The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by CZAR

Dude was a pretty bad actor atleast in this film haha. Got Em!!

You realize he was the vampire Valek in John Carpenter's Vampires. And the general in Kull the Conquerer.

And is younger than Ralph Macchio!

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

My Pixar order:

1. Finding Nemo 5/5
2. Monsters, Inc. 5/5
3. Ratatouille 5/5
4. Toy Story 3 5/5
5. Toy Story 5/5
6. Up 5/5
7. Wall-E 4/5
8. Toy Story 2 4/5
9. A Bug's Life 4/5
10. The Incredibles 3.5/5
11. Cars 2.5/5

My top 3 are interchangeable.

My definitive Pixar ranking list in this order.

1) Ratatouille - 5/5
2) Wall-E - 5/5
3) Monster Inc - 5/5
4) Toy Story 3 - 5/5
5) Up - 5/5
6) Toy Story - 5/5
7) Finding Nemo - 5/5
8) Toy Story 2 - 5/5
9) Cars 5/5
10) A Bugs Life - 4/5
11) The Incredibles - 3.5/5

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

My definitive Pixar ranking list in this order.

1) Ratatouille - 5/5
2) Wall-E - 5/5
3) Monster Inc - 5/5
4) Toy Story 3 - 5/5
5) Up - 5/5
6) Toy Story - 5/5
7) Finding Nemo - 5/5
8) Toy Story 2 - 5/5
9) Cars 5/5
10) A Bugs Life - 4/5
11) The Incredibles - 3.5/5

So....you're not a Pixar fan?

[Batman1980]

Cars 5/5 all around, very under-rated Pixar film and inside a gorgeous steelbook, no less. Will be the last movie I watch tonight as it is 2 hours long, will watch X-Men Evolution after and shower.

[Romulus]

Antichrist

To be honest I really hadn't read that much on this film before watching it. I know that some people found it to be extremely disturbing, but in my mind I didn't know in what way. Needless to say for the first hour and twenty minutes I thought the film was very beautifully crafted in an artistic sense and was honestly dumbfounded how people thought it was disturbing. Needless to say, it didn't take me long to find out why. In a matter of moments I went from rating the film from a 4.5 all the way down to a 2 (out of 5). Beautiful artistic direction simply can't save this film from the very unnecessary depictions of

[Show spoiler]sexual violence

. Normally I'm not bothered by disturbing images in films. Antichrist, on the other hand, clearly crosses a line in my opinion. I honestly feel like Lars von Trier could have easily taken a different route in what he was trying to achieve. In the end I feel like it's no different than low horror films that rely on shocking images and gross out techniques to bait the audience, which is a damn shame.

2/5

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by tommyboy81

Just got back from seeing an early screening of Fair Game. Guess we were the first to get it. 5/10

[Show spoiler]The editing and camera work were really bad in the first 30mins. Why have scenes of 2 people and when you're moving the camera from one person to the other do you have to cut just before you get to the other person and cut to that person??? The sub-titles are really small and not in bold and white. The only reason I say this is because when they talk there's a white wall, white shirt or is really bright outside and you can't read it.

1st act bad, 2nd act really good except for camera IMO, 3rd Act??? well couldn't tell when it started. I'm guessing it started when

[Show spoiler] she took her kids to her parents house with 20mins left

I wanted to like it more i really did but the first5 to 10 mins did it for me with the quick editing of shot, the editing itself (it's like they used a different editor through the rest of the movie), and just the way it started out. The acting in here was ok. Penn wasn't Oscar material. We shouldn't have to worry about him come Oscars.

That's a shame. I was looking forward to this one. I might catch a matinée.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

So guys i got these Criterion's from the sale
The Magician
Seven Samurai
Last Year At Mareinbad
Paths of Glory
Charade
Everlasting Moments
The Thin Red Line

Nice. "The Seven Samurai," "Paths of Glory," "Charade," and "The Thin Red Line" should be well worth it. I ordered "The Magician" myself, so I hope it's good.

[tbizzle]

The Fog - 3.5/5

Pretty decent horror film from the early 80's although the story was kinda weak. I really like that early Carpenter feel, especially with the music!

Halloween - 3.75/5

Decent remake, though I'm not the biggest fan of the original. I like the story a lot, but neither film nailed it for me. I'll probably watch the sequel sometime soon, though I'm not expecting much.

The Fly - 4.5/5

Very well done, I liked this one a lot. Jeff Goldflum was awesome as the charming geek, as well as a crazy

[Show spoiler]man-fly

He and Geena Davis had great chemistry on screen. I really liked the tone, pacing and direction. This was my first Cronenberg film and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing Videodrome.

The Evil Dead - 3/5

Not my style. It was ok, though I was thinkin it was gonna be funny at least. I'll give The Evil Dead 2 a shot soon

Drag Me To Hell - 2/5

What a bad film, I should've stayed away from it after seeing the trailer. I guess this could be kinda fun for some people, but I'm finding that I'm not a fan of Raimi's style. After the first 20 minutes, I began fast forwarding it to the "interesting parts" and ultimately fast forwarding to the end.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Jurassic Park

after watching Toy Story 3 today and reliving my youth yesterday with "Pixar Day" i decided to keep the theme running with an old favorite, Jurassic Park.

sadly though, the film just doesn't have the same 'sizzle' as it used to. i used to kind of just give it a 5/5 because there are a few awesome scenes and the visuals are outstanding (and still are), but watching it today, man, the film has a lot of issues that bugged me.

1) i forgot how long this movie is and how streeeeeeetched out Spielberg makes some of the scenes. i've always kind of liked The Lost World more (yeah, one of like, 5 people in the world ) because it's faster paced and has wicked cool raptor scenes, and it isn't super serious like JP is.

i've recently begun to rethink about what i actually want to own on blu-ray and one of the requirements is wanting to watch the movie 2 - 3 times a year, at least. JP doesn't make the cut, and after today, i'm glad it didn't just come out and i bought it because i don't care how great PQ/AQ are, that's no reason (to me) to buy a film. i've had this on DVD for years, and this is probably the 3rd time i've watched it in about 5-6 years.

i also forgot how annoying and useless the kids are in the film and hate how they suddenly become main characters at the end but of course, there is the legendary opening scene with doctor Grant telling the small, fat boy about how raptors attack and eat you while you're still alive, so that's worth something

3.5/5

Never really thought about it, but it does take a while to get to the good stuff in this film. Jeez.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

The Fly - 4.5/5

Very well done, I liked this one a lot. Jeff Goldflum was awesome as the charming geek, as well as a crazy

[Show spoiler]man-fly

He and Geena Davis had great chemistry on screen. I really liked the tone, pacing and direction. This was my first Cronenberg film and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing Videodrome.

The Evil Dead - 3/5

Not my style. It was ok, though I was thinkin it was gonna be funny at least. I'll give The Evil Dead 2 a shot soon.

"Videodrome" was fairly weird and crazy. I'm still not sure what to think myself! Cronenberg also made a fine film called "The Naked Lunch," which is probably the third weirdest film I've seen.

"Evil Dead II" is way funnier than the first film, with a lot of slapsticky screwball stuff, so that might appeal to you better.

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

"Videodrome" was fairly weird and crazy. I'm still not sure what to think myself! Cronenberg also made a fine film called "The Naked Lunch," which is probably the third weirdest film I've seen.

Yeah I've heard this one was pretty crazy, can't wait to check it out! Just added Naked Lunch to my queue as well. I'm getting behind on the mind benders, I still haven't seen Mulholland Drive, Crazy Highway, Inland Empire, etc.

"Evil Dead II" is way funnier than the first film, with a lot of slapsticky screwball stuff, so that might appeal to you better.

Yeah that's what I was hoping for. I've heard all of the hype about ED2 and Army of Darkness, so I was thinkin the first is where Raimi was getting his footing, and then he opened up with the sequels.

[DavePS3]

Toy Story 3 was the one I watched last night. Very well done and I consider it the best of the trio. What I found really interesting was how far the technology has allowed the artists and animators to kick up detail in backgrounds as well as human faces over the original film. Back then, they could only do so much but what they COULD do, worked perfectly for the toys and more simplistic backgrounds. Now, although the main toys themselves look the same which is critical, but other toys as well as dirt and smudge marks on the toys themselves are taken to new heights. However this does not take from the movie, it adds to it... it blends in perfectly without distraction.

Bear in mind though, that all the detail in the world can't save a bad script/story but luckilly TS3 actually has the best story out of the trilogy. I was impressed. As an example of how the technology has changed, the fur on the teddy bear could not have been done with as much detail back when the first film was rendered but more importantly, in the first film, looking at Woody's feet walking on carpet, it was obvious he was literally placed onto the background that they produced separately. The second film was a bit better but this third installment looks more like the background was produced in the same field as the characters so it appears more seamless. Huge difference in even the artwork on the two main dogs between the first and third film. Amazing piece of work, great sound and great story.

[tbizzle]

Can't wait to see TS3! Mine came from Netflix yesterday but I ended up watching Hunger.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Antichrist

To be honest I really hadn't read that much on this film before watching it. I know that some people found it to be extremely disturbing, but in my mind I didn't know in what way. Needless to say for the first hour and twenty minutes I thought the film was very beautifully crafted in an artistic sense and was honestly dumbfounded how people thought it was disturbing. Needless to say, it didn't take me long to find out why. In a matter of moments I went from rating the film from a 4.5 all the way down to a 2 (out of 5). Beautiful artistic direction simply can't save this film from the very unnecessary depictions of

[Show spoiler]sexual violence

. Normally I'm not bothered by disturbing images in films. Antichrist, on the other hand, clearly crosses a line in my opinion. I honestly feel like Lars von Trier could have easily taken a different route in what he was trying to achieve. In the end I feel like it's no different than low horror films that rely on shocking images and gross out techniques to bait the audience, which is a damn shame.

2/5

aha, I know what you mean, but you weren't "baited" by the depictions. You said it yourself -- you were engaged beforehand That's the difference in my eyes -- low horror films rely on disturbing imagery, while Antichrist is merely using imagery as a condiment

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Antichrist

To be honest I really hadn't read that much on this film before watching it. I know that some people found it to be extremely disturbing, but in my mind I didn't know in what way. Needless to say for the first hour and twenty minutes I thought the film was very beautifully crafted in an artistic sense and was honestly dumbfounded how people thought it was disturbing. Needless to say, it didn't take me long to find out why. In a matter of moments I went from rating the film from a 4.5 all the way down to a 2 (out of 5). Beautiful artistic direction simply can't save this film from the very unnecessary depictions of

[Show spoiler]sexual violence

. Normally I'm not bothered by disturbing images in films. Antichrist, on the other hand, clearly crosses a line in my opinion. I honestly feel like Lars von Trier could have easily taken a different route in what he was trying to achieve. In the end I feel like it's no different than low horror films that rely on shocking images and gross out techniques to bait the audience, which is a damn shame.

2/5

Got a question for you.

[Show spoiler]When you say sexual violence, do you mean enthusiastic rough sex? Or does the couple actually beat/rape each other? I need some clarity on this before I see it.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

[The Fly - 4.5/5

Very well done, I liked this one a lot. Jeff Goldflum was awesome as the charming geek, as well as a crazy

[Show spoiler]man-fly

He and Geena Davis had great chemistry on screen. I really liked the tone, pacing and direction. This was my first Cronenberg film and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing Videodrome.

.

Dont miss "A History of Violence"

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Rob71

You realize he was the vampire Valek in John Carpenter's Vampires. And the general in Kull the Conquerer.

And is younger than Ralph Macchio!

Never seen Vampires actually. He did look familiar but man was he bad. Like I said u could tell Macchio was a lil to old in part 3 haha. Got Em!!

Originally Posted by Romulus

Antichrist

To be honest I really hadn't read that much on this film before watching it. I know that some people found it to be extremely disturbing, but in my mind I didn't know in what way. Needless to say for the first hour and twenty minutes I thought the film was very beautifully crafted in an artistic sense and was honestly dumbfounded how people thought it was disturbing. Needless to say, it didn't take me long to find out why. In a matter of moments I went from rating the film from a 4.5 all the way down to a 2 (out of 5). Beautiful artistic direction simply can't save this film from the very unnecessary depictions of

[Show spoiler]sexual violence

. Normally I'm not bothered by disturbing images in films. Antichrist, on the other hand, clearly crosses a line in my opinion. I honestly feel like Lars von Trier could have easily taken a different route in what he was trying to achieve. In the end I feel like it's no different than low horror films that rely on shocking images and gross out techniques to bait the audience, which is a damn shame.

2/5

I will be watching this soon hopefully. Got Em!!

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Got a question for you.

[Show spoiler]When you say sexual violence, do you mean enthusiastic rough sex? Or does the couple actually beat/rape each other? I need some clarity on this before I see it.

can't wait to read your review on that!! Think a torture porn version of the Fountain (very similar direction/cinematography)

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

can't wait to read your review on that!! Think a torture porn version of the Fountain (very similar direction/cinematography)

I think I've just been motivated some more to rent it...

[Batman1980]

Ratatouille 5/5 all around
Pixar's second best film to date, brilliant in every way, although I may just be biased because I work in a kitchen. Up next, the over-rated Wall-E.