The last movie I watched was Man Of Steel, and I loved it. I had read a lot of negative criticism for it before I actually saw it, so I was pleasantly surprised to find that I agreed with almost none of it, and thoroughly enjoyed the movie. The only thing I thought could have been better was the portrayal of Clark's budding romantic relationship with Lois, which does kind of happen out of nowhere.
I liked Despicable Me better than a lot of other movies on its same level. But the notion that the comedy improved because it went from hitting people to breaking a wall, falling out of a building, and daydreaming is.....what....what even. There are no standards for comedy anymore.
I always thought slapstick was the original form of comedy.
Comparing The Three Stooges to the minions because they both used slapstick is akin to comparing Mozart to Justin Bieber because they both wrote music as teens. It's just insulting.
The last film I saw was Les Misérables which I really enjoyed. Don't have much more to say about it really other than that a couple of the songs are still going around in my head a week later.
So so so so soooooooo much better than Origins.
Of course as many Hollywood films do, its full of odd plot holes and slightly odd acting and characterizations for anyone who isn't a protagonist, but if you hold a healthy suspension of disbelief then its a pretty enjoyable romp.
(I think most people rage on the series for not sticking to the comic, but I think honestly they are starting to reign it in a little bit more, and I personally think the changes can be quite refreshing at parts tbh)
Well Origins did stick pretty close to the comic(one version of it anyway) with the exception of a couple minor and one big completely stupid differences. Look how well that did? Instead of going back and trying to do it properly, I guess they just said fuck it, that didn't work, let's do our own thing.
Most fans would have to agree that if you don't feel confident you can do it properly, don't do it at all.
I haven't seen much backlash for the story and that's probably why. The big fans I've seen had just minor disappointment to share. "Yeah, it's not really accurate to the comic story, but other than that..."
Honestly, I don't really mind when people make changes to movie adaptations of anything, because with the change in media, you have to make changes to suit the new media you're using. I just care that the changes make sense and serve to promote the story. I mean, let's be honest here. Some comics just have absurd reasonings for events that happen that require years of build up to even make even the slightest bits of sense.
Case in point, I love Grey Hulk. Favorite Hulk ever. But the way he shows up in the comics is frankly absurd. I mean, there's a good hundred or so comics of build up where Banner somehow separates himself from the Savage Hulk so there's a separate Hulk running around and Rick Jones falls into this weird nutrient bath that makes him turn into a Hulk and then the Hulkiness gets sucked out of him and stuck in the Leader and somehow in all of this the Grey Hulk pops out of nowhere and nobody really knows where he came from. If that were made into a movie, it would be awful. I mean, it barely makes sense within the context of the comics. And it's only one example.
Honestly, I would prefer comic movies have original storylines that only pull neat concepts from the comics to base the story around. Like, I enjoyed how Iron Man 3 did it. They weren't really using any of the storylines exclusively or trying to recreate a specific comic, but grabbed a few ideas, twisted them around and made something new and interesting for the movieverse.
It's satire, they didn't make the movie to be good.
It's unwatchable! I find it disturbing that someone thought it was a good idea to make a movie out of THAT. Slow motion dubstep sequences and 5 minutes of dialogue is not a freaking movie! It's just not...
It's unwatchable! I find it disturbing that someone thought it was a good idea to make a movie out of THAT. Slow motion dubstep sequences and 5 minutes of dialogue is not a freaking movie! It's just not...
Honestly at first I thought it was a publicity stunt for Selena Gomez. But the movie is supposed to reflect what the youth is being exposed to and what teenagers see as cool. It's satire, it has a deeper meaning to it. I mean yeah the movie itself is probably garbage (I never saw it) but it was never meant to be a good movie. The goal for the movie is probably to make you feel uncomfortable or irritated.
I watched this because Max on Netflix for PS3 talked me into it.
The plot is serviceable, and it's good as a B-movie popcorn flick.
BUT:
1) it's too long as the fight at the end could have been 30 minutes shorter;
2) suspension of disbelief is broken a bunch of times as Witwicky seems to have god mode turned on, allowing him to such as jump through plate-glass skyscraper windows without injury, be jerked and slung about while wearing a Just Cause 2-style grappling hook without dislocating his shoulder, and baseball-slide completely under wrecked cars as though he's a video game character;
3) Witwicky's girlfriend is uncharacteristically hot for no reason than to provide eye candy, plus she's running around in heels during the major battle when the building is being destroyed;
4) too many slow motion explosion/destruction shots, even one where Witwicky's girlfriend doesn't react to the explosion behind her even though it's not at all one of those bad-ass moments; and...
5) Spock is a robot. Seriously. Leonard Nemoy as a robot who at one point makes an obvious Spock quote from Star Trek.
It's a serviceable movie, but it's not much more. If you want to watch an action flick, it's good, and the plot does make sense, but it's unmistakably a Micheal Bay movie as the believability factor is sacrificed in favor of action.
Lion King 8/10
Great film my only problem was I was routing for Scar the whole movie...
I mean he is the mistreated young Sibling who gets tired of his bully Big brother and obnoxious nephew...
And when Scar does become King everyone blames him for it not raining...
If Simba had turned up a week later everyone would be celebrating how he saved the Kingdom...
He created a union between Hyenas and Lions and if the weather had been better he would have been a better King then anyone else...
It's a serviceable movie, but it's not much more. If you want to watch an action flick, it's good, and the plot does make sense, but it's unmistakably a Micheal Bay movie as the believability factor is sacrificed in favor of action.
But then you could just skip the first half of the thing. Just like any other of the movies in the Bay series. What makes them unbearable is
especially the human side of the story that no one cares about. No one cares about Sam's job or his mother eating the wrong brownies or his girlfriend.
For those who aren't aware it is a film made by famous youtuber and Review of tat, Ashens, and is available free on youtube.
It's really quite funny. One scene had my in histerics, laughing for over a minute. Without wanting to give too much away, it involved a signpost containing the spelling of the place they were going to.
The plot was pretty decent, and there are plenty of decent actors in i too (Robert Llewellyn and Warwick Davis, for example. Well worth the watch.
I gave it 10/10 because in addition to being pretty decent, it does have the added benefit of being free. Can't argue with that!
Ughhh. The middle of the movie was so different from the book. It really took me out of the movie, there was a bunch of cheesy lines and special effects. This movie suffers because it tries too hard to be Harry Potter, but in the end it is less memorable and far from the perfection that is Harry Potter. The Percy Jackson books are still amazing, so don't waste money on the movie and just read the books.
Ashens and the quest for a gamechild 8/10
Really well done, Really enjoyable and Free
Also Warwick Davies is a remarkable actor...
Watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS2Cnx_eL6s
Enjoyable nonsense, even if the CGI was ropey in places. I think this is the most dignified performance a Wayans brother has ever given, and he's still annoying, but overall the acting was fine, the action was over-the-top awesome and it had Christopher Eccleston in it, which is worth like 2 whole points by itself.
Still prefer the more character-focused sequel though.
Ughhh. The middle of the movie was so different from the book. It really took me out of the movie, there was a bunch of cheesy lines and special effects. This movie suffers because it tries too hard to be Harry Potter, but in the end it is less memorable and far from the perfection that is Harry Potter. The Percy Jackson books are still amazing, so don't waste money on the movie and just read the books.
Is it better or worse than the first film? I haven't read the books, but I quite enjoyed the first film. My sister has gone to great lengths to explain how awesome the books are, and that the film is nothing like them. Which is fine by me, I like it when the film is different from the books (Like Hitchiker's guide to the galaxy. Every medium it is on is significantly different.), just so long as the film itself is half-way decent. I'm looking at you, Eragon. I actually prefer it that way. I hated the Hunger Games film, as it was too similar to the book I had literally just finished reading.
Anway
The Rescuers 9/10
Oh gosh, when did this film get so sad? Poor, poor penny. It made me just want to go out and adopt a kid this instant. And I don't even like kids! It loses a point because I'm now depressed and still fighting back tears. She went through so much for such a young little girl. Why wouldn't want her, I don't know!
Is it better or worse than the first film? I haven't read the books, but I quite enjoyed the first film. My sister has gone to great lengths to explain how awesome the books are, and that the film is nothing like them
Depends on how you see the movie, I honestly could tell that they weren't aiming to be something more than it is, because it kept on being advertised as a "Family Film" Even though it has a bunch of flaws there is still the action adventure fun and enjoyment, if you go in with a expect less mindset you will be more impressed with it. However for me, I read the books almost 2 years ago and was still really angered about how they slaughtered it.
If you want to see it, don't expect much, and don't read the book, you will have more fun in the end!
But then you could just skip the first half of the thing. Just like any other of the movies in the Bay series. What makes them unbearable is
especially the human side of the story that no one cares about. No one cares about Sam's job or his mother eating the wrong brownies or his girlfriend.
I like the Bay films, especially after going back and rewatching some of the old cartoon. Sorry Trans-fans, it's not a serious awesome fest like you remember. It's goofy as can be. That being said, the first Transformers had the best story, followed by Dark of the Moon, with Revenge of the Fallen being the worst(not really the fault of the writers, they had to hand Bay a rough draft on their way to the picket line, and Paramount refused to push it back to allow for re-writes). Action/CG wise, they definitely improved, but the storytelling was a crummy roller coaster. I don't expect #4 to improve on that.
The Wolverine 8/10
I really can't say how it was compared to the comics, so judging it compared to the other X-films. DEFINITELY better than X-Men Origins, great action, great drama with Logan, loved the characters.
Best part though was the mid-credits stinger. HO-LEY FUCKBALLS. I'd seen a thumbnail for it online, so I knew Magneto was in it, so wasn't shocked by his appearance. But then the people in the background stopped moving, and my jaw dropped. HOW THE FUCK DID XAVIER SURVIVE BEING VAPORIZED?!
They need to get Ra's Al Ghul's name pronounced properly (officially pronounced "RAY-sh" not "RAH-z"), but that's a minor quibble maybe. Even though I've seen this movie more than half a dozen times, I still was on edge during the scene
when Gordon was in the Batmobile.
.
Why do people not like Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes? She's a good actress and she sells the part. I've heard people say she doesn't seem old enough, but she seems near enough in age to Bruce Wayne to fit the story. And she's a heck of a lot better (and younger) looking than Maggie Gyllenhaal from The Dark Knight. ...eh, I guess the reason is that the net is filled with trolls.
EDIT: It's not really that Katie is prettier (though I do admit that's part of it.) It's that they don't look or sound at all alike. The don't even look near the same age.
I mean really. This person:
looks nothing at all like this person:
which matters when the Nolan movies are supposed to be a trilogy. If Maggie was always Rachel, maybe wouldn't bother me. (Yes it did bother me when they switched actors for Dumbledore, though the first actor did die; then again, the Chris Columbus Harry Potter films are different in style and tone from the others.)
But again, I do admit that I find Katie Holmes to be far more attractive than Maggie is.
I was once riding the elevator in a Holiday Inn with a woman wearing a shirt that said, "Best Western Gal." I remarked, "They let you check in wearing that???"
I absolutely adored this film. The plot may be insubstantial as all hell, but with such a magnificent cast clearly having a blast, it's really hard not to get caught up in the fun. Plus, Karl Urban is in it. Instant awesome.
Red 2 - 7/10
Not quite as good as the first - it feels more forced in regards to getting the crew back together, for example, and the plot is kind of all over the place - but the new casting additions work well and I enjoy the chemistry between Willis and whats-her-name, which is a relationship we really don't see often.
In short - both of these films are a LOT of fun, and I'd happily recommend the pair of them.
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters
Having never read any of the books, I went into this with no knowledge of the plot, or really any preconceptions. Th film is your typical Action-adventure film, but I felt it lacked the distinct charm and humour of the original film. The plot wasn't really engaging, none of the
character deaths
were even particularly moving, which is coming from a guy who cries at the slightest hint of sadness.
Overall, I'd give the film a big old 'meh'. Certainly not worth the £9.40 I paid for the ticket (Why can't I have my student card now?!). Wait until it's in the bargain bucket I think.
Comments
(I mean you guys have your own opinion in the end of the day. (I bet I'm waaay too forgiving about the quality of stuff as long as its fun! XD))
I always thought slapstick was the original form of comedy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qxaaJzlnF0
7/10
So so so so soooooooo much better than Origins.
Of course as many Hollywood films do, its full of odd plot holes and slightly odd acting and characterizations for anyone who isn't a protagonist, but if you hold a healthy suspension of disbelief then its a pretty enjoyable romp.
(I think most people rage on the series for not sticking to the comic, but I think honestly they are starting to reign it in a little bit more, and I personally think the changes can be quite refreshing at parts tbh)
Most fans would have to agree that if you don't feel confident you can do it properly, don't do it at all.
I haven't seen much backlash for the story and that's probably why. The big fans I've seen had just minor disappointment to share. "Yeah, it's not really accurate to the comic story, but other than that..."
Case in point, I love Grey Hulk. Favorite Hulk ever. But the way he shows up in the comics is frankly absurd. I mean, there's a good hundred or so comics of build up where Banner somehow separates himself from the Savage Hulk so there's a separate Hulk running around and Rick Jones falls into this weird nutrient bath that makes him turn into a Hulk and then the Hulkiness gets sucked out of him and stuck in the Leader and somehow in all of this the Grey Hulk pops out of nowhere and nobody really knows where he came from. If that were made into a movie, it would be awful. I mean, it barely makes sense within the context of the comics. And it's only one example.
Honestly, I would prefer comic movies have original storylines that only pull neat concepts from the comics to base the story around. Like, I enjoyed how Iron Man 3 did it. They weren't really using any of the storylines exclusively or trying to recreate a specific comic, but grabbed a few ideas, twisted them around and made something new and interesting for the movieverse.
It's satire, they didn't make the movie to be good.
It's unwatchable! I find it disturbing that someone thought it was a good idea to make a movie out of THAT. Slow motion dubstep sequences and 5 minutes of dialogue is not a freaking movie! It's just not...
Honestly at first I thought it was a publicity stunt for Selena Gomez. But the movie is supposed to reflect what the youth is being exposed to and what teenagers see as cool. It's satire, it has a deeper meaning to it. I mean yeah the movie itself is probably garbage (I never saw it) but it was never meant to be a good movie. The goal for the movie is probably to make you feel uncomfortable or irritated.
He liked it, by the way. Feel free to disagree with him.
And before you ask - I like MovieBob's stuff. I may not always agree with him, but he's entertaining nonetheless.
I watched this because Max on Netflix for PS3 talked me into it.
The plot is serviceable, and it's good as a B-movie popcorn flick.
BUT:
1) it's too long as the fight at the end could have been 30 minutes shorter;
2) suspension of disbelief is broken a bunch of times as Witwicky seems to have god mode turned on, allowing him to such as jump through plate-glass skyscraper windows without injury, be jerked and slung about while wearing a Just Cause 2-style grappling hook without dislocating his shoulder, and baseball-slide completely under wrecked cars as though he's a video game character;
3) Witwicky's girlfriend is uncharacteristically hot for no reason than to provide eye candy, plus she's running around in heels during the major battle when the building is being destroyed;
4) too many slow motion explosion/destruction shots, even one where Witwicky's girlfriend doesn't react to the explosion behind her even though it's not at all one of those bad-ass moments; and...
5) Spock is a robot. Seriously. Leonard Nemoy as a robot who at one point makes an obvious Spock quote from Star Trek.
It's a serviceable movie, but it's not much more. If you want to watch an action flick, it's good, and the plot does make sense, but it's unmistakably a Micheal Bay movie as the believability factor is sacrificed in favor of action.
Great film my only problem was I was routing for Scar the whole movie...
I mean he is the mistreated young Sibling who gets tired of his bully Big brother and obnoxious nephew...
And when Scar does become King everyone blames him for it not raining...
If Simba had turned up a week later everyone would be celebrating how he saved the Kingdom...
He created a union between Hyenas and Lions and if the weather had been better he would have been a better King then anyone else...
especially the human side of the story that no one cares about. No one cares about Sam's job or his mother eating the wrong brownies or his girlfriend.
I really hate Witwicky's mother. Every scene with his parents should have been completely cut from the entire movie.
It had no character development. Very, very, very well done mecha action scenes, though.
For those who aren't aware it is a film made by famous youtuber and Review of tat, Ashens, and is available free on youtube.
It's really quite funny. One scene had my in histerics, laughing for over a minute. Without wanting to give too much away, it involved a signpost containing the spelling of the place they were going to.
The plot was pretty decent, and there are plenty of decent actors in i too (Robert Llewellyn and Warwick Davis, for example. Well worth the watch.
I gave it 10/10 because in addition to being pretty decent, it does have the added benefit of being free. Can't argue with that!
3/10
Ughhh. The middle of the movie was so different from the book. It really took me out of the movie, there was a bunch of cheesy lines and special effects. This movie suffers because it tries too hard to be Harry Potter, but in the end it is less memorable and far from the perfection that is Harry Potter. The Percy Jackson books are still amazing, so don't waste money on the movie and just read the books.
Really well done, Really enjoyable and Free
Also Warwick Davies is a remarkable actor...
Watch it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS2Cnx_eL6s
Enjoyable nonsense, even if the CGI was ropey in places. I think this is the most dignified performance a Wayans brother has ever given, and he's still annoying, but overall the acting was fine, the action was over-the-top awesome and it had Christopher Eccleston in it, which is worth like 2 whole points by itself.
Still prefer the more character-focused sequel though.
Anway
The Rescuers
9/10
Oh gosh, when did this film get so sad? Poor, poor penny. It made me just want to go out and adopt a kid this instant. And I don't even like kids! It loses a point because I'm now depressed and still fighting back tears. She went through so much for such a young little girl. Why wouldn't want her, I don't know!
Depends on how you see the movie, I honestly could tell that they weren't aiming to be something more than it is, because it kept on being advertised as a "Family Film" Even though it has a bunch of flaws there is still the action adventure fun and enjoyment, if you go in with a expect less mindset you will be more impressed with it. However for me, I read the books almost 2 years ago and was still really angered about how they slaughtered it.
If you want to see it, don't expect much, and don't read the book, you will have more fun in the end!
I like the Bay films, especially after going back and rewatching some of the old cartoon. Sorry Trans-fans, it's not a serious awesome fest like you remember. It's goofy as can be. That being said, the first Transformers had the best story, followed by Dark of the Moon, with Revenge of the Fallen being the worst(not really the fault of the writers, they had to hand Bay a rough draft on their way to the picket line, and Paramount refused to push it back to allow for re-writes). Action/CG wise, they definitely improved, but the storytelling was a crummy roller coaster. I don't expect #4 to improve on that.
The Wolverine 8/10
I really can't say how it was compared to the comics, so judging it compared to the other X-films. DEFINITELY better than X-Men Origins, great action, great drama with Logan, loved the characters.
8/10
It's actually surprisingly clever and cute and well-done! Give it a chance after the first few scenes.
The premise sounds corny, but you'll be entertained.
They need to get Ra's Al Ghul's name pronounced properly (officially pronounced "RAY-sh" not "RAH-z"), but that's a minor quibble maybe. Even though I've seen this movie more than half a dozen times, I still was on edge during the scene
Why do people not like Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes? She's a good actress and she sells the part. I've heard people say she doesn't seem old enough, but she seems near enough in age to Bruce Wayne to fit the story. And she's a heck of a lot better (and younger) looking than Maggie Gyllenhaal from The Dark Knight. ...eh, I guess the reason is that the net is filled with trolls.
EDIT: It's not really that Katie is prettier (though I do admit that's part of it.) It's that they don't look or sound at all alike. The don't even look near the same age.
I mean really. This person:
looks nothing at all like this person:
which matters when the Nolan movies are supposed to be a trilogy. If Maggie was always Rachel, maybe wouldn't bother me. (Yes it did bother me when they switched actors for Dumbledore, though the first actor did die; then again, the Chris Columbus Harry Potter films are different in style and tone from the others.)
But again, I do admit that I find Katie Holmes to be far more attractive than Maggie is.
Really Good Movie Best western I have ever seen...
I absolutely adored this film. The plot may be insubstantial as all hell, but with such a magnificent cast clearly having a blast, it's really hard not to get caught up in the fun. Plus, Karl Urban is in it. Instant awesome.
Red 2 - 7/10
Not quite as good as the first - it feels more forced in regards to getting the crew back together, for example, and the plot is kind of all over the place - but the new casting additions work well and I enjoy the chemistry between Willis and whats-her-name, which is a relationship we really don't see often.
In short - both of these films are a LOT of fun, and I'd happily recommend the pair of them.
Wow, that is genius, why did I never think of that.
And Ernest Borgnine is something that finally wasn’t Spongebob.
Having never read any of the books, I went into this with no knowledge of the plot, or really any preconceptions. Th film is your typical Action-adventure film, but I felt it lacked the distinct charm and humour of the original film. The plot wasn't really engaging, none of the
Overall, I'd give the film a big old 'meh'. Certainly not worth the £9.40 I paid for the ticket (Why can't I have my student card now?!). Wait until it's in the bargain bucket I think.
6/10
A good and creepy monster movie, but overladen with environmentalist bullshit.