Rate the last movie you saw

theogt;3614622 said:
Let Me In -- 7/10

Negatives: Obviously the original was better. The pacing here was a little too slow. The pacing on the original was slow, but it just seemed to work better. If you're going to go CGI on the "attacks", do it well or don't do it at all. If it looks cartoonish, then it's not scary and makes you laugh at the moment that is supposed to be the most intense. Also, the scoring was terrible. I think they were trying to go for a 80s horror film type of score (since the movie was set in the 80s), but they didn't pull it off.

Positives: I was surprised by how much I liked Chloe Moretz in this. After seeing Kick-***, I didn't think she was right for the part. But she does an incredible job. Both of the kids are perfect, actually. Since they're 90% of the movie, they make up for the negatives and pull the score up to a 7.

For people looking for a scary movie, don't go see it.


The original is pretty good huh?

What are some other good forum films?
 
CATCH17;3614859 said:
The original is pretty good huh?

What are some other good forum films?
In the foreign, scary movie category, check out Del Toro's "The Devil's Backbone."
 
theogt;3614971 said:
In the foreign, scary movie category, check out Del Toro's "The Devil's Backbone."

Del Toro has some great films. I actually preferred The Orphanage and Pan's Labyrinth to The Devil's Backbone, although all 3 were excellent.



Others to take a look at (not scary):

Run Lola Run
City of God
Amelie
 
Motorbreath;3604322 said:
My soul to take= 5/10

With Scream 4 on the horizon, I'm sure Wes Craven was hoping this would do better at the box office.
 
Boom;3615043 said:
Del Toro has some great films. I actually preferred The Orphanage and Pan's Labyrinth to The Devil's Backbone, although all 3 were excellent.



Others to take a look at (not scary):

Run Lola Run
City of God
Amelie

Have not seen the Orphanage. Send the other two and liked them.
 
theogt;3614633 said:
Congrats, you never fail.

Yeah, nobody else says that movie was boring and useless. :rolleyes:

Anybody who says that movie wasn't boring, didn't see it.

I gave it credit where it deserved it, but it fails in the most important category, and that's having anything at all interesting or entertaining. If a movie fails there, then nothing can save it. I'm not going to give a dull movie a good score just because it was decently shot or well acted. Those can help a good movie be great, but they can't turn a piece of into anything but a piece of .
 
Saw the Social Network on Sunday, throroughly enjoyed. Zuckerberg is a total dbag and I jokingly say I felt like deleting my account at facebook over it but figured what the hell, all my peeps can't handle it when I am away and they don't get my daily status updates.
 
theogt;3614622 said:
Let Me In -- 7/10

Negatives: Obviously the original was better. The pacing here was a little too slow. The pacing on the original was slow, but it just seemed to work better. If you're going to go CGI on the "attacks", do it well or don't do it at all. If it looks cartoonish, then it's not scary and makes you laugh at the moment that is supposed to be the most intense. Also, the scoring was terrible. I think they were trying to go for a 80s horror film type of score (since the movie was set in the 80s), but they didn't pull it off.

Positives: I was surprised by how much I liked Chloe Moretz in this. After seeing Kick-***, I didn't think she was right for the part. But she does an incredible job. Both of the kids are perfect, actually. Since they're 90% of the movie, they make up for the negatives and pull the score up to a 7.

For people looking for a scary movie, don't go see it.

I rarely see these types of movies, but I agree with this review. Not a big fan of the genre but the kids were good in it.
 
Chief;3615620 said:
I rarely see these types of movies, but I agree with this review. Not a big fan of the genre but the kids were good in it.

You should see the original. I haven't watched the remake yet, but loved the original.

One of the few movies that cut parts out of a book that didn't offend me.
 
In Bruges 9/10

Honor among [strike]thieves[/strike] assassins.

http://img839.*************/img839/7716/dmdinbrugesavi001438395.jpg
 
bbgun;3616309 said:
In Bruges 9/10

Honor among [strike]thieves[/strike] assassins.
I generally don't watch movies more than once. But I've seen this movie at least half a dozen times.
 
theogt;3616327 said:
I generally don't watch movies more than once. But I've seen this movie at least half a dozen times.

Didn't like it that much, but it's worth a second look. The train stop scene was pretty implausible, and the conveniently pregnant inn-keeper was pushing it in terms of Farrell's tortured conscience, but those are small quibbles. To his credit, Harry Waters was a man of his word.
 
Fanboys

I like it. It is basically a road trip, reach the goal, buddy movie comedy but if you liked star wars and star trek you will find the humor in it.
 
bbgun;3616309 said:
In Bruges 9/10

Honor among [strike]thieves[/strike] assassins.

http://img839.*************/img839/7716/dmdinbrugesavi001438395.jpg

I liked this movie as well.

It was pretty good overall (acting, writing and so on).

The whole midget/dwarf scenes crack me up.
 
BrAinPaiNt;3616573 said:
I liked this movie as well.

It was pretty good overall (acting, writing and so on).

The whole midget/dwarf scenes crack me up.

Mix them with coke and hookers and you, my friend, have a party on your hands.
 
bbgun;3616345 said:
Didn't like it that much, but it's worth a second look. The train stop scene was pretty implausible, and the conveniently pregnant inn-keeper was pushing it in terms of Farrell's tortured conscience, but those are small quibbles. To his credit, Harry Waters was a man of his word.
I think it's the chemistry between the two leads -- sheepish, apologetic assassins -- combined with the hilarity of the supporting cast -- the boss, the midget, the eurotrash that gets shot in the eye, the arms dealer. It's just a crisp, clever script with a phenomenal cast. I like the way it's shot as well, adds a somber tone and is very re-watchable. The female is strangely attractive too.
 
theogt;3616771 said:
I think it's the chemistry between the two leads -- sheepish, apologetic assassins -- combined with the hilarity of the supporting cast -- the boss, the midget, the eurotrash that gets shot in the eye, the arms dealer. It's just a crisp, clever script with a phenomenal cast. I like the way it's shot as well, adds a somber tone and is very re-watchable. The female is strangely attractive too.

I didn't think much of the drug-dealing gf. Maybe she was tacked on to entice women to see this flick, although Farrell's handsome mug was probably enough. The running theme of lampooning/denigrating Americans seemed unnecessary, but whatever.
 
Somtimes Foreign films are kind of hard to get into due to odd pacing for the lack of a better term/phrase but if you can get beyond that there are some pretty good ones.

Same with some of the shows on BBC/America.
 
Finally watched Inglorious Bastids and was impressed with the acting and storyline but was expecting more action from a Tarantino film. 8/10
 
Duane;3616819 said:
Finally watched Inglorious Bastids and was impressed with the acting and storyline but was expecting more action from a Tarantino film. 8/10

I thought it was pretty dumb.
 
Back
Top