A24 4,338 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Oh no, I've insulted Joey (king of exaggeration) and his favorite movie genre: the mindless blockbuster. Sure, my comment is exaggerated but I'm tired of these soulless, uninspiring, unstimulating, faceless, run-of-the-mill films with not an ounce of originality. Ah well, mediocricity attracts mediocrity.Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Superman Returns made me appriciate Superman The Movie a lot more. That's also far from a perfect movie, but when I'm watching that, I'm trhouroughly entertained, and I don't feel depressed and cheated when it finishes.Damn good score too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 To say its one of the worst every is a complete exaggeration. It makes you a farce.A bit like your view of the AotC score Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Halloween IIStarts directly were the genre classic ended, and goes pretty much downhill from there.Director Rick Rosenthal tries to stay within the same style as John Carpenter, but does not manage to capture that same feeling of death lurking in the corners. The original Film showed as little as possible of it's killer Michael Meyers, and when we did see him, he was buried in darkness, right at the edge of the widescreen picture.In the sequel he's pretty much the star, so he's often in the middle of the frame. Death count has gone up, and so has the gore factor, this film is afterall of the early 80's, when the silent killer and dead teenager films were hugely successfull.Most notable deaths are a naked chick being trown headfirst into a bath of boiling water and a nurse being stabbed in the eye with a syringe.Jamie Lee Curtis returns to the role that made her famous, but is unable to give any new dimension to her character, since for the first half she's out cold in a hospital bed, and the second part she's just running for Meyers, who turns out to be her brother in a shallow attempt by screenwriter Carpenter to give The Shape a reason for trying to butcher her.Donald Pleasance is again Dr.Loomis uttering dire threats about Michael Meyers.The score, also by Carpenter and Alan Howarth relies heavily on the themes from the first one, sounds a little more polished, but also looses some of the first score's simplistic effectiveness.A few scares, a few cool deaths, but no story worth writing home about, or characters to root for.*1/2 out of ****Halloween 4: The Return Of Michael MeyersThe Shape didn't die in the last film afterall, and neather did Donald Pleasance, who sports a scar on his face that reminded me of his stint as Blofeld.After the critical and financial failure of part III, which tried to take the series in a new direction, Michael Meyers once again escapes and returns to Haddonsfield, this time not to kill his sister, but his sisters daughter. Old Donald once again follows the trail of bodies, uttering warning about how michael is not human and pure evil...etc...etc...All of this sounds pointless...and ridiculous. And I suppose it is pointless. But the film is actually fairly well made, for this slasher genre. There's a nice tense atmosphere thoughout and the performances are decent.Direction is adequate yet workman-like, music by Alan Howarth is effective.The best thing about the film is it's surprise ending though, which is a really nice send-off, and a nice wink to Carpenters original.**1/2 out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Thank You For Smoking. Love it. Never lags. Constantly funny. Performance of a life time for Aaron Eckhart. At least half a dozen wonderful supporting performances. Good look. All coming out of a genuinly funny and worked-out screenplay. One of the few comedies in recent years that I would count among my favorites. ***1/2/****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romão 2,274 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I never saw Superman as charismatic character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 He is. Good Lord he is.I was a fan of Returns, but it did have its problems (ones that Singer apparently acknowledges). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Sunshine: To me this is Danny Boyle's first failure. The storytelling was a mess and the dialog of poor quality. Sci-Fi is so difficult to pull off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 The first act was intirguing, promising. Second act was kind of a mess. Third act was just terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightscape94 965 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Michael Clayton. Unbelievably great cinema. I was engaged the entire time. One of the best of the year. **** out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I was a fan of Returns, but it did have its problems (ones that Singer apparently acknowledges).Interesting, I hadn't seen that. Do you have a specific article to link to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 There isn't a specific article. However, Singer has used an analogy to Wrath of Khan, in that the franchise would get better once it was "broken in". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I watched Superman Returns recently and it wasn't quite as bad as I remembered it last year, but I still thought it it was terribly flawed and in many places, highly mediocre - Kate Bosworth being the main culprit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Kate Bosworth being the main culprit.Yes. Hell yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fommes 153 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I saw Stardust recently. Very, very mediocre.DeNiro has a great couple of minutes in it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I watched the film below.Somehow I feel my signature undermines my credibility today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 You could say that again.I saw Stardust recently. Very, very mediocre.DeNiro has a great couple of minutes in it though. I enjoyed it very much. But, then again, I'm a huge Neil Gaiman fan. And DeNiro was very funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I only seen the trailer but didn't find it very appealing.My guess is that it's been critically panned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Not exactly, but certainly not touted as anything special. 75% tomatometer. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/stardust/?...32&page=all Certainly nothing you'd be interested in, unless you're amused by the concept of DeNiro playing a gay pirate. Morlock- who's gonna finally watch Chinatown Properly tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Oh no, I've insulted Joey (king of exaggeration) and his favorite movie genre: the mindless blockbuster. Sure, my comment is exaggerated but I'm tired of these soulless, uninspiring, unstimulating, faceless, run-of-the-mill films with not an ounce of originality. Ah well, mediocricity attracts mediocrity.Alexyou just described blade runner.Michael Clayton. Unbelievably great cinema. I was engaged the entire time. One of the best of the year. **** out of ****you saw a different film than I did, the only thing great was Clooney, the storytelling was a disaster, there was no drama, no tension, because the hack director chose to tell the story bassakwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 While I didn't feel as negatively as you did....I was not terribly impressed by the film either. Never grabbed me. Clooney was good, but Tilda Swinton's character, I thought, was not good, and Sydney Pollack gave a weak version of his excellent character in Changing Lanes. The whole 'soulless corporate world' angle didn't get to me at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitch 57 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Kate Bosworth being the main culprit.Yes. Hell yes.Can't be any worse than Helen Slater as Supergirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 But Supergirl has no pretensions of being a real movie, Superman Returns does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I agree, it wasn't bad, but great cinema its not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 you just described blade runner.You wish! And how can the most inspiring sci-fi film of the last 25 years be called uninspiring? Really Joey, it's comments like these that make you sound like a farce. How anyone can be so unaware is a mystery to me.But Supergirl has no pretensions of being a real movie, Superman Returns does.You think? The Usual Suspects was a real film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I'm afraid the meaning of your post evades me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Superman Returns has no significance. It did not contribute anything to the genre and it failed in what it sought to do, namely, to entertain. Of course, the very young might still get something out of it. Bryan Singer's previous attempts to entertain were more successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Oh, I certainly agree. But I do think that Singer had more pretentions of grandeur with his super-movie than the Salkinds did with their movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 you just described blade runner.You wish! And how can the most inspiring sci-fi film of the last 25 years be called uninspiring? Really Joey, it's comments like these that make you sound like a farce. How anyone can be so unaware is a mystery to me.But Supergirl has no pretensions of being a real movie, Superman Returns does.You think? The Usual Suspects was a real film.good one Alex, that made me laugh, the most inspiring, what a crock, inspired to what? snooze, not live in such a bleak darkly lit future, Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzthe usual suspect was a real film, Superman Returns was a digitization, not a film at all.the usual suspect also gave itself away, so that the surprise ending wasn't, at least to some who paid attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I would be in serious trouble if someone said, "I love Titanic, Potter, Superman Returns ... and Blade Runner!"Hahahaha, that wouldn't make sense.Hahahahaha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romão 2,274 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I do think the Hulk brought something new to to genre, but I seem to be the only person in the world who actually likes that movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpigeon 3 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Fear not, Merkel. I like it too!Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I bought it once, never watched it. Than I traded it in for another DVD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I was drug to the theater kicking and screaming to see The Hulk, and ran away as quickly as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I would be in serious trouble if someone said, "I love Titanic, Potter, Superman Returns ... and Blade Runner!"Hahahaha, that wouldn't make sense.Hahahahaha!coming from the man who also liked the Hulk, palease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 So what? I liked Hulk too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 coming from the man who also liked the Hulk, palease.Sure I like Hulk. It was braver, more intriguing and more original than Superman Returns which was tame and lame. The film played it too safe for me. Please Supes, show me something I don't already know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Hulk was a disaster, complete and utterly but why it appeals to you Euros, I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I liked Hulk too, but it did have it's problems. It was very respectful, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 it was so respectful that Universal is redoing it because the first sucked so bad, and sadly for Nick Nolte he's forever linked to his characters' getup for his drunk driving.The Incredible Hulk will be a much better movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Hulk was a disaster, complete and utterly but why it appeals to you Euros, I don't know.Because we don't need bars and stripes and fanfares to think something is heroic? Or maybe it's not a geographical thing, and we are just people who enjoyed the subtext. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 You people supposedly like Jerry Lewis, and prefere Chaplin to Keaton. I don't know what to make of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob 0 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I don't like Lewis and have never seen a Chaplin or Keaton movie (except for Batman, which I do not like). *So much for stereotypes.*Please disregard if you weren't referring to Charlie Chaplin and Michael Keaton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QMM 4 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 it was Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Barnsbury 8 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Well, Michael Keaton has been called the Charlie Chaplin of contemporary cinema. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 American Gangster. ***1/2Next up: No Country For Old Men Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob 0 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 it was Charlie Chaplin and Buster KeatonI stand (sit) corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A24 4,338 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Das Leben Der Anderen (The Lives Of Others): Impressive, very touching. Loved the photography. Amazing debut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Halloween 3: Season Of The Witch.The story is unrelated to the brilliant first film and the dissapointing second one, though Producer Carpenter rather shamelessly has his original play on a TV screen in this film not once but twice.The structure and story reminds of The Twilight Zone or The Outer Limits, a rather far out plot of a rich industrialist planning to kill millions of children with Halloween masks that will blow their heads of.A few gory scenes that are to over the top to be really scary.The film is not without it's campy 80's charm but it feels like a long TV episode, not a real movie. ** out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts