films.

This is the extent of it:

If... (1968)

A Clockwork Orange (1971)

O Lucky Man! (1973)

In a span of 5 years he starred in three classic films then it wasn't until 1979 he made another good one (Time After Time).  After that, nothing worth mentioning, mostly B-movie career.  I would have thought that Time After Time (which he was only 36 in) would have been a turning point in his career for the better since it showed his range as an actor.
Click to expand...
oh wow... I was a big fan of If when I saw it. think it was in a double feature with Performance.

interesting about McDowell's career. he was in caligula IIRC, and I know he showed up in phineas and ferb too.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Andrew74
2025 FBG Stock Contest
2
Replies
77
Views
4K
Andrew74
Andrew74
KarmaPolice
  • Poll Poll
FBG Movie Club - DotM: Ridley Scott
2 3
Replies
129
Views
8K
Eephus
Eephus
Andrew74
2024 FBG Stock Contest
2 3
Replies
127
Views
8K
McBokonon
McBokonon

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 8 (members: 4, guests: 4)
    Back
    Top