The AUS/KIWI Seen at the movies thread

[Templar]

Just thought i'd kick off a thread about movies we've seen at the movies! Apologies if this has already been done. I know we all love our blu's but it's still good to go and sit in someone else's darkened room for a while

Today i finally saw Skyfall -

[Show spoiler]I really liked Quantum of Solace, but i do agree with the general consensus that it left you wanting more due to it not being up to scratch. DC has gone on record saying that it was made during the writers strike and the script wasn't as polished as they'd liked.
Skyfall rights all the wrongs (there weren't that many) and delivers a cracker of a good time. Craig was again spot on as our favourite 00, the action was great and not over the top, the plot well done, and Sam Mendes did a great job directing the movie. Here's hoping he's let loose on another Bond movie.
There were a couple of sly nods to the Bonds of past, but they were nowhere near as bad as the ones in Die Another Day (which was released on Bond's 40th anniversary), the weakest entry in the Bond series IMHO. I loved the ending and loved the way that it put it's own stamp on the series, said goodbye to the past and now looked to the future.

Go and see it - you'll love it!

[Blueherring]

Still havent seen skyfall and i think running out of time to see it at the movies. Maybe this week or next if its still on.
Only movie i saw over the christmas period was the Hobbit.
Was good, entertaining, got a bit long for me, i'm not the biggest fan of that type of movie though, i watched and own all the LOTR movies and they were good, but im just not a massive fan like others. Still the Hobbit was worth a watch at the cinemas.

Wanting to go see Life of Pi and a few others coming up looked good in previews.

Saw the most movies at the cinemas that I have in a long time during 2012, normally only see 1 or 2 at the movies, 2012 saw all of these:
- Best exotic marigold hotel
- The Dark Knight Rises
- Avengers
- Ted
- Prometheus
- The Hobbit
- Red Hot Chilli Peppers Album launch concert
- Expendables 2
- Bourne Legacy

Possible more, but that is all i can remember, enjoyed all of them, probably Best Exotic and Prometheus the most.

Good idea for a thread by the way

[Templar]

Originally Posted by Blueherring

Still havent seen skyfall and i think running out of time to see it at the movies. Maybe this week or next if its still on.
Only movie i saw over the christmas period was the Hobbit.
Was good, entertaining, got a bit long for me, i'm not the biggest fan of that type of movie though, i watched and own all the LOTR movies and they were good, but im just not a massive fan like others. Still the Hobbit was worth a watch at the cinemas.

Wanting to go see Life of Pi and a few others coming up looked good in previews.

Saw the most movies at the cinemas that I have in a long time during 2012, normally only see 1 or 2 at the movies, 2012 saw all of these:
- Best exotic marigold hotel
- The Dark Knight Rises
- Avengers
- Ted
- Prometheus
- The Hobbit
- Red Hot Chilli Peppers Album launch concert
- Expendables 2
- Bourne Legacy

Possible more, but that is all i can remember, enjoyed all of them, probably Best Exotic and Prometheus the most.

Good idea for a thread by the way

Thanks mate!
I saw all on your list apart from Marigold and the RHCP launch - where and how, coz that would've been awesome!

[melmac]

Originally Posted by Blueherring

Still havent seen skyfall and i think running out of time to see it at the movies. Maybe this week or next if its still on.

This is something I've really begun to notice a lot lately, at least over here in the West if its not a ginormous blockbuster or a kids flick then it's in and out of the theatre so quick that if you blink you'll miss it. Seriously 2 weekends if your lucky and then its gone it's rather annoying.

I see a lot of movies at the cinemas in fact so many last year that I don't think I could list them all if I tried, I think this year I may try and keep tab just for interest sake.

As posted in the last watched thread I saw The perks of being a Wallflower yesterday and really enjoyed it, I heard someone describe it as The Breakfast Club for the next gen and I think that's pretty apt as it had a similar feeling to it however TBC was much cooler

[insomniac]

Originally Posted by melmac

I see a lot of movies at the cinemas in fact so many last year that I don't think I could list them all if I tried, I think this year I may try and keep tab just for interest sake.

I've been keeping tab since last year by adding the films I saw at the pictures with the 'Theatrical' function, just like how you add Blu-ray titles to your collection. I love how it neatly lists all the films you've seen with the theatrical artwork, and it shows up like your BD collection on the phone app too.

I agree about how some films are pulled out of the theatres too quickly, I don't even remember seeing Dredd going up, as I was busy during that period.

The last one I saw was 'Wreck-It-Ralph'. It was better written than I had expected, though it jumped around from trying to appeal to the kids, as well as people who grew up and remembered the 80s. I really liked how they went dark with the villain at the end, and can see it being frightening for some kids.

[Saints 2010]

Saw a bit at the cinemas last year. I'll list them in alphabetical order.

Argo (Favourite film)
The Avengers
The Amazing Spider-Man
Brave
Chronicle
The Dark Knight Rises (IMAX)
The Descendants
The Devil Inside
The Dictator
Dredd (3D)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (US)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Hugo (3D)
The Hunger Games
Life of Pi
Looper
The Man with the Iron Fists
Men in Black 3 (3D)
The Muppets
Project X
Prometheus
The Raid: Redemption
Red Dawn
Rock of Ages
Safe House
Skyfall
Stars Wars: The Phantom Menace (3D)
Taken 2
Ted
This Means War
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Saw The Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Looper twice as well.

[melmac]

Originally Posted by insomniac

I've been keeping tab since last year by adding the films I saw at the pictures with the 'Theatrical' function, just like how you add Blu-ray titles to your collection. I love how it neatly lists all the films you've seen with the theatrical artwork, and it shows up like your BD collection on the phone app too.

Hey didn't know that function existed great idea thanks
Just wondering how it works though as when I search a movie and add to collection it goes into my Bluray collection and I don't see a way to move it to the Thaetrical tab? And when I go to the theatrical tab it states

You currently don't have any titles in your theatrical collection. To add a title, simply go to the movie you wish to add and click the "Add to theatrical visits" button below the cover.

But there is no theatrical button below the covers

[Lazlo]

The Avengers and Dark Knight Rises are the only two that i remember seeing at the cinema last year. I'm never all that impressed with the picture quality at our local (country vic) cinema. And it's $40 for the two us to go unless there's a deal on. I just wait three months and get the blu-ray from Amazon for ~$20.

We did treat ourselves to The Hobbit in Gold Class last week (coincidentally on Tolkien's birthday). My first time at gold class and was very impressed. Will go next year for part two. Loved the movie and didn't have a problem with the pacing at all. Only issue was the two dwarves that didn't look at all like dwarves.

[melmac]

Originally Posted by melmac

Hey didn't know that function existed great idea thanks
Just wondering how it works though as when I search a movie and add to collection it goes into my Bluray collection and I don't see a way to move it to the Theatrical tab? And when I go to the theatrical tab it states

But there is no theatrical button below the covers

Worked it out you need to click movie rating and then the Theatrical button appears

[MacEachaidh]

Just back from seeing Les Misérables.

So much good, and yet so much frustrating/bad about it.

The arrangements were great. Many of the scenarios too. The casting ... not so much.

Russell Crowe has to be mentioned first, because he was ... simply awful. Every time he had to sing, all his energy diverted to his trying to croon his way through the melody line, and his eyes had this inward gaze as if he was trying to stare down the terror — which left no energy or presence for his acting the songs. It made his frequent threatening of Valjean (in song) almost comical. And his one big song of his own, one of the cardinal points of the movie (Stars), was completely, utterly passionless. So disappointing. Not to mention frustrating.

But Rusty being a poor choice for a musical isn't really a surprise. The surprise is that so (for most of the time) was Hugh Jackman. I mean, Valjean is a damned difficult (high!) role for a baritone, and even though they fiddled with the keys, it was still a tough grind for him. Unfortunately, to manage it he affected this strangled, adenoidal tone, with a bizarre Oirish accent that came and went — he often reminded me for all the world of the mad, drunken priest off Father Ted. And his own cardinal point song, Bring Him Home, was simply bloody awful.

Anyway. The supporting people were actually way, way better, and Eddie Redmayne — who supposedly has never done a singing role before — was close to brilliant. Anne Hathaway was pretty good, but her lack of theatrical singing experience really showed in her phrasing and struggling with the musical line, and her breathing ... oy!! (All your grief ->gasp!<- at last, at last ->gasp!<- behind you, and you shall be with ->gasp!<- Gooooooood ....) Hmmm.

But my other big issue was the cinematography. It may be a by-product of Tom Hooper's choice to record all of the singing live on-set — which would have meant the extensive use of close boom microphones — but almost every shot throughout the film was in near or extreme close-up, to the point where people's hair and chins were often cropped out. I was just aching for a sweeping vista, a tracking dolly shot or an aerial swoop, and by about halfway through the film I was already feeling scratchy with a kind of visual claustrophobia.

Huge disappointment. I really love this particular musical as a piece of theatre, and I had such high hopes for the film version.

[insomniac]

Originally Posted by melmac

Worked it out you need to click movie rating and then the Theatrical button appears

There's a quicker way. On top of the search bar, there's "Blu-ray 3D Blu-ray DVD UV Theatrical Cast & crew HT Gear PS3 News Forum"

It's highlighted to 'Blu-ray' by default. Just click on 'Theatrical' instead, and when the results pop up, you can add them without actually having to load the page and press the button again.

[Carcuss]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

Just back from seeing Les Misérables.

So much good, and yet so much frustrating/bad about it.

The arrangements were great. Many of the scenarios too. The casting ... not so much.

Russell Crowe has to be mentioned first, because he was ... simply awful. Every time he had to sing, all his energy diverted to his trying to croon his way through the melody line, and his eyes had this inward gaze as if he was trying to stare down the terror — which left no energy or presence for his acting the songs. It made his frequent threatening of Valjean (in song) almost comical. And his one big song of his own, one of the cardinal points of the movie (Stars), was completely, utterly passionless. So disappointing. Not to mention frustrating.

But Rusty being a poor choice for a musical isn't really a surprise. The surprise is that so (for most of the time) was Hugh Jackman. I mean, Valjean is a damned difficult (high!) role for a baritone, and even though they fiddled with the keys, it was still a tough grind for him. Unfortunately, to manage it he affected this strangled, adenoidal tone, with a bizarre Oirish accent that came and went — he often reminded me for all the world of the mad, drunken priest off Father Ted. And his own cardinal point song, Bring Him Home, was simply bloody awful.

Anyway. The supporting people were actually way, way better, and Eddie Redmayne — who supposedly has never done a singing role before — was close to brilliant. Anne Hathaway was pretty good, but her lack of theatrical singing experience really showed in her phrasing and struggling with the musical line, and her breathing ... oy!! (All your grief ->gasp!<- at last, at last ->gasp!<- behind you, and you shall be with ->gasp!<- Gooooooood ....) Hmmm.

But my other big issue was the cinematography. It may be a by-product of Tom Hooper's choice to record all of the singing live on-set — which would have meant the extensive use of close boom microphones — but almost every shot throughout the film was in near or extreme close-up, to the point where people's hair and chins were often cropped out. I was just aching for a sweeping vista, a tracking dolly shot or an aerial swoop, and by about halfway through the film I was already feeling scratchy with a kind of visual claustrophobia.

Huge disappointment. I really love this particular musical as a piece of theatre, and I had such high hopes for the film version.

Totally agree with you, Mac. I have been a major fan for over 25 years and the film left me shocked and bewildered. Jackman is a baritone who can sing bass. His work in the role of Wolverine showed he can grow a mean set of sideburns. He should have played Javert and Crowe should have stayed at home. Alfie Boe as Valjean would have been the smart choice. Awful film of a truly wonderful musical.
Cheers,
Mark.

[Luketheman5]

Well, I've never seen Les Miserables before and haven't really seen much musicals beyond Sweeney Todd, Moulin Rouge, Hairspray and Grease. But I actually really enjoyed the movie. Instead of this movie having the music/singing as the primary focus and acting second, they make the acting the focus and the singing second. (Filming it live and not lip syncing and what not) And with that comes so much more emotion in the singing than ever before. Personally, while watching this movie, I felt so much more in every single song than I've ever felt in a musical before.

[drouyn]

Saw 'Jack Reacher' today, pretty standard thriller fare but enjoyable nonetheless. Regardless of what Tom Cruise does off-screen, he plays this sort of character very well. Much like 'Taken 2', it has the feel of a film that has been toned down to get a particular classification, could easily have been a bit harder. Werner Herzog was great as the villain, comes across genuinely insane!

[Blueherring]

Saw Skyfall last night, I think I would have to say my new favourite of the Bond films, was highly enjoyable the movie felt really long but a good long and could have gone longer as i was so enthralled.
Enjoyed the more story focus and less of the cheesy old bond, it was a refreshing change and look forward to watching it again on Blu

oh and ps. it is the first film i have added to the theatrical tab in this forum thanks to Insomniac for the heads up on this

[Anamnesis]

I have decided that I too shall make use of the theatrical option on the forums and thus have added Life of Pi & Les Mis to my list.

Wasn't a huge fan of either film I am afraid, but each to their own I guess.

[Blueherring]

Originally Posted by Anamnesis

I have decided that I too shall make use of the theatrical option on the forums and thus have added Life of Pi & Les Mis to my list.

Wasn't a huge fan of either film I am afraid, but each to their own I guess.

I think im gonna skip les mis at the cinemas, but was considering Life of Pi, wasnt sure whether it would be worth seeing or not?

Want to see Hitchcock though.

[Hucksta G]

Originally Posted by Blueherring

I think im gonna skip les mis at the cinemas, but was considering Life of Pi, wasnt sure whether it would be worth seeing or not?

I thought Life of Pi was great, and if you are considering watching it, theatre is the way to go, beautiful visuals.

[MacEachaidh]

Has anyone else here seen Quartet?

I went to see it partly because there are so many in the cast whose work I really enjoy, but also out of curiosity because it's Dustin Hoffman's first film as a director.

I enjoyed it to a fair degree — in its film form it's basically an entertaining but somewhat slight British sitcom — but I was deeply puzzled, because it's staggeringly different from the original stageplay, which is a tight fourhander, funny but also deeply emotional and with many layers of meaning which were completely jettisoned for the film. I understand the (over)quoted saying that film and stage are two different environments, and that stage plays inevitably must change in their adaptation to film; but in this case the film was such a diminishment of the original, and frankly pretty unmemorable in its own right, that I don't understand why Hoffman wanted to make it, if he truly felt such changes were necessary or that was the best he could come up with.

It's also a pity that Maggie Smith, doubtless the film's major drawcard for matinee audiences, is clearly miscast in her role. The other three principals — Tom Courteny, Billy Connolly and Pauline Collins — do quite well, but only Billy Connolly really scores in being memorable.

So: a strange little beast. If you've never seen the original play, the film is entertaining enough, but if you have, the film's a complete oddity. And overall, I can't say Dustin Hoffman particularly impresses as a director.

[Blueherring]

Originally Posted by Hucksta G

I thought Life of Pi was great, and if you are considering watching it, theatre is the way to go, beautiful visuals.

That's what i figured