You dislike the good movies, but like a terrible movie like Tintin. Nice.
Ahahaha! That's hilarious that you're trying this "I'll ignore the difference between real insults and trash talking and treat insults the same as trash talking to make him feel insulted and change his stance on trash talking", but in reality I just don't care and it just makes you a complete BITCH. So what's going to happen is that you're just going to be even angrier because you're so butthurt and I'm not going to ever care.
I do think it's RETARDED that my friend Monkey tries to reintegrate himself into this community and he does so in a way that is literally true to himself and funny and you guys take offense and then start just ripping into him. Really nice. What a nice community you guys are.
Guys, can we get back to the original topic of simply rating the last movie you watched and cut back on insulting each other please? I don't want to start issuing warnings.
Hold on, action sequences? Did we see a different movie? There were no action. Scenes until an hour and a half into the movie, and it was a single scene lasting 45 minutes of lazily choreographed action.
Now that I think about it there only was that one and that was it, makes the movie even more dull.
Has anyone here seen the How to Train Your Dragon shorts? They're on Netflix, and I don't know if I should bother, what with the record animated straight-to-video sequels have had over the years.
I have yet to watch but will buy soon Steins Gate which is supposed to be a excellent anime show that got ranked really well.
ALso a perfect 10 goes to Cowboy Bebop the anime and Grave of the Fireflies the anime which are excellent show/movie in their own right I recommend anyone to watch these two shows their really well made.
Also I recommend a long running anime show called One Piece. It's a excellent show for all ages kids teens or adults. The only bad thing in it for kids is a lil bit of swearing but that is all.
Hey Fawful, looky here, Lil Kid is an otaku just like you.
Tintin is a terrible movie, and I say that without having watched it. Fawful, you know that I only ever disliked it because you love it so much.
As I type this I am watching the movie Monte Carlo. It's just another "oh no I discovered I secretly look exactly like this celebrity that I've never heard of before in my life and am now suddenly being mistaken for them" movies. The story isn't great. It's quite bad in fact. But the truth is Selena Gomez is hot, so I will watch her crappy movies and listen to her terrible music, because that's what guys do when a girl is hot. If you disagree with me then you're lying. Overall I rate it... 7/10 (Selena herself is an 8.5 obviously).
Last night I watched some B-movie called "Cherry Falls" about a serial killer who targets virgins. It had Brittany Murphy in it, and she was pretty hot. It also had Jay Mohr, and as soon as I saw the way he was acting toward Brittany's character I pinned him as the killer. The story was easily predictable, the acting was horrible, and some of the scenes were just awkward as hell (like the scene where Brittany decides she's gonna have sex with her boyfriend, and starts kicking him in the face telling him to bite her toe "harder, harder". What...??). I give it a 5/10 on the real movie scale, a 7/10 on the B-movie scale (coz Brittany's hot).
At the sake of going off-topic, I will just point out that nobody has the right to tell me what my own intent was. I never said my posts couldn't have been perceived as insulting, I only refuted that it was my intent. That's all I have to say about that.
And now that Monte Carlo is over, I'm watching Almost Famous. It has Zooey Deschanel in it. She's hot too. This is a really awesome movie. I feel like the gratuitous nudity was, well, gratuitous and unnecessary. But an amazing film nevertheless. I give it a 9/10.
We had free premium channels on Directv this weekend, so I caught a couple of movies.
Dream House 4/10
The acting was fine. It looked good. Didn't find the story believable at all; thought the actions of Daniel Craig's character were dumb. Didn't make me feel the least bit of tension or anything. Since this is a ghost movie, and probably supposed to be at least somewhat scary, that isn't good. I sat through it without shutting it off. Not sure why. It just felt like it was okay for no real reason.
Contagion 7 1/2/ 10
I found it interesting to see the work that went into tracing the path of a deadly virus as it moved around the world. There were some parts that were a bit slow, but overall entertaining. I liked most of the acting involved, other than Jennifer Ehle. I don't know what it is about her, but I can't stand watching her. Something about the faces she pulls maybe? Speaking of actresses I dislike, this movie gets an extra 1/2 point for bumping one off in the film.
Midnight in Paris 7/10
(sloppily executed idea, but how could I not like it with all those artist and authors in it? It's bit like Excellent Adventure with its tail cut off)
Midnight in Paris 7/10
(sloppily executed idea, but how could I not like it with all those artist and authors in it? It's bit like Excellent Adventure with its tail cut off)
yeah, it starts off pretty funny, but towards the end it gets pretty repetitive, moreover the overall message of what the 'best' France is was pretty obvious
So let me toss out a few things right off the top. Emma Stone is gorgeous in this movie. If you're into women, you might see it just for her. Because she's smoking. Also? There are some brutal kill scenes in this film. If you like seeing a guy get split in half while chained to two cars, or seeing a police office and a mob boss bash each other's skulls in with their fists in what has to be one of the epic beat downs of the last few years, you might want to see it. I enjoyed this movie as a sheer testosterone rush of sex and violence, so as a man, from that perspective, it was pretty good.
Other than that though? I'm not sure what it says that, going into the climactic final shootout and beatdown, I kept thinking to myself, "I'd rather be watching Scarface". Don't get me wrong, Sean Penn plays a heavy vicious Mickey Calhoun, mob boss of Los Angeles. He's the most interesting character in the film, but only because he's the villain, and because his acting's pretty good. Penn gets all the good scenes with murder, violence, mayhem and intimidation, so of course his character comes across as interesting.
But every other character is generally unremarkable. You've got a black, knife throwing police officer that's just... there. You've got a Mexican gunslinger that's just... there. It's like they tossed in the two minorities in highest demand right now in politics, just to point out that the police force fighting Calhoun was diverse. They just don't say enough to be interesting. It's not a matter of too many people filling the screen, either. Tombstone, a Wild Western film about a group of law enforces battling a belligerent criminal element had plenty of people on the screen, but they found ways to fill them with personality.
The most interesting member of the force is, ironically, an old western gunslinger still living in the Los Angeles area, and only because he's firing six shooters when everyone else is packing tommy guns. All the other characters are essentially lifeless, just good guys doing good things.
There's some conflict between Sergeant O'Mara, who leads the force, and his wife, concerning his role in an operation that could claim his life while she's on the verge of giving birth to her child. There's also some conflict between him and his intelligence officer, who wonders what the difference is between the police engaging in these violent activities and the criminals they're fighting. That's good material and it only gets lip service on screen, without real time invested into analyzing those internal conflicts. Because Gangster Squad is more concerned with looking pretty, putting period piece costumes on people, having them roll around spouting some somewhat cheesy period dialogue from time to time.
It's pretty. It's got a sexy girl. It's got men beating the hell out of each other between wild shoot outs. But it lacks substance, it's got some cheesy dialogue, and you never get a sense that the movie is more than black versus white. It does give some lip service to complex themes, but never explores them. So, overall? Maybe watch it, if you're looking for a rush of sex and violence. If you're looking for something deeper, rent it when it goes to your local Red Box or skip it all together.
That is sound and true. But it's also the reason why he was not exactly cut out for the role of ragged drunkard Rooster Cogburn, despite the Oscar he took home for it. John Wayne is a real ass kicker. And less of an actor. Also, a 22 year old playing a 14 year old: Not too great.
I figure we see most of her best scenes in the commercials they keep running for this movie. It is so heavily advertised, I suspected it must be completely awful, or they wouldn't have to do that.
I was never going to watch this movie; I could deduce that it was going to be complete tripe solely based upon its premise, it's crew, and it's overall presentation in the way it advertised itself. When I saw that it was an all-star grouping of American comedy darlings, which was written and produced by those whose names are attached to titles such as 'Superbad', 'Pink Panther', 'Just Married' and 'Knocked Up', I could tell it was going to be another one of those movies. I could predict that it was going to be another terribly-written, uninspired, clumsily-constructed, poorly-paced 'comedy' that this current generation of American film-makers seem to be pumping out so prolifically.
But it was one of those nights where I was around friends who have a much less refined taste in all areas of media, who are oblivious to obvious indicators of poor quality, and decided that watching this piece of shite was a good idea. And thus I was roped into enduring another crap piece of American comedy that caters to a demographic of devolved sub-beings of which I am gladly not a part of.
This film blunders out of the gate, verifying my misgivings within the first ten minutes, by substituting vulgarity where there is no wit to be found, by delivering a constant stream of try-hard humour, and by relying upon established funny-men to liven up a script that is bereft of any real comedic value. The movie then continues in this fashion for 80 more minutes, before mercifully reaching its conclusion. Honestly, this film is painful; it only ever occasionally rises to the level of almost-funny, and that's only due to Vince Vaughn and Ben Stiller (who are overrated and over-exposed, but undeniably talented) being able to somehow magically inject humour into a script that assumes that irrational activity and nonsensical banter will register it 'funny'. Jonah Hill fails in this area however, once again failing to bring a wan smile to my face, let alone a laugh. Meanwhile, Richard Ayoade - easily the funniest and most talented member of the whole cast - has his talents wasted on rude dialogue and lines featuring increasingly vulgar swear words, because, y'know, cursing always sounds funnier when spoken by a nerdy, well-spoken, otherwise polite British man. It's a cheap, low-brow gag to begin with, and only gets worse the more it's used.
I could go on for pages about all the things wrong with this movie. It's not funny, it's bloody terrible, and not only is it a complete waste of your time, it's also likely to cost you a significant number of brain cells. On reflection, I believe this movie encapsulates everything that is wrong with mainstream American comedy at this point in time. The only reason any intelligent person should watch this film is to study it's flaws.
I quite enjoyed it. 7/10
You just need to know going in that the character is supposed to be a constant. He doesn't develop, he doesn't grow, you wont learn anything. It's a ride through hard justice.
Much more enjoyable than the Stallone flick.
I figure we see most of her best scenes in the commercials they keep running for this movie. It is so heavily advertised, I suspected it must be completely awful, or they wouldn't have to do that.
It's only good on a superficial level. Like I said, if you're alright with just sex and beatings, it's a great Friday flick. If you want something with depth, not a good choice.
I don't want to spoil this movie for you. Seriously, that's not the point of my reviews, or this blog. But I want to save you from yourself. I know you want to go see this film, and I know you think it will be good. Trust me, it won't be. It will be, perhaps, good enough, but it doesn't even contain the level of kick- ass spectacle that Gangster Squad that at least allowed me to recommend that movie as a rental. No, all Mama has is a ton of cliches, a stupid story and an ending so bad you'll go home and think a porn film does a better job of telling a tale.
There's no good music in this movie, but it's a horror film so, guess that's okay. The special effects are terrible. The movie monster looks bad, just bad, and not even in an acceptable way. Some of the cinematography, on the other hand, is gorgeous. Some of the locales are of vast forests and mountains that you might find in The Hobbit. Unfortunately, there's no comparatively good story going on. But hey! It's a horror film, right? You're in it for the scares. So how are those?
When it comes to scares, there's three ways to go about it. One, lots of murder and gore, which I've never found scary as much as grotesque. Two, snap scares, done with sudden camera cuts, quickly moving monsters. You know, the stuff that happens so fast you can't help but jump out of your seat. Three, a director can set a creepy mood that sort of just saturates the audience and lets fear slowly sink in. Mama aims for the second and third sort of scares, and does so fairly successfully, at lest for a while.
The jump scares are always pretty good. The director makes good use of suddenly launching monsters at you, of having the girls appear from nowhere, the camera catching sudden glimpses of dark shadows. Especially in the closing thirty minutes, the entire audience was mumbling. One couple next to me were hugging each other so tightly I wasn't sure if it was the man or woman that was scared. The problem, though, is that the movie is terrible.
The cliches are everywhere, and that's not an exaggeration. A lonely cabin in the woods? Check. Creepy children? Check. Nursery rhymes to invoke fear? Check. Drawings to communicate how disturbed they are? Check. Vengeful ghost that needs justice to end its vengeance? Check. A freaking psychologist analyzing the situation to find a rational explanation? Okay Halloween, we got you.
The story is bad, so bad that it ruins the context of the scares. At the same time I kept getting freaked out I also kept anticipating what was going to happen next, because the film is so by-the-numbers. Some things don't even make sense. For instance, the ghost is from the 1800s, but for some reason she lives in a cabin decorated with furniture fro the 1970s. Whyyyy, it makes no sense! There's almost no point to that detail, it's just thrown in, and the name of the person who lived there, that the movie actually lingers on, never comes into play. It's like a small detail you'd expect to come into play later except the director forgot that he set up the story to include that detail.
Don't watch this movie. It's got scares, but the price it requires in order for you to get to them is high. It's tedium, and boredom. That's a cost of admission that's much more expensive than the dollars you'll spend at the concession stand.
And this is why I don't watch comedy movies that advertise themselves as comedy movies. Because they almost always suck and are completely unfunny because they have nothing else to carry the film other than the comedy. A movie's gotta have something else, action, drama, I don't know. Something to carry the plot when the jokes can't. Characters with soul who just happen to have a soul that is hilarious.
I have no idea why critics are so harsh on this movie. It's funny, it's sweet, and it has a nice story. Some of the special effects don't hold up so well today (especially Connie inhaling her submarine sandwich), but there's very little of it anyway (since the plot is mostly about the Coneheads trying to have a normal life on Earth). The stop motion animation with the Garthok on Remulak is excellent though.
It's definitely one of the best (and I feel it's the best) movie adaptations of a Saturday Night Live skit. In my opinion it's even better than Wayne's World.
The Blues Brothers - Hell yes.
Mr. Bill’s Real Life Adventures - no.
Bob Roberts - meh.
Wayne’s World - yes.
Wayne’s World 2 - yes.
Coneheads - meh.
It’s Pat - no.
A Night at the Roxbury - no.
Blues Brothers 2000 - meh.
Superstar - no.
The Ladies’ Man - no.
Harold - no.
MacGruber - meh.
Nobody I know has ever seen this movie, but it brings a smile to my face every time I watch it. Marlon Brando at his best, in my opinion. It's also hilarious, especially if you know any Japanese at all. Also, takes its place as one of my sources for the weird things I say sometimes.
Comments
Ahahaha! That's hilarious that you're trying this "I'll ignore the difference between real insults and trash talking and treat insults the same as trash talking to make him feel insulted and change his stance on trash talking", but in reality I just don't care and it just makes you a complete BITCH. So what's going to happen is that you're just going to be even angrier because you're so butthurt and I'm not going to ever care.
I do think it's RETARDED that my friend Monkey tries to reintegrate himself into this community and he does so in a way that is literally true to himself and funny and you guys take offense and then start just ripping into him. Really nice. What a nice community you guys are.
Now that I think about it there only was that one and that was it, makes the movie even more dull.
The movie was okay, lot's of gore I guess, but the action itself isn't quite up to par with other movies I've seen.
Also, I get the feeling that for a Hollywood Blockbuster it had a relative small budget
ALso a perfect 10 goes to Cowboy Bebop the anime and Grave of the Fireflies the anime which are excellent show/movie in their own right I recommend anyone to watch these two shows their really well made.
Also I recommend a long running anime show called One Piece. It's a excellent show for all ages kids teens or adults. The only bad thing in it for kids is a lil bit of swearing but that is all.
Tintin is a terrible movie, and I say that without having watched it. Fawful, you know that I only ever disliked it because you love it so much.
As I type this I am watching the movie Monte Carlo. It's just another "oh no I discovered I secretly look exactly like this celebrity that I've never heard of before in my life and am now suddenly being mistaken for them" movies. The story isn't great. It's quite bad in fact. But the truth is Selena Gomez is hot, so I will watch her crappy movies and listen to her terrible music, because that's what guys do when a girl is hot. If you disagree with me then you're lying. Overall I rate it... 7/10 (Selena herself is an 8.5 obviously).
Last night I watched some B-movie called "Cherry Falls" about a serial killer who targets virgins. It had Brittany Murphy in it, and she was pretty hot. It also had Jay Mohr, and as soon as I saw the way he was acting toward Brittany's character I pinned him as the killer. The story was easily predictable, the acting was horrible, and some of the scenes were just awkward as hell (like the scene where Brittany decides she's gonna have sex with her boyfriend, and starts kicking him in the face telling him to bite her toe "harder, harder". What...??). I give it a 5/10 on the real movie scale, a 7/10 on the B-movie scale (coz Brittany's hot).
At the sake of going off-topic, I will just point out that nobody has the right to tell me what my own intent was. I never said my posts couldn't have been perceived as insulting, I only refuted that it was my intent. That's all I have to say about that.
And now that Monte Carlo is over, I'm watching Almost Famous. It has Zooey Deschanel in it. She's hot too. This is a really awesome movie. I feel like the gratuitous nudity was, well, gratuitous and unnecessary. But an amazing film nevertheless. I give it a 9/10.
Dream House 4/10
The acting was fine. It looked good. Didn't find the story believable at all; thought the actions of Daniel Craig's character were dumb. Didn't make me feel the least bit of tension or anything. Since this is a ghost movie, and probably supposed to be at least somewhat scary, that isn't good. I sat through it without shutting it off. Not sure why. It just felt like it was okay for no real reason.
Contagion 7 1/2/ 10
I found it interesting to see the work that went into tracing the path of a deadly virus as it moved around the world. There were some parts that were a bit slow, but overall entertaining. I liked most of the acting involved, other than Jennifer Ehle. I don't know what it is about her, but I can't stand watching her. Something about the faces she pulls maybe? Speaking of actresses I dislike, this movie gets an extra 1/2 point for bumping one off in the film.
(Remake better than original)
Midnight in Paris 7/10
(sloppily executed idea, but how could I not like it with all those artist and authors in it? It's bit like Excellent Adventure with its tail cut off)
6/10
yeah, it starts off pretty funny, but towards the end it gets pretty repetitive, moreover the overall message of what the 'best' France is was pretty obvious
John Wayne could kick Jeff Bridge’s ass.
P.S. I’m going to go see Zero Dark Thirty. I let you know if it’s good.
(haven't seen it, just don't have any interest)
So let me toss out a few things right off the top. Emma Stone is gorgeous in this movie. If you're into women, you might see it just for her. Because she's smoking. Also? There are some brutal kill scenes in this film. If you like seeing a guy get split in half while chained to two cars, or seeing a police office and a mob boss bash each other's skulls in with their fists in what has to be one of the epic beat downs of the last few years, you might want to see it. I enjoyed this movie as a sheer testosterone rush of sex and violence, so as a man, from that perspective, it was pretty good.
Other than that though? I'm not sure what it says that, going into the climactic final shootout and beatdown, I kept thinking to myself, "I'd rather be watching Scarface". Don't get me wrong, Sean Penn plays a heavy vicious Mickey Calhoun, mob boss of Los Angeles. He's the most interesting character in the film, but only because he's the villain, and because his acting's pretty good. Penn gets all the good scenes with murder, violence, mayhem and intimidation, so of course his character comes across as interesting.
But every other character is generally unremarkable. You've got a black, knife throwing police officer that's just... there. You've got a Mexican gunslinger that's just... there. It's like they tossed in the two minorities in highest demand right now in politics, just to point out that the police force fighting Calhoun was diverse. They just don't say enough to be interesting. It's not a matter of too many people filling the screen, either. Tombstone, a Wild Western film about a group of law enforces battling a belligerent criminal element had plenty of people on the screen, but they found ways to fill them with personality.
The most interesting member of the force is, ironically, an old western gunslinger still living in the Los Angeles area, and only because he's firing six shooters when everyone else is packing tommy guns. All the other characters are essentially lifeless, just good guys doing good things.
There's some conflict between Sergeant O'Mara, who leads the force, and his wife, concerning his role in an operation that could claim his life while she's on the verge of giving birth to her child. There's also some conflict between him and his intelligence officer, who wonders what the difference is between the police engaging in these violent activities and the criminals they're fighting. That's good material and it only gets lip service on screen, without real time invested into analyzing those internal conflicts. Because Gangster Squad is more concerned with looking pretty, putting period piece costumes on people, having them roll around spouting some somewhat cheesy period dialogue from time to time.
It's pretty. It's got a sexy girl. It's got men beating the hell out of each other between wild shoot outs. But it lacks substance, it's got some cheesy dialogue, and you never get a sense that the movie is more than black versus white. It does give some lip service to complex themes, but never explores them. So, overall? Maybe watch it, if you're looking for a rush of sex and violence. If you're looking for something deeper, rent it when it goes to your local Red Box or skip it all together.
http://callatimeout.blogspot.com/2013/01/dont-watch-this-movie-gangster-squad.html
BAM!
That is sound and true. But it's also the reason why he was not exactly cut out for the role of ragged drunkard Rooster Cogburn, despite the Oscar he took home for it. John Wayne is a real ass kicker. And less of an actor. Also, a 22 year old playing a 14 year old: Not too great.
I figure we see most of her best scenes in the commercials they keep running for this movie. It is so heavily advertised, I suspected it must be completely awful, or they wouldn't have to do that.
Not as good as Hurt Locker, but still a pretty good manhunt flick.
I was never going to watch this movie; I could deduce that it was going to be complete tripe solely based upon its premise, it's crew, and it's overall presentation in the way it advertised itself. When I saw that it was an all-star grouping of American comedy darlings, which was written and produced by those whose names are attached to titles such as 'Superbad', 'Pink Panther', 'Just Married' and 'Knocked Up', I could tell it was going to be another one of those movies. I could predict that it was going to be another terribly-written, uninspired, clumsily-constructed, poorly-paced 'comedy' that this current generation of American film-makers seem to be pumping out so prolifically.
But it was one of those nights where I was around friends who have a much less refined taste in all areas of media, who are oblivious to obvious indicators of poor quality, and decided that watching this piece of shite was a good idea. And thus I was roped into enduring another crap piece of American comedy that caters to a demographic of devolved sub-beings of which I am gladly not a part of.
This film blunders out of the gate, verifying my misgivings within the first ten minutes, by substituting vulgarity where there is no wit to be found, by delivering a constant stream of try-hard humour, and by relying upon established funny-men to liven up a script that is bereft of any real comedic value. The movie then continues in this fashion for 80 more minutes, before mercifully reaching its conclusion. Honestly, this film is painful; it only ever occasionally rises to the level of almost-funny, and that's only due to Vince Vaughn and Ben Stiller (who are overrated and over-exposed, but undeniably talented) being able to somehow magically inject humour into a script that assumes that irrational activity and nonsensical banter will register it 'funny'. Jonah Hill fails in this area however, once again failing to bring a wan smile to my face, let alone a laugh. Meanwhile, Richard Ayoade - easily the funniest and most talented member of the whole cast - has his talents wasted on rude dialogue and lines featuring increasingly vulgar swear words, because, y'know, cursing always sounds funnier when spoken by a nerdy, well-spoken, otherwise polite British man. It's a cheap, low-brow gag to begin with, and only gets worse the more it's used.
I could go on for pages about all the things wrong with this movie. It's not funny, it's bloody terrible, and not only is it a complete waste of your time, it's also likely to cost you a significant number of brain cells. On reflection, I believe this movie encapsulates everything that is wrong with mainstream American comedy at this point in time. The only reason any intelligent person should watch this film is to study it's flaws.
I quite enjoyed it. 7/10
You just need to know going in that the character is supposed to be a constant. He doesn't develop, he doesn't grow, you wont learn anything. It's a ride through hard justice.
Much more enjoyable than the Stallone flick.
How dare you! HE IS THE LAW!
It's only good on a superficial level. Like I said, if you're alright with just sex and beatings, it's a great Friday flick. If you want something with depth, not a good choice.
I don't want to spoil this movie for you. Seriously, that's not the point of my reviews, or this blog. But I want to save you from yourself. I know you want to go see this film, and I know you think it will be good. Trust me, it won't be. It will be, perhaps, good enough, but it doesn't even contain the level of kick- ass spectacle that Gangster Squad that at least allowed me to recommend that movie as a rental. No, all Mama has is a ton of cliches, a stupid story and an ending so bad you'll go home and think a porn film does a better job of telling a tale.
There's no good music in this movie, but it's a horror film so, guess that's okay. The special effects are terrible. The movie monster looks bad, just bad, and not even in an acceptable way. Some of the cinematography, on the other hand, is gorgeous. Some of the locales are of vast forests and mountains that you might find in The Hobbit. Unfortunately, there's no comparatively good story going on. But hey! It's a horror film, right? You're in it for the scares. So how are those?
When it comes to scares, there's three ways to go about it. One, lots of murder and gore, which I've never found scary as much as grotesque. Two, snap scares, done with sudden camera cuts, quickly moving monsters. You know, the stuff that happens so fast you can't help but jump out of your seat. Three, a director can set a creepy mood that sort of just saturates the audience and lets fear slowly sink in. Mama aims for the second and third sort of scares, and does so fairly successfully, at lest for a while.
The jump scares are always pretty good. The director makes good use of suddenly launching monsters at you, of having the girls appear from nowhere, the camera catching sudden glimpses of dark shadows. Especially in the closing thirty minutes, the entire audience was mumbling. One couple next to me were hugging each other so tightly I wasn't sure if it was the man or woman that was scared. The problem, though, is that the movie is terrible.
The cliches are everywhere, and that's not an exaggeration. A lonely cabin in the woods? Check. Creepy children? Check. Nursery rhymes to invoke fear? Check. Drawings to communicate how disturbed they are? Check. Vengeful ghost that needs justice to end its vengeance? Check. A freaking psychologist analyzing the situation to find a rational explanation? Okay Halloween, we got you.
The story is bad, so bad that it ruins the context of the scares. At the same time I kept getting freaked out I also kept anticipating what was going to happen next, because the film is so by-the-numbers. Some things don't even make sense. For instance, the ghost is from the 1800s, but for some reason she lives in a cabin decorated with furniture fro the 1970s. Whyyyy, it makes no sense! There's almost no point to that detail, it's just thrown in, and the name of the person who lived there, that the movie actually lingers on, never comes into play. It's like a small detail you'd expect to come into play later except the director forgot that he set up the story to include that detail.
Don't watch this movie. It's got scares, but the price it requires in order for you to get to them is high. It's tedium, and boredom. That's a cost of admission that's much more expensive than the dollars you'll spend at the concession stand.
Rating: Don't Watch This Movie!
http://callatimeout.blogspot.com/2013/01/dont-watch-this-movie-mama.html
I really liked it, made me laugh, cry, and wince at the brutal scenes. While sitting on the edge of my seat.
My god, this movie was fucking terrible. All the actors in the world couldn’t make this movie enjoyable. DO NOT SEE IT!
Eeww. Count me out.
A
I have no idea why critics are so harsh on this movie. It's funny, it's sweet, and it has a nice story. Some of the special effects don't hold up so well today (especially Connie inhaling her submarine sandwich), but there's very little of it anyway (since the plot is mostly about the Coneheads trying to have a normal life on Earth). The stop motion animation with the Garthok on Remulak is excellent though.
It's definitely one of the best (and I feel it's the best) movie adaptations of a Saturday Night Live skit. In my opinion it's even better than Wayne's World.
Mr. Bill’s Real Life Adventures - no.
Bob Roberts - meh.
Wayne’s World - yes.
Wayne’s World 2 - yes.
Coneheads - meh.
It’s Pat - no.
A Night at the Roxbury - no.
Blues Brothers 2000 - meh.
Superstar - no.
The Ladies’ Man - no.
Harold - no.
MacGruber - meh.
Nobody I know has ever seen this movie, but it brings a smile to my face every time I watch it. Marlon Brando at his best, in my opinion. It's also hilarious, especially if you know any Japanese at all. Also, takes its place as one of my sources for the weird things I say sometimes.