Jump to content

What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Older Films)


Mr. Breathmask

Recommended Posts

Inception has zero re watching ability for me

Currently watching a very interesting documentary called Terror in the Aisle. I saw it in theatres in 84. Good stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess if I had to chose, I'd rather have the too smooth action scenes, as opposed to the super chopped up stuff like TDK...I like to at least see what's going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nolan doesn't understand action not the way Spielberg or Cameron, hell even GL does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fights in the second Bourne film also struck me as being so chopped up I couldn't see much. The car chase...ahhhhhhh.

And thank you King Mark for reminding me that I still haven't seen Kick-Ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just watched nightmare at 20.000 feet (shatner). Not a film but pretty great all the same. Students loved it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain America. I'm trying to catch my wife up on the heroes movies before seeing Avengers with her.

Is it just me or do some of the fight scenes in Captain America looks like they are...too smooth. It's almost a fast FPS effect or something. Am I dreaming this?

That sounds interesting to me. I have that movie still to watch and must get a move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just watched nightmare at 20.000 feet (shatner). Not a film but pretty great all the same. Students loved it

The monster is ridiculous, but that one is great :) I wonder how it would work with Goldsmith's amazing score

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched a French film called La Haine last night. It was quite good and strangely watchable. Didn't exactly set out to finish see the whole thing, but I did.

Haine.jpg

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer

It's been a while since I last saw it, and its preceding film. Tim Story has a much better handle on the action and big CGI setpieces. Weta Digital's work on Silver Surfer holds up well, with Doug Jones and Lawrence Fishburne giving him presence and gravitas even with the paper-thin plot. Speaking of plots, the film barely explains or glosses over some of the plot holes -- what happens to Julian McMahon's Doctor Doom? How was he able to heal himself? And like the first film, McMahon and Jessica Alba put in terrible, one-note performances. (But Alba's platinum blonde wig is the biggest offender.)

Michael Chiklis and Chris Evans are again the acting highlights of this film, while Ioan Gruffudd is still rather meh as Reed Richards. The film moves at a decent pace, it's beautiful to look at, and John Ottman's theme for the Silver Surfer is perfect. There's a lot about the film that's better than the first, but the detractors are glaring. Once everything's said and done, it's about the same as the first film -- light, inoffensive, and totally forgettable. Not surprised Fox is doing a reboot of the franchise, there's a lot of room for improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, because that film was on tv here lasy night. I agree with your review.

It was on FX Movie Channel last night here, around midnight. But I rewatched it on DVD, hate the commercial breaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo: Not bad (but I knew it was the friendly guy from the beginning). However, I don't understand how it can lead to a 87% on Rotten Tomatoes. And Fincher is gonna make two more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like it and I didn't like the original as well. It's such a boring story. Fincher is doing what he can to make it interesting, but it just isn't.

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only the first story is a who-done-it. The next two books/movies are completely different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo: Not bad (but I knew it was the friendly guy from the beginning). However, I don't understand how it can lead to a 87% on Rotten Tomatoes. And Fincher is gonna make two more?

that's not a certainty yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spider-Man

I think it's aged beautifully, despite some dodgy cgi (at moments, for the most part it looks fine); and Danny Elfman's score is amazing to this very day.

I do hope LLLR can one day get all these scores in expanded/complete form one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it Tuesday night. I thought it was very meh

The action was fine, as was the one liners and all the acting (great cast)

But the plot was non-existent. No characters had any development at all (I guess they save that for their solo movies?). The main villain's motivations were unclear and underdeveloped. It was a 2 and a half hour long movie - and felt like it - and nothing happened until the last 45 minutes.

If it was 90 minutes the lack of plot would have been excusable, it would have been a fantastic 90 minute romp. But in its current 2 and a half hours form it takes itself very seriously even though, i the end, there's no depth to it at all. The minimal plot and character motivations that exist are just there to allow the action set pieces to exist.

Meh.

If I was 15 years younger I would have loved the shit out of it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything up to the final climatic battle has more condensed plot than some good films I can think of, plus basically all the moments of the plot being based on character writing. Many ensmble action films would like to be like this...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw Battleship.

it's stupid. but it's competent and I enjoyed it far more than I did the Avengers.

Avengers is a better made movie but it failed to live up to expectations for me, it's a big let down.

Battleship was a film I figured would be loud and lots of stuff blown up but I had low expectations and it exceeded them all. Rihanna wasn't horrible. And the finale involving Mighty Mo was great fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw it Tuesday night. I thought it was very meh

The action was fine, as was the one liners and all the acting (great cast)

But the plot was non-existent. No characters had any development at all (I guess they save that for their solo movies?). The main villain's motivations were unclear and underdeveloped.

Seeing the solo films helps to a degree, especially Thor, where you get a much better sense of Loki's trickster mind and the sibling dynamic between him and Thor. (But seeing all of them isn't necessary unless you want to, just Thor and Captain America.) And you understand why Dr. Selvig plays a small but crucial role in The Avengers, as opposed to Natalie Portman's character (this is the post-credits scene in Thor). But I highly disagree with you on character development -- Hawkeye had no depth in his bit role in Thor and Black Widow was two-dimensional in Iron Man 2. "Avengers" gave them more depth and a shared history between one another.

But in its current 2 and a half hours form it takes itself very seriously even though, i the end, there's no depth to it at all. The minimal plot and character motivations that exist are just there to allow the action set pieces to exist.

The Avengers is not Christopher Nolan territory, it is a Joss Whedon film through and through. It is serious to a degree, but the tone is pretty light. Nowhere did I think any of the Avengers themselves would bite the dust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But in its current 2 and a half hours form it takes itself very seriously even though, i the end, there's no depth to it at all. The minimal plot and character motivations that exist are just there to allow the action set pieces to exist.

In all fairness, you could have set Kurosawa, Kubrick or even Eisenstein on this mishmash of comic heroes and i doubt any of them would or could have provided anything approaching 'depth' into that stuff. There's just no sensible subtext of even the lightweight DARK KNIGHT variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, for the third time.

Are you that fascinated by it?

Couldn't tell you, but I like when it does "boom!", "kapow!", "crack!", "phoomph" and "whack!".

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all fairness, you could have set Kurosawa, Kubrick or even Eisenstein on this mishmash of comic heroes and i doubt any of them would or could have provided anything approaching 'depth' into that stuff. There's just no sensible subtext of even the lightweight DARK KNIGHT variety.

Perhaps I've said it before, but Watchmen is the most Kubrickian comic book movie out there. There's more to Kubrick then subtext. There's something about the immoral and ironic tone in Watchmen that reminds me of him. The film makes references to his movies too.

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never saw WATCHMEN. I'll give it a try, Alex, but if it's shite i will come to your bedroom window and sing MAKE ME RAINBOWS every night for a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never saw WATCHMEN. I'll give it a try, Alex, but if it's shite i will come to your bedroom window and sing MAKE ME RAINBOWS every night for a year.

Also, it realizes it's a movie. The movies of Kubrick also have that self-awareness. Yes, you should definitely see it, certainly if you have a dislike for the usual Marvel fluff. If Blade Runner is the best unofficial comic book movie (based on no actual comic book hero or story) then Watchmen is the best official comic book movie.

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all fairness, you could have set Kurosawa, Kubrick or even Eisenstein on this mishmash of comic heroes and i doubt any of them would or could have provided anything approaching 'depth' into that stuff. There's just no sensible subtext of even the lightweight DARK KNIGHT variety.

Perhaps I've said it before, but Watchmen is the most Kubrickian comic book movie out there. There's more to Kubrick then subtext. There's something about the immoral and ironic tone in Watchmen that reminds me of him. The film makes references to his movies too.

It should have been a Kubrick film.

Then you would have seen what awesomeness is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Or I might prefer Sin City, though I'd have to see it again to decide.

You like green screen movies?

It should have been a Kubrick film.

I would've loved that though I'm not sure how his stance was on the genre. Perhaps he thought it was stupid. Zack is a real fan. I wish he did Miller's Batman (even though I never read it).

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know. As far as I know he was interested on occasion in similar stuff, he might have liked such a project. I think he would have structured the story quite differently though.

I've read the beginning of Miller's Year One. It was a bit like Batman Begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" is an awesome graphic novel and would make a terrific Zak Snyder film

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.