Last movie you saw.

[max_cady]

Lawless

OK, I was originally going to see Paranormal Actitivy 4 this Saturday, but after a surprise visit from a couple of my best buds and few back and forth, I decided to go see Lawless. And it turns out, I was pleasantely surprised. This little story takes place in the 1930's in a humble county that involves a band of small time liquor smugglers (the Bodurant brothers) who run into trouble when a new Deputy wants his cut from the operation, starting a slowly escalating conflict between authorities and the local mob.

Tom Hardy and Shia LaBeuof are pretty good. Shia does his best to stray away from his "teenager routine" from Transformers and Hardy, well, the man can make his mumbles seems like shakesperian banter to some degree.

If there is one major up it is Guy Pearce, as Deputy Rakes, his performance as a chicago mobster is just perfect.

[max_cady]

~(Sorry for the double-post once again, come next year, I'll start another topic with an updated release schedule)~

Paranormal Actitivy 4

The PA series has been an odd franchise to say the least, it has a meager budget, no-name actors who barely, just barely qualify as as such, but each installment has been comercially sucessful in every iteration. Probably the strangest of all, it's a series that has gotten better with each sequel. Paranormal Actitivy 3 stands as being the absolute strongest of the three. So here I was expecting them to at least keep that steady mommentum and what I got instead was more than chrushing dissapointment. The fourth movie is just beyond atrocious, it's poorly paced, the attempts at jumpscares are so spaced out and lazy. Even worse, the characters in this one are the most tedious yet in this franchise. I don't think I can possibly spoil anything by just sayin': Nothing happens! Not worth a DVD rental, not worth the bandwith that you waste on Netflix.


Wreck-it Ralph

I haven't seen a Disney movie since Up. I really liked Wreck-it Ralph, the premise sounds great on paper, it's probably the most well executed game movie, or rather a movie that features video game elements and lore. The characters are great and I love those enviroments and the ton of background nods to other classic video game characters. The marketing guys hyped the heck out of this "game hopping" hook, but when you think about it, it's fairly limited and most of the movie takes place very much in Candyland, probably made for a much tighter script, but I wish there was just a little more.
Minor nitpicks, honestly. I recommend it.

[Barry the Nomad]

The Amazing Spider-Man

Finally saw this on blu-ray, and I gotta be honest: I really hated it. Words I'd use to describe this movie: unnecessarily dark, uneven, indirect, weak, awkward. 

Obviously this movie had to be made to retain film rights, but they really could have tried a lot harder to justify a reboot. As is, it was just way too dark (The Dark Knight affecting it, no doubt) and as such it lost a lot of fun found in a Spider-Man story. I disliked the changes made to established elements, just so they could point at it and say "hey look! this bit is different from the other movie!". I'm sorry, the original origin story worked. Why change something that works? The bit at the convenience store which lead to Ben's death was nowhere as good as the original comic's depiction, or the first movie's.

The bits with Peter's parents reeked of elements that either are on the cutting room floor, or were held back for reveals in later sequels. I'm sorry, but the whole "omg, Peter's parents have a mysterious past!" thing was weak and hollow. Just because you treat something as a mystery does not make it enticing to the audience. In the case of this movie, the whole thing just felt weak and unresolved. Throw us a bone! Give us a little more than what we got!

The Lizard was a very weak villain. Conners was never consistant. Was he a nice guy? Was he hiding an evil secret? Was the Lizard making him insane (like Doc Ock and Green Goblin in the original movies) or was he genuinely evil? They never explained it, and again, acted like the real answers will arrive in a sequel! The end goal: make NYC full of Lizard people! C'mon man... give us something with more depth than that! What a weak final plan.

I don't want to rant forever, so I guess long opinion short: the movie suffered from being different for the sake of being different (rebootitus?) and intentionally weakened certain elements to give something for sequels (sequelitus?) and as such it was a weak film. Spider-Man 3 was a weak movie as well, but at the very least we got payoff and resolutions to storys. Even the first Spider-Man, which had two more sequels, gave us clear resolutions to plot points, and set up very strong plot points for sequels (Harry's vendetta on Spider-Man, Peter and MJ's relationship). At best, ASM gave us resolution that Peter and Gwen would continue to see each other (surprise, surprise). But everything else? Gotta keep it unresolved for the sequel! Ugh...

5.5/10

[max_cady]

@Barry

What made The Amazing Spiderman such an uneven product is that this movie was made pretty much by Sony Picture's focus group, Marc Webb is probably a very talented director, but right now, in Hollywood terms he is still a nobody, therefore Sony Pictures can boss him around. I say focus group, because cleary they wanted to mimic The Dark Knight, but somehow try to be everything to please everybody (Twilight fans, for one).



Rise of the Guardians

I'm starting to think that the less I know about a movie, the more surprises I will have. And Rise of the Guardians is one such. I hadn't seen a Dreamworks movie after I walked out of Monsters vs Aliens. This one was awesome. It's got the right spirit, this is cleary the perfect Holiday themed movie. The CG is stunning to say the least. The plot is a little so-so since this is basically a G-rated version of The Avengers.

[Barry the Nomad]

@Barry

What made The Amazing Spiderman such an uneven product is that this movie was made pretty much by Sony Picture's focus group, Marc Webb is probably a very talented director, but right now, in Hollywood terms he is still a nobody, therefore Sony Pictures can boss him around. I say focus group, because cleary they wanted to mimic The Dark Knight, but somehow try to be everything to please everybody (Twilight fans, for one).

Yeah, I did more research on the movie's development and was shocked to learn how hacked to hell the finished product was: http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/

Having read that, it explains the many things I disliked about the movie. The loose plot thread with the Indian dude who was pushing Conners to finish his work? It had a clear resolution but was cut! This lead to a very uneven moment when the Lizard appeared out of nowhere very pissed off in a tattered lab coat. That link also explains why the backstory with Peter's parents was so shitty. Even the plot thread with hunting down Ben's killer apparently had a resolution! To be honest, I may have kind of enjoyed the movie if it had all these essential elements put back in. I'd still dislike stuff like Peter's characterization (way too goofy and awkward) and the whole "Peter was genetically engineered from birth to be Spider-Man"... but at least the second bit would have been cohesive.

[JohnOfRage]

An Extremely Goofy Movie ^.^

[Barry the Nomad]

Finally got around to seeing this! Ok, so it released on Friday... but I didn't see it til Sunday. And even two days felt like a long wait. Overall, I really enjoyed it!

The Hits:
• The intro ties in very nicely with LOTR, I could see both trilogies connecting seamlessly

• Martin Freeman as Bilbo - I've always loved Martin in any role he has played: Tim Canterbury in The Office, Arthur Dent in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Watson in Sherlock. Now he plays another literary character and does such an awesome job! His face is just so damn hilarious. He doesn't need to say a thing and he can get his point across.

• Gandalf the Gray is BACK! I loved Gandalf in LOTR: FOTR, but found Gandalf the White to be so stoic and boring. So to see the pipe smoking, funny Gandalf back in action was the highlight of the film.

• The dwarfs - they don't all stand out, but there are another two movies to go, so I'm sure each dwarf will get their moment in the trilogy. I really liked Dori, he seemed to be a connoisseur of the finer things like tea and wine, which contrasted with his appearance. Balin was cool as well, he and Thorin had the most screen time for sure. I really liked all the dwarf history. It helped in making me care about their plight.

• The scene with Gollum was another highlight of the film. Acting was great on both sides, very tense moments combined with very funny moments.

• Radagast the Brown - he's so friggen kooky! His bird shit head and bunny sled were just so out there, but they worked.

• The music. I have that damn Misty Mountains theme stuck in my head.

• The action scenes were hectic, but a lot of fun.

• Unlike a lot of people... I liked the goblin king! He was an ugly son of a bitch.

The Misses
• On first watch, it takes time to get back into middle earth. Not to say that the beginning dragged, it was just that you had all these new dwarfs but we knew very little about them. It wasn't until the end of the movie that I really liked them, and on rewatch I'm sure the intro would be a lot stronger now that I'm more familiar with them.

• Unlike LOTR, there is no true villian... yet. Once Smaug appears in full, I'm sure things will really (literally) heat up.

• The white council scene is neat fan service, but it wasn't as strong as I wish it would be. All these returning cast members, but no really exciting dialogue. Mainly its "Gandalf is talking shit... oh wait, he's not." I did really like seeing Christoper Lee again, and nice LOTR foreshadowing.

Overall a great start to what I'm sure will be another fantastic trilogy. I can't really rank it with the other LOTR movies until the trilogy completes, but I'd grade it an A/A-

[max_cady]

Well, I've been going back and watching some older animated movies. After Wreck-it Ralph and Rise of the Guardians, I realized that I've missed a lot of animated films in the least three years.

Puss in Boots - B

It works as a spin-off from the Shrek film. It features an interesting twist, but other than that, it's acceptable.

Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted - C

This franchise is strange, the first film was almost a throwaway, just barely qualified as a feature film. But the second film, was like night and day. Number three felt like a step down, the most basic of plot, hits all the familiar notes (setup and the most easily resolved conflict), but it kinda makes up for it with very complex visuals and an interesting message.

Today, I'm watching Rio and I'll stop with How to Train Your Dragon.

[MadeManG74]

The Hobbit. Peter Jackson, you have been an immense disappointment.

[Randroid]

Saw Chronicle last night.

If you have any interest at all in movies with super powers then I can definitely recommend it. The story is pretty common but their approach is completely unique. There's really nothing out there like it.

[Chaosmaster8753]

Got back from Django Unchained, it was a blast.

[max_cady]

I just came back from a screening of Jack Reacher. Damn it, Tom Cruise had to turn 50 to actually become a good character actor and lose his gigantic ego at the same time. I really enjoyed Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, because it was finally what people wanted out of a Mission Impossible movie. Jack Reacher puts Tom Cruise one step closer to the icons of the 80's and late 70's. Tom Cruise plays Reacher, who is an ex-military cop who helps out a defense attorney representing an former marine accused of killing several civilians in what appeared to be a massive shooting spree. The evidence is all there and all the pieces fits together, but for Reacher, the pieces just fit a little too well.

This movie has all the right stuff: it's a good detective story, it has a great 80's vibe, like I said before, Tom Cruise is almost like old-school Stallone, Charles Bronson and Liam Neeson (minus the height), well paced, there are a few amazing unintentionally funny scenes.

Seriously, go check it out.

[semmie]

thats my boy   comedy movie
but i found the jokes so exagerated that i didnt laught at all

i stopped smoking weed for 7 years now. (its legal in holland so)
but if i did have a spliff i would v laughed. like i did with half baked

miss those days:(

but i rather be healthy i guess

[ROJM]

Seen Wreck It Ralph as its just been released over here in the UK. Definatly the better non Pixar Disney CGI movie. Also its strange that films not based on actual video game properties like Tron and Wreck It ralph(both from disney oddly enough) tend to be better movies.
Also it was good to see the Sega references. I was expecting the Sonic, Robotnik thing as it was well publicised but Cyril the Zombie from HOTD?! Wasn't expecting that. The boss from ALTERED BEAST?
and if you include FROGGER which was historically published and given its name by Sega of america, it kinda seems that the filmmakers at disney are somewhat fond of Sega games.

[Barry the Nomad]

Did you spot the Sonic the Fighters and Virtua Cop cabinets in the arcade?