Last movie seen — Page 251

Edge of Tomorrow (2014).

Brain-Bug Day

3 balls.....

Okay so it's derivative of a handful of admired genre classics of screen and print, so was Star Wars but it doesn't really mix the elements enough to create a new recipe.

It's replicates the sensation of playing a game like Halo or more accurately watching someone else play it.

You are a mechanically enhanced soldier, you get to progress through the plot using various save points and when you die you get to take your knowledge with you to complete the levels and try and finish the final boss battle.

In fact if this were the long awaited Halo film that plot device would probably have gone down well with the target audience as a point of connection with their game play experience.

The D-Day references seemed a bit in poor taste but the action was fun, the acting was lean. Cruise seems isn't as stretched in acting terms compared to the slightly more interesting Oblivion (2013).

What does he have against pyramids by the way?

I don't hate this.

I don't want it to fall on my toe.

Ryan vs. Dorkman (2003)

Normally, I loathe PT-style lightsaber swordplay. Since this is just an ultra-low budget fanfilm, though, I have to say I'm impressed by the choreography.

8/10

Ryan vs. Dorkman 2 (2007) - 8/10

Hardware Wars (1978) - 7/10

Hardware Wars: The Special Edition (1997) - 7/10

Thumb Wars (1999)

Beyond a few select moments here and there, this just wasn't very funny. It was incredibly weird, though, and that alone almost serves as compensation for the weak humour.

6.4/10

Broken Allegiance (2002)

This is the first -- an so far only -- really serious, non-parodic Star Wars fanfilm I've seen. While the acting isn't all that great, the story's kind of underdone, and the choreography is spotty, that's all to be expected seeing as this is a fanfilm; for what it is, it's pretty good. Plus this was obviously made before AOTC came out, so the story isn't hampered by stupid references to the PT and various other prequelisms.

8/10

Broken Allegiance was a nice surprise when I first saw it. They planned to do a sequel / prequel at some point but it never really happened. I remember seeing some test footage / fight choreography and being impressed.

Plus it was made near where I live. :)

Now I feel like watching it again.

I watched a lot of those films back in the day and a few were pretty decent. I remember also being impressed by one called Duality - it's pretty fight heavy / green screen heavy with barely a shred of plot but it was fun.

I remember enjoying thumb wars but it was probably mostly the absurd nature of it rather than the actual humour.

I remember being impressed with trailers for a fan film called Tyderium some years back but it appears to be trapped in development hell or abandoned altogether.

There are probably some other good ones out there but I've been out of the loop for a while, might do some digiging..

Saw World War Z yesterday. I remember enjoying it while watching it but feeling disappointed at the end. Apparently the Book is pretty different, might take a look at that.

2 Balls.

Dark Resurrection (2007)

I have a lot to say about this movie, and since I don't feel like typing it all out (again), I'm just going to post my not-yet-approved IMDb review of it here.

While I admire all the effort that went into making this film, I'd be lying if I said I liked it.

Out of all the "Star Wars" fan films I've seen so far, this one is without a doubt the best made one on a technical level; the costumes, sets, effects, and acting are all very well done. Unfortunately, from a storytelling point-of-view, I find it very underwhelming.

First things first, I didn't like how the Jedi are portrayed in this. Not only do they come off as far too powerful -- throwing up Force fields, regenerating from wounds at an accelerated rate, etc. -- they come off as a cross between the PT Jedi and the Bene Gesserit from the Dune Universe, which -- IMO -- is NOT how the Jedi of Luke Skywalker's Order should be portrayed; the Jedi should be warmer, more human and relatable, not cold traditionalists with a pseudo-matriarchal council trying to create a genetic super-being.

Second, the main villain's regenerative capabilities -- far, far too over the top. Not only can he recover after being run through with a lightsaber, but he can also regenerate from complete incineration(!) Like I said with the Jedi above, he's just too damn powerful, only more so.

Now, as for the characters -- I just didn't care about any of them. The Jedi, like I said, are too frigid, while the Sith/Imperials just don't have defined character whatsoever beyond being typical black hat bad guys.

In regards to the plot, it was needlessly confusing in places. When the first flashbacks pop up, for example, they pop at random with no telltale transitions given to indicate that they even were flashbacks; it's only once you get through them that you realize they're supposed to take place in the past, not the present. More effort definitely should have been put into making the flashbacks look like actual flashbacks.

Also, what's with the Imperial fleet the Sith are allied with? Where did they come from? Does the Empire coexist with the New Republic in this timeframe? Is it some kind of Imperial remnant? Did the Empire somehow reconquer the galaxy? What's going on with those guys?

Now, as for the Sith themselves. I'm just going to be frank -- I don't like Sith anymore, not the modern PT-inspired incarnation of the Sith, anyway. Even if I didn't have a problem with Sith, though, I'd still have a problem with how they're shoehorned into the plot. Where did they come from? Did the main baddie recreate the Sith? Did he just join with a Sith organization that was already in existence? No info about them is revealed or alluded to at all at any point in the film. It's apparent that the Sith characters should have just been Dark Jedi.

Now, for my final issue with this film -- the lightsaber colours. I know it's the in-thing to go with the stupid RGB lightsaber colour scheme from the prequels these days, but I would have preferred more lightsaber colours between the Jedi and the Sith.

In the end, I give this film 7/10 (4/5 for quality, 3/5 for enjoyability).

Godzilla

The Blues Brother 2000

Oh dear god why did I do this?  I am pretty sure spending 20 years in prison would be less painful then this movie.  This is the worst sequel ever made.

I first saw Blue Brothers 2000 way back in 2001, before I saw the original, and loved it. When I eventually did see the original in 2004, I found it underwhelming compared to 2000.

Flashforward a number of years to 2012/13, and I watched both movies again, this time in the proper order; I utterly loathed Blues Brothers 2000 this time around.

Yeah i saw the original first a long time ago and I only watched this one because The Nostalgia Critic was doing it and I like the watch the movies for myself before seeing his reviews because once in a while I don't agree with them. Well in this case he may have understated how bad it was.  Watching this movie was a giant mistake,it makes Episode one look like Citizen Kane.

Well there are two hours of my life I will never get back and yes like Alien 3 I don't count this in my head cannon since it ruins the perfect ending of a movie I loved.

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Well there are two hours of my life I will never get back and yes like Alien 3 I don't count this in my head cannon since it ruins the perfect ending of a movie I loved.

 I have a similar reaction to Alien 4 :-D

twister111 said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Yeah i saw the original first a long time ago and I only watched this one because The Nostalgia Critic was doing it and I like the watch the movies for myself before seeing his reviews because once in a while I don't agree with them.

There are also times that he misrepresents and messes up the timeline of a plot in his reviews. Like his review of the first Power Rangers movie. The timeline of the movie is a lot less messed up than his review would have you think.

 Yeah not that I mind this that much since he is comic first and a critic second.  When he messing something up I just chalk it up to a simple mistake and treat it the same way I treat it when MST3K would make cut to a movie to get it down to time and then the plot wouldn't make sense,it's there to make me laugh so it doesn't really bother me.  I end up watching most of these movies at some point any way.  Still this was just bad,it was even worse then he made it out to be.  I didn't know such a thing could happen.

Bingowings said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Well there are two hours of my life I will never get back and yes like Alien 3 I don't count this in my head cannon since it ruins the perfect ending of a movie I loved.

 I have a similar reaction to Alien 4 :-D

 Well Alien 3 killed off Newt and took away the happy ending for Aliens so that is where I stopped counting.

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Bingowings said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Well there are two hours of my life I will never get back and yes like Alien 3 I don't count this in my head cannon since it ruins the perfect ending of a movie I loved.

 I have a similar reaction to Alien 4 :-D

 Well Alien 3 killed off Newt and took away the happy ending for Aliens so that is where I stopped counting.

Killing off Newt was my happy beginning (I am on record as loathing the character), Ripley sacrificing herself was my perfect ending (how many times could she keep waking up to the same nightmare?).

Well then why not just kill her off in the first two minutes of the first movie?  She didn't do anything,she didn't save a single life.  The first two movies were completely pointless since we were just watching her survive and not doing anything.  See for me the ending of Alien 3 renders the inter series pointless.  I mean the whole point of Aliens was for Ripley to face her demons and defeat them,what is the point if she still has the same problems after that and is going to die in a few days.  In many ways Alien 3 is a reboot since from a character and plot stand point it's as if Aliens never happened.  I don't really mind alien 4 because for me the franchise was already dead,all Alien 4 did was burn the corps.

I am not saying every series has to have a happy ending but if the only thing that happens in a series is that the character we follow gets out alive while everyone else dies and then deals with her personal issues then what is the point of the story if the one person she saves dies and she ends up being defeats by her demon and doesn't make it out a live?  Why even bother watching the first two movies?  The whole story could have been told in five minutes,everything beside her death is just padding stretching a five minute story out to six hours,that's how I feel any way.

They had to do what they did if they were going to start the film with Ripley waking up from the previous story.

Carrie Henn had aged and was too recognisable to be recast.

Arguably the character is more potent as a dissectable corpse than she ever was as a living, bad line delivering, screeching living small thing in peril. That autopsy is the character's finest scene, it's stomach churning not just viscerally but also down to what Signorney brings to her performance.

Oh and it has Charles Dance, anything with Charles Dance is more watchable than Aliens.

Newt's death is an element that remained intact from Vincent Ward's ruined concept.

For me Ward's vision of Ripley constantly pummeled by events, plunged into an alien environment and finally defeating the Company's plans for the Alien was the big win.

Even the mess of the final film is better than having Ripley playing happy families with Newt and Hicks. In my view Alien films should have nightmarish nihilistic beginnings and main plots capped with an uplifting ending.

The first 30mins of Alien 3 (any version) has more atmosphere than practically any film these days. But that's me for you. My favorite Planet of the Apes film is the second one.

But what point does it serve in the end other then to say "Life's a bitch and then we die"?  Okay fine if that is the point you want to make more power to you but did we really need three movies to do that?  The second movie doesn't really fit into the story and really should be removed.  For the story they wanted to tell in Aliens 3 to work I think they should have just had Ripley crashing after the events of Alien and pretended the second movie never happened since it doesn't work at all with the tone or message of the third film and it makes everything feel disjointed.  I mean the second half of the second movie wasn't needed at all and we really didn't need any sequels to tell this story,they could have just had the alien in the lifeship kill Ripley at the end of the first movie and gotten the same point and story across.

Sorry but to me it just made the first two films feel like padding so I would rather right off one film then two.

Ryan said : ...although they did have to change the names to Billie and Wilks (The comic it's based on still has the proper names though).

Not in the original comic they didn't

Ryan McAvoy said:

This is one reason I don't get the constant calls from people that "Well of course Han should have died in ROTJ, the film would've been so much better". Yes because shocking major character deaths in Alien3, X-Men: The Last Stand, ST7 & ST10 were so popular with the fans and those films are so well respected for it.

However, for the record 'Alien3' is awesome and if you want Newt and Hicks to be still alive then read this excellent book...

...although they did have to change the names to Billie and Wilks (The comic it's based on still has the proper names though).

 I didn't know that existed,thanks.

That is the one thing no Alien movie has done that I am still waiting for.  I want to see the Aliens on earth.