logo Sign In

Last movie seen — Page 224

Author
Time

Riddick (2013)

Now this was more like it! It's amazing how much they were able to do with their small budget. I've heard criticism and even know a couple of people who have decided not to see the film because they think it's basically a remake of Pitch Black. It's not that at all.

It's more of a detour on Riddick's quest that was started in Chronicles. Yes there are a horde of creatures that threaten everyone. But that doesn't come up until much later in the film. The film is primarily about Riddick and his journey of discovering if he's lost a step since winning an army.

I can understand how people came away with that misconception based on the trailers though. I was a bit bothered by the hamfisted manner in which they made sure they attained an R rating. That was their goal after hearing from the fans but I think they pushed it a bit too far. It's a fun ride though.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Nice to see a little Zardoz love around here. Part of the problem is most people have likely seen the version that used to air on tv. It was pretty hacked up for broadcast standards, and important plot points were lost. I had no idea what happens to Sean's character at the end until I saw it uncut on home video years later.

And I'll take Connery in a pigtail and red undies over Connery in a bear costume any day of the week. I heard there were some brutals prowling around Dragoncon recently.

It makes a great double feature with THX 1138.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Finally saw The World's End.

Overall I enjoyed it but the tone kind of shifts around a bit. It's not their best film but it was pretty funny.

3 balls.

 

Kick-ass 2.

Fucking terrible. No balls.

I really enjoyed the first film but this one was just a train wreck. They lost me at Rape humour.

It was a sequel that really didn't need to be made and having seen it I really wish they hadn't. Maybe in the right hands [with some heavy re-writes] it could have been another fun ride but it's just dark and disgusting.

**You will see characters shit themselves.**

 

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:


Alien (1979)

As I've mentioned before elsewhere, I'm not really a fan of this movie; I found the characters bland and uninteresting, and the performances of the cast were just merely adequate to me.

In spite of that, I do think this film was excellently made on a technical level, and the universe this film initially presented was very interesting, held a lot of potential, and was ripe for further exploration/development (suffice it to say, I don't think any of the sequels/spinoffs I've seen fulfilled that potential).

http://25.media.tumblr.com/a667314e719b4426789442c021f9fd93/tumblr_mkqgxpmAkp1s6j8veo1_400.gif

Author
Time

I don't think any of the sequels/spinoffs I've seen fulfilled that potential

I agree with that, there are aspects of the sequels and prequel and spin offs that are interesting but as far as fully utilising the potential of the fictional realm none of them have.

I personally find the performances and the characters as well crafted as the 'world' in the first one.

The others don't achieve that balance.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

DuracellEnergizer said:


Alien (1979)

As I've mentioned before elsewhere, I'm not really a fan of this movie; I found the characters bland and uninteresting, and the performances of the cast were just merely adequate to me.

In spite of that, I do think this film was excellently made on a technical level, and the universe this film initially presented was very interesting, held a lot of potential, and was ripe for further exploration/development (suffice it to say, I don't think any of the sequels/spinoffs I've seen fulfilled that potential).

http://25.media.tumblr.com/a667314e719b4426789442c021f9fd93/tumblr_mkqgxpmAkp1s6j8veo1_400.gif

You really are a piece of work TV's Sheldon. Thats my joke.

Heather now has 2 strikes about slagging off the classics with Alien and Dawn of the Dead. If you say Nightmare On Elm Street is actually good, then your dead to me.

Author
Time

"Murder by Death" (1976)

What a racist film this is. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed it. Great ensemble cast.

The only people still alive from the film's cast are Maggie Smith, James Cromwell, and Richard Narita

"Clue" (1985)

Another great ensemble cast, yet I did not find it as funny as I did when I first saw it in the theater when it was released.

 

 

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Racist? oh yes lampooning honourable Mr Chan.

Forgive please but I'm not sure if it's racist to lampoon a genuinely racist trope.

Let's not forget that Gremlins (1984) managed to maintain this trope with a straight face without the yellow face (and with the real number one son).

Having sellers obviously not Chinese underlined for me just how silly the stories it was sending up were. The same goes for The Fiendish Plot Of Dr Fu Manchu (1980).

The Party (1968) however is genuinely racist as the character is meant to be a real 'very silly' Indian person not a representation of a story trope.

Author
Time

Darth Solo said:


Heather now has 2 strikes about slagging off the classics with Alien and Dawn of the Dead. If you say Nightmare On Elm Street is actually good, then your dead to me.


http://e2.img.v4.skyrock.net/0610/10480610/pics/3069599583_1_3_brucSnsU.jpg

Then you'd better consider me UNdead, punk, 'cause I like it enough to almost love it.

Author
Time

FanFiltration said:


"Murder by Death" (1976)

What a racist film this is.


It's also misogynistic, homophobic, ethnocentric, makes fun of the blind, the old, the overweight, etc, etc, etc.

Author
Time

It's also the the movie Alec Guinness was working on when a script called Star Wars came his way.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:
Zardoz (1974)

I expected this to be one of those silly "so-bad-they're-good" Star Wars/Mad Max knockoffs that proliferated the 80's, but I was surprised by how beautifully made this movie actually was. The homoerotic red undies aside, I think this is an incredibly deep, emotional movie that is unfairly mocked for no good reason and is criminally underrated.

Anyone who isn't able to understand and/or appreciate the nature of non-linear/surrealist/Dadaist/absurdist films probably will think I'm just pulling their leg here, but this is my honest-to-God opinion on the film.

 

SilverWook said:

Nice to see a little Zardoz love around here. Part of the problem is most people have likely seen the version that used to air on tv. It was pretty hacked up for broadcast standards, and important plot points were lost. I had no idea what happens to Sean's character at the end until I saw it uncut on home video years later.

I was blissfully unaware of Zardoz until a couple of years ago.  The trailer was on some classic Sci-Fi DVD I rented.  If you're unaware of this movie, go watch the trailer NOW!

It was so bizzare... it felt like finding out that my parents used to be [REDACTED].

I finally tracked the movie down expecting it to be so ridiculous that my head would pop off of my shoulders... and I was disappointed.  Because compared to the trailer, the movie is fairly sensical.  So... I'd say, for maximum ridiculous enjoyment, just watch the trailer over and over again. 

It's terribly delicious!

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

Hunger (2008) 9/10 - I haven't posted here in awhile but I felt I needed to write about this. If you haven't seen it yet, you really should. The structure of the film is incredibly interesting.

*SPOILERS FOR A MOVIE BASED ON A TRUE STORY* The first half of the movie is sparse in dialogue, and sets up the story mostly, in the process switching between a couple (seemingly) protagonists, before settling on the great Michael Fassbender. Then we get a twenty plus minute scene of purely dialogue between him and Liam Cunningham (which contains a ridiculously impressive 17 minute long take). Then the last twenty minutes of the movie is Fassbender dying from starvation and is basically without dialogue. It's just completely fresh and harrowing and brilliant and so many other things. *SPOILERS END*

Highly recommended, with a warning: probably the grossest movie I've ever seen.

Author
Time

"Zardoz"

After seeing all the banter about this film, I thought I would give it a try.

I liked it a lot. It's very imaginative, and smacks of the early 70's style of what the future will be like. I loved the far out nature of the first season of space 1999, and this film remind me of that allegory through imagery style. If you are a person who could accept and understand Lynch's DUNE, you may just be able to understand this film's way of reveling it's story. Yet, I can understand why it was rejected by the typical popcorn munchers, even with all them bare titties. ;) 

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time

FanFiltration said:

"Zardoz"

After seeing all the banter about this film, I thought I would give it a try.

I liked it a lot.

 But did you watch the trailer, man?!?

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

FanFiltration said:

"Zardoz"

After seeing all the banter about this film, I thought I would give it a try.

I liked it a lot.

 But did you watch the trailer, man?!?

Sure did!  And this...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDDQuavCa3Y

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I watched Star Trek 2009 about a month ago.  Part to see it again before STID and part to see if my negative memories of it had been trumped up by time (the memory cheats).

I still really disliked it.  My misgivings are on file here somewhere.

Because I'm a "responsible adult" these days, the wife and I usually end up watching movies in 2 (or heaven forbid 3) sittings, which I'd prefer not... but it would mean watching one non-kiddie movie a month or so, which I can't say sounds any better.

That being said, night one of ST2009 ended with Scotty's Super Fun Water Slide after conveniently being teleported into the coolant tank.  This of course, right on the heels of the Old Spock scenes, which are some of the most illogical (see what I did there?) scenes in a very illogical movie.

The upshot of watching movies in different sittings (not one that outweighs the down, but it's what I've got) is that it's easier to evaluate one part separately from another.  If a movie has a stronger front end or back, it's harder to realize that when you watch them "all mashed up together" like that.  :)

So the scene that directly follows the Scotty Slide is probably the one I would say is the best in the film- when Kirk has to compromise Spock's emotions.  So much better than the "your mom goes to college is a human" bit with young Spock at the begining. 

And then the ridiculous ending starts.  Well, it was 7 minutes that I really found myself enjoying the picture.

So... last night we checked out Star Trek Into Darkness.  I was prepared to hate it, given my reaction to 2009's outing, and I'm generally unimpressed with Kurtzman and Orci across the board.  I spoiled everything in the movie back when it had its Australian release several weeks ahead of the domestic one.  I believed the "callbacks to the good movies" were going to be lazy and stupid... and I thought the marketing/PR moves with the "is Cumberbatch Kahn? mystery to be really stupid.  (Of course he is!)  Bringing Kahn back for the 2nd movie seemed to be really uninspired.

All of that to say that I fully expected to hate STID.  I would like to say that I give all movies a chance, even if I have certain expectations (likely untrue)... and I'd like to use STID as an example of that.

I quite enjoyed it!  Sure, there were nits ripe for the picking... but somehow this movie won me over and engendered enough goodwill in me that those issues did not get in the way of my enjoyment. 

There's not a lot more to say about it than that.  I've heard a lot of 'love 2009, really liked STID" and a lot of "hate both of them" "they're the 2 best 'Trek movies ever" kind of commentary... but I haven't heard/seen my response- detest 2009, quite enjoyed STID.

4/5 proton torpedo coffins

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

xhonzi said:

I watched Star Trek 2009 about a month ago.  Part to see it again before STID and part to see if my negative memories of it had been trumped up by time (the memory cheats).

I still really disliked it.  My misgivings are on file here somewhere.

Because I'm a "responsible adult" these days, the wife and I usually end up watching movies in 2 (or heaven forbid 3) sittings, which I'd prefer not... but it would mean watching one non-kiddie movie a month or so, which I can't say sounds any better.

That being said, night one of ST2009 ended with Scotty's Super Fun Water Slide after conveniently being teleported into the coolant tank.  This of course, right on the heels of the Old Spock scenes, which are some of the most illogical (see what I did there?) scenes in a very illogical movie.

The upshot of watching movies in different sittings (not one that outweighs the down, but it's what I've got) is that it's easier to evaluate one part separately from another.  If a movie has a stronger front end or back, it's harder to realize that when you watch them "all mashed up together" like that.  :)

So the scene that directly follows the Scotty Slide is probably the one I would say is the best in the film- when Kirk has to compromise Spock's emotions.  So much better than the "your mom goes to college is a human" bit with young Spock at the begining. 

And then the ridiculous ending starts.  Well, it was 7 minutes that I really found myself enjoying the picture.

So... last night we checked out Star Trek Into Darkness.  I was prepared to hate it, given my reaction to 2009's outing, and I'm generally unimpressed with Kurtzman and Orci across the board.  I spoiled everything in the movie back when it had its Australian release several weeks ahead of the domestic one.  I believed the "callbacks to the good movies" were going to be lazy and stupid... and I thought the marketing/PR moves with the "is Cumberbatch Kahn? mystery to be really stupid.  (Of course he is!)  Bringing Kahn back for the 2nd movie seemed to be really uninspired.

All of that to say that I fully expected to hate STID.  I would like to say that I give all movies a chance, even if I have certain expectations (likely untrue)... and I'd like to use STID as an example of that.

I quite enjoyed it!  Sure, there were nits ripe for the picking... but somehow this movie won me over and engendered enough goodwill in me that those issues did not get in the way of my enjoyment. 

There's not a lot more to say about it than that.  I've heard a lot of 'love 2009, really liked STID" and a lot of "hate both of them" "they're the 2 best 'Trek movies ever" kind of commentary... but I haven't heard/seen my response- detest 2009, quite enjoyed STID.

4/5 proton coffins

Hmmm... I'm in the "fairly enjoyed '09 (even with all the stupid stuff in it) and utterly loathe Into Darkness camp"... so...

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

greenpenguino said:

xhonzi said:

 Star Trek Into Darkness.

 I've heard a lot of 'love 2009, really liked STID" and a lot of "hate both of them" "they're the 2 best 'Trek movies ever" kind of commentary... but I haven't heard/seen my response- detest 2009, quite enjoyed STID.

4/5 proton coffins

Hmmm... I'm in the "fairly enjoyed '09 (even with all the stupid stuff in it) and utterly loathe Into Darkness camp"... so...

I guess I need to read more articulated "utterly loathe" reviews.  I don't know where they are coming from.

 

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

Gravity (2013) 9.5/10 - Amazing film. Just got out of an advanced screening. Cinematography is brilliant. Editing is superb - the pace is fantastic. Bullock is great, Clooney is great. Effects are seamless, 3D is pretty damn good. Suspense is top-notch. Message is perfect. Go see this movie (when it comes out next month).

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Gravity (2013) 9.5/10 - Amazing film. Just got out of an advanced screening. Cinematography is brilliant. Editing is superb - the pace is fantastic. Bullock is great, Clooney is great. Effects are seamless, 3D is pretty damn good. Suspense is top-notch. Message is perfect. Go see this movie (when it comes out next month).

This has been my most anticipated movie for awhile now. Congrats on the early screening!

“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”

Author
Time

Riddick.

Wasn't sure what to expect but I enjoyed it - much more than the previous film which did nothing for me.

It's a bit different to the other two but it makes enough reference to them to tie the three films together. Karl Urban Cameo FTW.

3 Balls.

Author
Time

georgec said:

DominicCobb said:

Gravity (2013) 9.5/10 - Amazing film. Just got out of an advanced screening. Cinematography is brilliant. Editing is superb - the pace is fantastic. Bullock is great, Clooney is great. Effects are seamless, 3D is pretty damn good. Suspense is top-notch. Message is perfect. Go see this movie (when it comes out next month).

This has been my most anticipated movie for awhile now. Congrats on the early screening!

You won't be disappointed.