★★★★

ChainsawAsh said:

Transformers are giant robots fighting other giant robots.

Pacific Rim is giant machines piloted by people fighting giant monsters.

Totally different things.

Ah, how eloquent.

What If (2014)

I liked it. Mainly because I sympathize with Radcliffe’s character… woe is me.

The Shape of Water

*ahem*

I LOVE MOVIES!!!

Equilibrium

A really Good and Awesome movie. I give it a Thumbs up!

★★★★

The Darkest Hour- Solid, if a little dry depiction of politics on the UK side during Operation Dynamo during WWII. Phenomenal performance from Gary Oldman, who took home a well-deserved Oscar for his work. The rest of the film is a pretty good, if unspectacular history lesson which will probably find its most natural home in schools. A decent docudrama about a pivotal moment in the war, with great performances and strong production values, but it falls a little short of being as dramatically involving as it wants to be.

Undisputed- Solid little boxing B-movie from underrated director Walter Hill. A film with no aspirations beyond being a genre movie, and that’s perfectly fine. Narrow in function, admittedly, but Hill’s lean, muscular direction and some strong lead performances from Ving Rames and Wesley Snipes make it involving, if not riveting action movie fare. I have to admire and respect a film with no delusions whatsoever about what it is and wants to be.

Speaking of Ghostbusters, I’m watching the remake right now. It’s not terrible. It’d be a lot better if it was much shorter and was a TV pilot imo. I like the cast, I’d follow a weekly series of 20-30 minute episodes about these characters for a little while, but as a feature length movie, it’s barely holding my attention.

This is the movie that people were up in arms about two years ago?

TV’s Frink said:

Yeah…it’s really not bad, and it’s better than II. But women, amirite?

The funny is that having women play the Ghostbusters is actually the only thing that makes the remake more than just a simple regurgitation of the original. It’s really the only strength that the entire production had. Now they’re remaking Lord of the Flies with girls instead of boys, and some idiots were complaining but ultimately we already have one fantastic adaptation of it from 1963 and a pretty good one from the 90s. If they didn’t make any changes it’d just be another reimagining of Lord of the Flies which was perfectly adapted almost word for word over five decades ago.

TV’s Frink said:

Yeah…it’s really not bad, and it’s better than II. But women, amirite?

It’s been so many years since I’ve seen II, I remember next to nothing about it, but I’ll take your word for it.

suspiciouscoffee said:

TV’s Frink said:

Yeah…it’s really not bad, and it’s better than II. But women, amirite?

It’s been so many years since I’ve seen II, I remember next to nothing about it, but I’ll take your word for it.

Hey, Ghostbusters II is my favorite movie.

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Yeah…it’s really not bad, and it’s better than II. But women, amirite?

The funny is that having women play the Ghostbusters is actually the only thing that makes the remake more than just a simple regurgitation of the original. It’s really the only strength that the entire production had. Now they’re remaking Lord of the Flies with girls instead of boys, and some idiots were complaining but ultimately we already have one fantastic adaptation of it from 1963 and a pretty good one from the 90s. If they didn’t make any changes it’d just be another reimagining of Lord of the Flies which was perfectly adapted almost word for word over five decades ago.

Lord of the Flies with girls sounds great if they abandon everything else about the novel and just make it a Wonder Woman prequel where the girls make a cool society of island hunter/warriors and generally get along.

suspiciouscoffee said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Yeah…it’s really not bad, and it’s better than II. But women, amirite?

The funny is that having women play the Ghostbusters is actually the only thing that makes the remake more than just a simple regurgitation of the original. It’s really the only strength that the entire production had. Now they’re remaking Lord of the Flies with girls instead of boys, and some idiots were complaining but ultimately we already have one fantastic adaptation of it from 1963 and a pretty good one from the 90s. If they didn’t make any changes it’d just be another reimagining of Lord of the Flies which was perfectly adapted almost word for word over five decades ago.

Lord of the Flies with girls sounds great if they abandon everything else about the novel and just make it a Wonder Woman prequel where the girls make a cool society of island hunter/warriors and generally get along.

Well, I hate superheroes so I’m opposed to that idea, but realistically I don’t think a Lord of the Flies with girls would be any different from the Lord of the Flies with boys. Kids are obnoxious and evil regardless of the gender.

Mike O said:

The Darkest Hour- Solid, if a little dry depiction of politics on the UK side during Operation Dynamo during WWII. Phenomenal performance from Gary Oldman, who took home a well-deserved Oscar for his work. The rest of the film is a pretty good, if unspectacular history lesson which will probably find its most natural home in schools. A decent docudrama about a pivotal moment in the war, with great performances and strong production values, but it falls a little short of being as dramatically involving as it wants to be.

I loved this movie. Even as someone versed in WWII history and politics, I learned some about the degree of hurdles Churchill had to overcome when he came in to replace Chamberlain. It was very well done, and, as you said, a spectacular performance from Oldman.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:
It was very well done, and, as you said, a spectacular performance from Oldman.

He’s not that old, he’s only sixty.

The Matrix (1999)

One of my all time favourites, I enjoy every minute. I’m gonna re-watch the sequels to figure out if they’re as bad as I remember them.