Rate the last movie you saw

Dark Knight Rises.

7 out of 10. Half of the movie felt like it was cobbled together and bound with scotch tape.
 
You guys watching the Hobbit and loving it can't be Tolkien fans, right?

Visually, it was very appealing. The creating of entirely new plot lines to justify making a trilogy out of a stand alone story is an abomination to Tolkien lovers everywhere. I enjoyed it, but only by completely disconnecting myself entirely from what the storyline was supposed to be.

Anybody see Silver Linings Playbook yet?
 
Django Unchained 6/10 - I love Tarantino so I wanted to love this movie, but I just liked it. To me it was longer than it needed to be.

I'd place it between Death Proof and Jackie Brown in my list.
 
Idgit;4921721 said:
You guys watching the Hobbit and loving it can't be Tolkien fans, right?

Yes I am. I just understand the dynamics of those two stories.

If Tolkien wrote the hobbit after he wrote Lord of the Rings he would have changed it completely.

He changed everything while writing LOTR and even stated that many of the narratives in the Hobbit were from Bilbo's very biased point of view.

In the original story Bilbo won the ring from Gollum in the Riddle game after starting LOTR Tolkien realized Gollums obsession would not allow that and changed it to a lie that Bilbo told Gandalf.
 
Idgit;4921721 said:
You guys watching the Hobbit and loving it can't be Tolkien fans, right?

Visually, it was very appealing. The creating of entirely new plot lines to justify making a trilogy out of a stand alone story is an abomination to Tolkien lovers everywhere. I enjoyed it, but only by completely disconnecting myself entirely from what the storyline was supposed to be.

Anybody see Silver Linings Playbook yet?
My take is if you like a book, read the book. If you want to see a movie, watch a movie. No movie should ever be faithful to its source for the sake of being faithful.

Plus, The Hobbit is a children's book (in contrast to the LOTR books, which were written as fiction for adults). There's zero reason to translate The Hobbit directly when creating of movie of this nature.
 
Idgit;4921721 said:
You guys watching the Hobbit and loving it can't be Tolkien fans, right?

Visually, it was very appealing. The creating of entirely new plot lines to justify making a trilogy out of a stand alone story is an abomination to Tolkien lovers everywhere. I enjoyed it, but only by completely disconnecting myself entirely from what the storyline was supposed to be.

I was actually pretty miffed at the way they had recreated everything until I realized I had walked into Django Unchained by mistake (Jamie Foxx was a terrible choice for Bilbo)
 
Joe Rod;4922207 said:
WHAT?!?! What does Foxx being Mexican have to do with his acting skills? :p:

You should not make fun of **** Jews like that.
 
The Bourne Legacy 6/10

Huge fan of the first trilogy.

The story has become so convoluted that even the most faithful of fans would have trouble following along with the Treadstones, Blackbriars, Blue/Green Chems, etc.

Jeremy Renner appears to be on the rise as an actor in the action genre. Loved Hurt Locker and have followed him since then with this and The Avengers.

Action had good spurts but the ending was so abrupt...and that's saying something for a movie that runs passed two hours. If there was a payoff, I still haven't figured it out.

Good for a viewing or two, otherwise I'd say the trilogy is fine on its own.
 
trouble with the curve: 6.5/10. pretty predictable movie. I love Eastwood though and had to watch it. they could have explained how a few parts happened better.

Dredd: 7/10. good action movie. again, they skipped a lot of explanations of how something happened.

Bourne Legacy: 8/10. I liked it. It was definitely different than the others and I didn't find it that confusing.

Taken 2: 7.5/10. I enjoyed the first one more but this was still a good action flick. the girl is still intolerable lol.

going to watch Abraham Lincoln vampire Hunter & lawless yet.


Posted from Cowboyszone.com App for Android
 
Les Miserables - 4/10. Not really a fan of musicals to start with (South Park in an exception), but i was with a girl so I went. It's way too long, the story wasn't all that great, and a lot of it seemed pretty irrelevant. And the story dynamic between Hugh Jackman's character and Russel Crowe's just seemed absurd to me. And the songs weren't all that great for the most part IMO. Anne Hathaway's performance (both acting/singing) in a limited role is the highlight of the movie.

Not sure why this is a classic musical.
 
Les Miserables 9/10

Jackman nailed the essence of Valjean's character. Hathaway as Fantine was the best I've seen/heard. Great score, great thematic questions to ponder. Russell Crowe was ok. Acted well, can't sing at the caliber needed for Javert.
 
Took the wife to see the Hobbitt. 6/10

However my wife is the big LOTR fan. Not me. I enjoyed it enough but the first 30 minutes of the movie was SLOW.

My wife however loved it. I asked her what she would score it and she said 8/10.
 
windward;4925472 said:
Les Miserables 9/10

Jackman nailed the essence of Valjean's character. Hathaway as Fantine was the best I've seen/heard. Great score, great thematic questions to ponder. Russell Crowe was ok. Acted well, can't sing at the caliber needed for Javert.



And you nailed the review.


But, I think it was very silly to "video" a plays performance. In essence thats all they did.

I saw Jackman in a play called "The Boy From Oz" - He is an AMAZING special of acting/theatrics/physicality.


Crowe should not have been cast - AT ALL!
 
The first 40 minutes of the Hobbit was character and plot buildup. I enjoyed the movie. 8/10 for me.
 
Saw Django.

Thought it was very good.

Cristoph Waltz made the movie for me just as I thought he made Inglourious *******s to a great extent.
 
"The Next Three Days" with Russell Crowe. Yawn. Somebody needed to crank out another film it seems. Streamed on Netflix. Win some, lose some.
 
Back
Top