The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I enjoyed the heck out of it. I will watch it again. But it IS a cheesefest.

I've always pondered if "cheesefest" is just a projection from future decades of a prior decade film. Will 2080 movie fans be calling INception a cheesefest too? If so, is it a meaningful criticism?

No j/k I know what you mean. acting is acting. it was weak at times, although I didn't have even close to the same amount of criticism as you.
I think its just the # of instances of cheesy acting - I agree it happened, but not so often that it affected my rating.

Chewy is big and meant to be intimidating, yet he walks along like a knock-kneed passive dweeb like Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory...dragging his feet like a lazy nerd. They should have hired an athlete instead of this guy...

interesting criticism - never heard this before, but good reasoning...

The cheese list is monumental. But Its like The Wizard of OZ. Its CLASSIC cheese filled with nostalgia that gets better with age.

dude, I seriously think you just associate "cheese" with old films. I remember all your "cheese" complaints: Citizen Kane, The Searchers, Star Wars, Wizard of Oz...
if i'm wrong, name me a RECENT CHEESE film.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Based on your logic vs emotion theory, HE would have difinitely been the man who would have.

For the entire film he was the leader, the organizer, the man with a PLAN, the guy who analysed EVERYTHING and weighed every dicision before making a move.

dang it - I had a GREAT counterargument here - that all of your cited logic decisions were NON-PARENTING decisions and that your argument was no better than saying the AMerican Idol parent wouldn't tell Simon their kid is still a great singer, because they are logical purchasers of goods (non-parenting). but then I remembered that I argued that the more logical parent would be more logical at the end (MIT Dean), so already conceded your argument Ok ok good argument.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

This is absolutely wrong.

When they were in the store and danger presented itself, they STILL had food and shelter (Safe haven). They were in far less long or short term danger at that point. There was never a "This is game over moment". All they had to do was

[Show spoiler] defeat any individual critter that managed to get in.

ONE at a time.

yes! good response here! ok, scratched that off the list. see? I am in "I want to love this ending" mode - no different than a buyer of a car

Later, when they left and were OUT IN THE OPEN, with no shelter, no food and no gas, it was the obvious END of their run. Monsters everywhere and nowhere to hide. No way to escape and no cover = Game OVER. Defeat had arrived.

one MAJOR problem here: if it was SO OBVIOUS that there was no help, how could there be help? I've only seen the film once a LONG time ago, and will watch it again NOW and be back to report further (be afraid sir, be very afraid! if i'm making you squirm like this without a recent viewing, think what'll happen in 2 hours!)

This is WHY the desparate act was taken. And, AGAIN, why the ending of THE MIST is perfect in every way.

so let me ask you a few questions. do you think the ending is good because:

(a)

[Show spoiler]the guy OBJECTIVELY made the right decision, based on the facts and circumstances, regardless of the fact that it ended up being the wrong decision?

(i'm guessing you're here)

(b)

[Show spoiler]the guy was a bonehead, never should have shot everyone, especially the kid, and now his moral demise upon seeing the rescue is self-gratifying to the point of pins and needles on my arm

(i don't think you're here, but your glaring smiley faces at such a horrid ending have me second guessing )

I think (b) obviously involves subjective projection onto the dad (the viewer wouldn't have done the same thing, hence projects judgment onto him), while (a) doesn't necessarily, although one who agrees with his decision (squid *cough* sick sick twisted dads of the world *cough* ) could be arguably projecting judgmnet onto the dad in (a) too - they approve of daddy's decision

I suppose (b) is the only refuge of someone who disagrees with his decision, yet wants to enjoy the film? unless they can swallow a gallon of frog diarrhea and somehow be objective enough to interpret it as (a). what's your take? is it fair for a viewer who disagrees with his decision to celebrate in his demise? how else can us (b)'s of the world enjoy the ending?? help us dude.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

1. i read some of your thoughts Surf about the ending of The Mist. along with comments by Al and Squid and all i have to say is... i'm not responding because i could barely digest and follow what the F i was reading. needless to say, i love the ending and thought it was awesome, so i'm correct

2. looks like i'm in the minority for The Others... as seen by my short review below...

------------------

The Others - 3/5

[Show spoiler]
worth 5 bucks? sure. worth keeping? no way.
never really held my attention all that much and honestly the only reason i kept watching as closely as i did was because of the supposed "twist" ending. which there was. but since all i EVER heard about this movie was the twist ending (not that the movie was any good, unlike its counterpart - The Sixth Sense (not that i found that very good either...) i knew there was something to suspect and discount for. so i tried to block that out.

didn't really work.

when the movie tries so hard to be creepy and puzzling and eyebrow raising in parts of course i'm gonna think something is up (unlike in other movies with a big twist reveal). acting was pretty solid across the board. and there was a thick atmosphere, if i had bought into it. the house was a great set piece, but the entire movie felt like something was just... off. like something was missing. like the film was a bit cold and too hollow for its own good. nothing to connect to or care about, so when the twist end came, who cares?

i sure didn't.

off to amazon it goes!

[Show spoiler]

that's what i HATE when people start chirping about the ending or big spoiler in any film. no matter what, somehow a little bit gets out and suddenly you kind of have an idea in your head.

drives me nuts

because (much like my review for The Others) once someone knows something is up, it's hard to turn away from knowing that and now you're expecting it.

much like in The Big Bang Theory when Sheldon gets told that the new comic (forget which one) is "mindblowing" he gets pissed because that's a spoiler. he now expects his mind to be blown, which will make it harder for his mind to be blown than if he didn't hear that expression for it.

kind of like when people are like "the movie was okay, but OMG that ending!" well, great. now you're anticipating and trying to solve what the ending will be before getting there and letting it punch you in the face!



some people can block those 'spoiler' type scenarios out. i however, pretty much cannot

You are right, but it would also save me the trouble of ever blind buying The Mist if the feeling I am getting is correct. You know how I hate movies that end like that if I am right, even if it makes sense in the context of the movie.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

more ending of The Mist discussions. I love your scientific probability breakdown!

Ha ha. They had to resort algorithms to prop up their feeble argument.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

dude, I seriously think you just associate "cheese" with old films. I remember all your "cheese" complaints: Citizen Kane, The Searchers, Star Wars, Wizard of Oz...
if i'm wrong, name me a RECENT CHEESE film.

Better than that, I can name many films from the same era (1970's) and even older that dont contain cheese.

12 Angry Men, Papillon, The Deer Hunter, The Godfather, One flew over the Cuckoos Nest, Apocalypse Now, The French Connection, Kramer vs Kramer, Being There, etc............

But, if you want recent cheese, poor acting and poor casting, OK. 10,000BC, Transformers, Indy 4, 2012, Sherlock Holmes, Iron Man, Surrogates, Expendables, Harry Potter films, Twilights, Drive angry, The A team, GI Joe, Battle Los Angeles, Jonah Hex, Hitman, Ghost Rider, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor............

I am not saying that cheese is bad. Look at my collection, I am a connaisseur de fromages.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

yes! good response here! ok, scratched that off the list. see? I am in "I want to love this ending" mode - no different than a buyer of a car



one MAJOR problem here: if it was SO OBVIOUS that there was no help, how could there be help? I've only seen the film once a LONG time ago, and will watch it again NOW and be back to report further (be afraid sir, be very afraid! if i'm making you squirm like this without a recent viewing, think what'll happen in 2 hours!)



so let me ask you a few questions. do you think the ending is good because:

(a)

[Show spoiler]the guy OBJECTIVELY made the right decision, based on the facts and circumstances, regardless of the fact that it ended up being the wrong decision?

(i'm guessing you're here)

(b)

[Show spoiler]the guy was a bonehead, never should have shot everyone, especially the kid, and now his moral demise upon seeing the rescue is self-gratifying to the point of pins and needles on my arm

(i don't think you're here, but your glaring smiley faces at such a horrid ending have me second guessing )

I think (b) obviously involves subjective projection onto the dad (the viewer wouldn't have done the same thing, hence projects judgment onto him), while (a) doesn't necessarily, although one who agrees with his decision (squid *cough* sick sick twisted dads of the world *cough* ) could be arguably projecting judgmnet onto the dad in (a) too - they approve of daddy's decision

I suppose (b) is the only refuge of someone who disagrees with his decision, yet wants to enjoy the film? unless they can swallow a gallon of frog diarrhea and somehow be objective enough to interpret it as (a). what's your take? is it fair for a viewer who disagrees with his decision to celebrate in his demise? how else can us (b)'s of the world enjoy the ending?? help us dude.

Its simple. If you are a (B) and want to enjoy the film, you must convert to an (A). That is the beauty of (A). While they are leaving the store he looks in the

[Show spoiler]gun and counts the bullets. Only four. The stage has been set right at that point for the possible poignant and tragic ending. As viewers we were supposed to think "Damn, not enough for all five of US" because thats what he was thinking. Not "Damn, only four bullets, that aint gunna kill many monsters".

The group suicide was powerful enough to be considered classic IMO. Films just dont have that kinda balls. But The Mist did. Then when he goes out and begs to be taken by the beasts (no doubt feeling incredible grief over his actions) and the Military comes by, It's one of the most powerful and tragic ironies ever put to film.

The man did what he did because he thought it was the best thing for his boy. He HATED doing it though. It was hard for him...NOT easy. He martyred himself to be torn to shreds or made a cacoon/incubator so that his son may have a swift and painless departure. In the end he was wrong, and will be crushed and tortured by that knowledge every single day for the rest of his life.

A good man, trying to do good, will now suffer for his deeds, unimaginably, for all eternity.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Its simple. If you are a (B) and want to enjoy the film, you must convert to an (A). That is the beauty of (A). While they are leaving the store he looks in the

[Show spoiler]gun and counts the bullets. Only four. The stage has been set right at that point for the possible poignant and tragic ending. As viewers we were supposed to think "Damn, not enough for all five of US" because thats what he was thinking. Not "Damn, only four bullets, that aint gunna kill many monsters".

The group suicide was powerful enough to be considered classic IMO. Films just dont have that kinda balls. But The Mist did. Then when he goes out and begs to be taken by the beasts (no doubt feeling incredible grief over his actions) and the Military comes by, It's one of the most powerful and tragic ironies ever put to film.

The man did what he did because he thought it was the best thing for his boy. He HATED doing it though. It was hard for him...NOT easy. He martyred himself to be torn to shreds or made a cacoon/incubator so that his son may have a swift and painless departure. In the end he was wrong, and will be crushed and tortured by that knowledge every single day for the rest of his life.

A good man, trying to do good, will now suffer for his deeds, unimaginably, for all eternity.

I like your last 2-3 sentences. That is a possible pathway to (A). Prior to reading those sentences, I saw no way. I love the eternal suffering part. However, I just found an easy way to stay at (B). I only got to see the first 1:20 of the film last night (phone kept ringing), but there is an irony even more supreme than the irony of

[Show spoiler]him getting rescued

.

Why did him and his crew leave the store? They all got together and agreed

[Show spoiler]that the religious nutjob woman is "going to pull a Jim Jones" and they didn't want to be there "when everyone is drinking the kool-aid."

. What was the religious nutjob woman's vision?

[Show spoiler]That there would be NO HELP. That there would be NO ESCAPE. That anyone who goes out will be DOOMED.

.

So let's recap:
(1)

[Show spoiler]Dad hears religious wacko saying that there is no help, no escape from the death for anyone who goes out there
(2) Dad and group leave the store PRIMARILY to avoid a future mass suicide with the religious wacko
**ONE HOUR LATER**
(3) Dad believes there is no help, no escape from the death
(4) Dad and group engage in mass suicide

So the morals of the story?
(1) Always believe religious wackjobs - it'll save you time and energy
(2) Try and be open-minded to

[Show spoiler]mass suicide

right off the bat

I'll finish the second hour tonight and see if that changes anything, but I'm thinking the above will help me solidify my enjoyment in (B)

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

I like your last 2-3 sentences. That is a possible pathway to (A). Prior to reading those sentences, I saw no way. I love the eternal suffering part. However, I just found an easy way to stay at (B). I only got to see the first 1:20 of the film last night (phone kept ringing), but there is an irony even more supreme than the irony of

[Show spoiler]him getting rescued

.

Why did him and his crew leave the store? They all got together and agreed

[Show spoiler]that the religious nutjob woman is "going to pull a Jim Jones" and they didn't want to be there "when everyone is drinking the kool-aid."

. What was the religious nutjob woman's vision?

[Show spoiler]That there would be NO HELP. That there would be NO ESCAPE. That anyone who goes out will be DOOMED.

.

So let's recap:
(1)

[Show spoiler]Dad hears religious wacko saying that there is no help, no escape from the death for anyone who goes out there
(2) Dad and group leave the store PRIMARILY to avoid a future mass suicide with the religious wacko
**ONE HOUR LATER**
(3) Dad believes there is no help, no escape from the death
(4) Dad and group engage in mass suicide

So the morals of the story?
(1) Always believe religious wackjobs - it'll save you time and energy
(2) Try and be open-minded to

[Show spoiler]mass suicide

right off the bat

I'll finish the second hour tonight and see if that changes anything, but I'm thinking the above will help me solidify my enjoyment in (B)

They left the store to persue

[Show spoiler]HOPE. They eventually came to believe that all HOPE had been lost. Time for self termination.

[Lepidopterous]

[SquidPuppet]

Burn Notice: The Fall of Sam Axe (2011)

DVD

Made for TV and it shows.

Cheesey and silly. But thats what you should expect from it, and a Bruce Campbell flick. Simply a background story for the Sam Axe character from the TV show "Burn Notice". It has the same mixture of silly/danger as the show.

I'd recommend it only for fans of the show. Fluffy entertainment.

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Burn Notice: The Fall of Sam Axe (2011)

DVD

Made for TV and it shows.

Cheesey and silly. But thats what you should expect from it, and a Bruce Campbell flick. Simply a background story for the Sam Axe character from the TV show "Burn Notice". It has the same mixture of silly/danger as the show.

I'd recommend it only for fans of the show. Fluffy entertainment.

What a great first choice to jump back into films

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

(1)

[Show spoiler]Dad hears religious wacko saying that there is no help, no escape from the death for anyone who goes out there
(2) Dad and group leave the store PRIMARILY to avoid a future mass suicide with the religious wacko
**ONE HOUR LATER**
(3) Dad believes there is no help, no escape from the death
(4) Dad and group engage in mass suicide

So the morals of the story?
(1) Always believe religious wackjobs - it'll save you time and energy
(2) Try and be open-minded to

[Show spoiler]mass suicide

right off the bat

That's a pretty funny way of breaking it down

[tbizzle]

X-Men: First Class - 4.25/5

Overall I thought it was a great addition the the X:Men series. There's definitely room for improvement, but I still enjoyed it a lot. I think more interesting mutants, more time and energy on the effects and script and a few better actors would have made this a lot better. Fassbender and McAvoy are great together, and I actually thought Bacon was a great villain.

[Show spoiler]Wolverine cameo!!!!!

Great

[Show spoiler]Rebecca Romijn

cameo as well.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

What a great first choice to jump back into films

Second choice. Star Wars was first.

Just squeezed a couple in while I was waiting for Netflix to send me more discs of Dexter season 5 and Californication.

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Second choice. Star Wars was first.

Just squeezed a couple in while I was waiting for Netflix to send me more discs of Dexter season 5 and Californication.

Haha that's right

I've been on a bit of a TV kick lately as well, watched the first season of The Walking Dead on Netflix recently. Next up, Breaking Bad or Twin Peaks. Hmmm..

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

X-Men: First Class - 4.25/5

Overall I thought it was a great addition the the X:Men series. There's definitely room for improvement, but I still enjoyed it a lot. I think more interesting mutants, more time and energy on the effects and script and a few better actors would have made this a lot better. Fassbender and McAvoy are great together, and I actually thought Bacon was a great villain.

[Show spoiler]Wolverine cameo!!!!!

Great

[Show spoiler]Rebecca Romijn

cameo as well.

Agreed about the cameos.

[Show spoiler]The Wolverine one wasn't really needed, but it was still pretty funny.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

They left the store to persue

[Show spoiler]HOPE. They eventually came to believe that all HOPE had been lost. Time for self termination.

still havent got to finish the last hour on this viewing

but yes, generally I agree with that, and do like your (A) analysis above and will probably go that route. I was being facietous in those "morals of the film" above (maybe should have made it clearer with faces, but figured you guys knew). But I do like the chilling irony of the dad

[Show spoiler]adopting the beliefs and actions of Jim Jones' sister

, as it does help in a (B) route if I go that way

oh i meant to ask you:

[Show spoiler]after the dinosaur birds attack, a store clerk says "she was right (religious wackjob). she said creatures would come at night and would kill one of us!". at THAT POINT (before dad leaves), it seems that logic/evidence would indicate that one should keep following religious wacko's advice (she already made one prediction right), no? logic/evidence doesn't care about ideology? this is along the (B) theory, so i'm sure you'd disagree, but wanted your take.

oh dude, I received a "squid recommendation" today: 9!!! i know i know, still no Breaking Bad, season 3. i'm too cheap , do you think it'll go down for black friday?

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by tbizzle

That's a pretty funny way of breaking it down

yeah, I was trying to be funny and serious at the same time:

[Show spoiler]the irony is NUCLEAR that he adopted the beliefs and actions of the religious wackjob he detested, even exceeding the irony of him getting rescued after shooting his son

. and yes, the "morals of the film" i listed was a faceitious joke which is just an extension of that irony

[Foggy]

Well, it's a bit of a clitche, and a little bit late, but I finally got around to watching...

The Room

You know, that really bad film everyone was raving about last year. It's really bad.

From the opening scene, the bar is set rather low, there is a lack of direction with anything. Nothing really has a pay off, unless it involves a large bloody bullet hole in the back of the head. Scenes really just trail off, and there a lot of actors doing awkward stuff with their hands and faces due to them not being told what to do. Line delivering spans between stale to brain tumor inducing, and it adds a new level to "being subtle".

It lacks logic, features way too much nudity from both parties, and is all in all a train wreak.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

Seriously, this film knows the bare minimum of film knowledge, and even then, it struggles to apply this to it's own work. It does need to be seen to believed, the film as a whole, really does melt the face off any filmgoer, it's that spectacularly bad.

7/10

(In Al's case, this would be the greatest film of all time)