Jump to content

What is the Last Film You Watched? - Part II


Lurker
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's odd how often scenes that aren't scored in a stereotypical way get the "worst scored" mark.

Never seen or heard that one. The scene was high camp. And he was treating it so dramatically and inapropriately. A deliriously over the top scene, should have had a score to match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Spiderman 3

what a piece of crap.

so overlong, and filed with some of the worst effects I've ever seen in a movie with such a budget.

the acting at times was attrocious. Raimi has done to spiderman what the director of Batman and Robin did for that franchise.

at least I only paid 50 cents.

As my David so humorously pointed out I paid 50 cents to see a 200 million dollar movie, yet I pas 7.50 for 25 cents worth of popcorn and 50cents worth of coke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely disagree with Morlock's opinion of the music in The Right Stuff. Tis one of the most underrated scores of all time, and Bill deserved his oscar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe, the film is not bad, it is not a piece of crap. It's just average.

Like Goblet of Fire, Men In Black II or Star Trek Nemesis.

yes it was Stefan, worse than GOF and Nemesis

its so digitized it should be renamed 010100110111000001101001011001000110010101110010011011010110000101101110 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really enjoyed Spidey 3 for what it was. Yes the movie has a lot of very large flaws and is just plain weird at times, it was a solid piece of entertainment and I enjoyed hearing Young's score for the first time, even if the main titles edit was a bit sudden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely disagree with Morlock's opinion of the music in The Right Stuff. Tis one of the most underrated scores of all time, and Bill deserved his oscar.

Well, presumably, if you liked the film, the score will have worked much better.

The film got me in the mood to see parts of Apollo 13. Mostly, the Houston scenes. I LOVE Ed Harris in this film, and those scenes in Houston and Florida are surprisingly exciting and involving. And the score....one of Horner's best. The End Credits, with Annie Lennix, are quite powerful. Horner is one of the best emotionalists ever to work the medium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its so digitized it should be renamed 010100110111000001101001011001000110010101110010011011010110000101101110 11

I dont know binary...

But was that Spiderman 3 in binary? very clever :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really enjoyed Spidey 3 for what it was. Yes the movie has a lot of very large flaws and is just plain weird at times, it was a solid piece of entertainment ...

Thank you for your voice of reason, richuk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? Are you being sarcastic, or not?

Morlock- who thought that Spiderman 3 was moderately entertaining and instantly forgetable, with the exception of the first Sandman scene, which is one of the best CG created scenes I've seen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think it's the other way around. I have very little interest in comic book, and the whole Spidey mythology. I was expecting something absolutely terrible, and was pleasantly surprised that there were good bits in between the overall crappiness that is Sam Raimi today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about Spider-Man 3, actually. I want to like it, to think there's more to it than meets the eye, like with the previous entries. But I don't know - it seems to me that Sam Raimi, who had somewhat accurately described how it feels like to be a geek with low self-esteem in the first movies, now has turned as self-absorbed as Peter Parker with the success of the saga, and created a huge catalogue of sequels that does not have the innocence of the other two.

I mean, these movies were never perfect, but at least they dared to have style, character. But third time didn't seem to be a charm: Raimi just ran through the usual structure of a Spidey film with certain boredom even, trying to amuse himself with the special effects, but getting bored with them too. And following the Parker-Raimi analogy, he also has stopped loving Mary Jane, for whom I actually felt sympathy for the first time in the saga.

In my mind, the soul of the movie was in the Sandman - but the director had to introduce everything else, or else make a fourth movie. But you can see the care, the soul, in the Sandman character. At least, and this is sadly said, in comparison with the rest of cardboard characters from this bunch of sequels tied together under the same title.

Oh, and this is coming from a man who can dumb himself down to enjoy summer blockbusters when the situation requires it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know binary...

But was that Spiderman 3 in binary? very clever :D

Actually, it's "Spiderman" and a transmission error in the last character (the code breaks off before the character is completed, and it would be some exotic character if finished). ;)

But kudos to Joe, I didn't expect this to be true ASCII code. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about Spider-Man 3, actually. I want to like it, to think there's more to it than meets the eye, like with the previous entries. But I don't know - it seems to me that Sam Raimi, who had somewhat accurately described how it feels like to be a geek with low self-esteem in the first movies, now has turned as self-absorbed as Peter Parker with the success of the saga, and created a huge catalogue of sequels that does not have the innocence of the other two.

I mean, these movies were never perfect, but at least they dared to have style, character. But third time didn't seem to be a charm: Raimi just ran through the usual structure of a Spidey film with certain boredom even, trying to amuse himself with the special effects, but getting bored with them too. And following the Parker-Raimi analogy, he also has stopped loving Mary Jane, for whom I actually felt sympathy for the first time in the saga.

In my mind, the soul of the movie was in the Sandman - but the director had to introduce everything else, or else make a fourth movie. But you can see the care, the soul, in the Sandman character. At least, and this is sadly said, in comparison with the rest of cardboard characters from this bunch of sequels tied together under the same title.

Oh, and this is coming from a man who can dumb himself down to enjoy summer blockbusters when the situation requires it.

I never did understand your Spiderman fixation. I do agree that the Sandman was the soul of the movie...but there just wasn't enough of him to make the movie work. And I don't think it was ever plausible that he agreed to go along with Venom. I thought the movie became much less interesting once Topher Grace became Venom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I thought Spider-Man 3 was just meh, but after multiple viewings it's slowly growing on me. Spider-Man 2 is the best one of the three though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its so digitized it should be renamed 010100110111000001101001011001000110010101110010011011010110000101101110 11

I dont know binary...

But was that Spiderman 3 in binary? very clever :D

yes luke it is. Smart man you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I finally got around to seeing Order of the Phoenix. Overall I enjoyed it, it was really everything it needed to be and not much more. Some observations:

- Rupert Grint is still the most solid of the Trio performance-wise, although it seemed like he had less to do here. Daniel Radcliffe continues to improve with every movie, and Emma Watson was better than last time but still seems to have regressed from being the scene stealer in the first two films. Or maybe it's because the other two have just gotten better? The rest of the cast: rock solid, as always.

- I was impressed with the score. There wasn't much in the way of themes as far as I could tell, but the underscore was well done. Better than Doyle's. A solid effort for the rookie.

- Probably the plot change that most annoyed me was Cho being the snitch that gets the DA caught, although is was under the influence of Veritaserum. It just seemed like a convienent way to do the Harry-Cho breakup without taking the time to do the Hogsmeade scenes.

- The design of the film is outstanding, Stuart Craig really outdid himself, especially the Ministry.

- Tonks is a total honey. She could rescue me from Dark wizards any day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once Upon a Time in America (The real one, not the incomprehensible American version). Saw it once before, but I didn't think it had any impact on me. Seeing it again, it came back very strongly, and I had very strong ideas about the film, I found. It is not a very even film. It is not the clearest film. The performances are generally pretty vague. But it is still a sweeping epic that really grabs hold of you. Leone's filmmaking is so operatic, so accessible, so filled with love of film.....I felt revitalized after seeing it. A filmic film. Full of big gestures- huge sweeping shots of solitary figures, and huge crowd shots, where it might take 20 second or so before the character we are following comes into view. And, at the same time, contrasting with these huge movement, the signature Leone extreme close-ups- people's eyes, so much said in the slightest, barely noticable movement of someone's face....it's breathtaking. Of all of the memorable images, the one that stuck with me the most is the kids running in slow motion away from Bugsy, who's around the corner, ending with the little kid getting shot and falling down. Slow-motion is used all too often, and is rarely particularly effective, but it is amazing in this instance. And, put 'Cockeye's Song' on top of it....great stuff.

Although, I must say, I am not a fan of 'Deborah's theme', the main, melancoly theme is quite attractive, and, as mentioned, 'Cockeye's Song' is great.

I don't think the movie should really be judged narratively...and it's acting is spotty- DeNiro is good, but non-specific, James Woods is nice and watchable, but rarely do we get real character. The actress playing Deborah was miscast and very, very unimpressive (especially following hte luminous Jennifer Connoly). But, still, an epic breathtaking in it's scope and love for film.

***1/2/****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hulk. This film is underrated. CGI looked better to me now than I first thought.

That was one aspect of the film I thought came across rather well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the first minute of Hulk on TV a while back. It was enough to make me look for something else to watch.

Should be seeing Transformers on Tuesday and I cant wait - the CG looks a--mazing, and to be honest, you don't go to a Michael Bay film looking for anything else do you :blink:

I really enjoyed Spidey 3 for what it was. Yes the movie has a lot of very large flaws and is just plain weird at times, it was a solid piece of entertainment ...

Thank you for your voice of reason, richuk.

Okay, I could've worded that a little better, but what I was trying to say is that even if it has some big problems, there's nothing to stop someone finding it a good few hours of popcorn entertainment. The people I saw it with all enjoyed it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hulk. This film is underrated. CGI looked better to me now than I first thought.

I agree, the film may be far from perfect, but i like the visual style a lot.

Because this was the second time I saw it, I was surprised that the film had intrigued me. Nick Nolte is actually a very fascinating, daring character. David Banner, who once embodied goodness, is plain evil! Boy, he and the Hulk surely make this a dark movie. What makes the Hulk different than other comic book films is that the hero (when transformed) isn't a clean-cut or a civilized one. He's dangerous and destructive. He probably will never hold a special place in the hearts of the people. In fact, people want him dead! The comic book look is also a plus. The biggest 'flaw' of the movie is the father-son battle at the end. The idea was special enough but somehow I think it came out all wrong.

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I admired about Hulk was that it felt like somehow an low budget, indie film at times even though it has a massive budget. Also it took risks, did not play it safe.

I can't say I love the film, but I definatly have a regard for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes the other night. It suffers from the studio-imposed cuts (over an hour!!), yet it's still very entertaining and well-made. Robert Stephens as Holmes was very good. And the score... :blink:

And I just got my Lonesome Dove DVD in the mail, will start watching it tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hulk. This film is underrated. CGI looked better to me now than I first thought.

In my book, it still is one of the best superhero movies ever made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure beats the Spider-Man trilogy, Merkel, me ol' buddy. Those films are just too mellow and puberal. Give me a high five! Of course, the better comic book films are still X-Men and Hellboy. The worst of he lot are some of the Batmans, Fantastic Four and Daredevil.

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't get the fuss about X-Men. I enjoy them, they have great performances and interesting concepts, but none of them feels like nit manages to fully realise what it attempts. Yes, I do rate the Spider-Man movies (the two I've seen so far, that is) among the best comic book movies I know.

But the X-Men films - all of them - are still far better than Superman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the X-Men films - all of them - are still far better than Superman.

That's not gonna fair well with our ol' chumps Joey, Marian. For your own safety, I think it will be better if you take those words back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never have really understood the love for Superman. Sure, it's a great movie, and one of the better comic book films, but is it really that good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I didn't even find it "good enough", except for the first half or so.

That's not gonna fair well with our ol' chumps Joey, Marian.

I know. I'm feeling reckless today. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I didn't even find it "good enough", except for the first half or so.
That's not gonna fair well with our ol' chumps Joey, Marian.

I know. I'm feeling reckless today. :blink:

you're German, that explains it all. auch tung.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first half of Superman is great, and so is score, which sounds lkie a Superman symphony, where each the main element of the mythology is developed on its own movement. The second half is just too silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.