Agreed. Awesome movie in pretty much all regards. Casey Affleck was simply amazing.
What movies have you seen recently?
- Thread starter Plainview
- Start date
Agreed. Awesome movie in pretty much all regards. Casey Affleck was simply amazing.
There are very few movies I would call absolute perfection, this is one.
Yeah I need to watch it again soon. It's been awhile and I loved it. A great movie that wasn't in a hurry and developed the story and characters with beautiful cinematography and the awesome score by Nick Cave/Warren Ellis.
You guys have obviously seen The Proposition too. That was an amazing "western" involving Nick Cave.
You guys have obviously seen The Proposition too. That was an amazing "western" involving Nick Cave.
Yeah, I really enjoyed the proposition too. However, in terms of more modern made westerns, Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven is atop of the pile for me. Love that movie.
Open Range is another good one of recent. I also enjoyed 3:10 To Yuma.
Tin Cup - still enjoy this movie after all these years. One of my favorite. Epic meltdown in the end. A good film to watch with your girl. Mine could not believe she had never seen it loved it.
Tin Cup - still enjoy this movie after all these years. One of my favorite. Epic meltdown in the end. A good film to watch with your girl. Mine could not believe she had never seen it loved it.
No surprise, I like this movie.
Back in the day, for some reason I enjoyed Don Coscarelli's PHANTASM movies even if the plot was nonsense. John Dies at the End still has a Phantasm vibe to it so I like it for that to.
Man I remember when I was a kid, they used to play that on TV for a week straight...
Riddick unrated/dc: 5.5/10
Couldn't really tell what was different from the theatrical version.
Still a decent scifi though.
This was one of those movie that once it ended it put me in a real funk for a good 2-3 days. Even to this day (I saw it the day it was released on blu-ray) when I think about it I kind of get a little depressed. A great movie for sure, but it really bugged me down to my core.
Hunger Games: Catching Fire - 8/10
The Hobbit Part 2: The Desolation of Smaug - 8.5/10
For some reason, I enjoyed this more than Hunger Games.
The Hobbit Part 2: The Desolation of Smaug - 8.5/10
For some reason, I enjoyed this more than Hunger Games.
The Hobbit Part 2: The Desolation of Smaug - 8.5/10
For some reason, I enjoyed this more than Hunger Games.
Will be watching this today, finally. Tried to get in to watch it on Boxing day but was sold out for all showings and today was the first time I could get 4 seats
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty: 9/10
Utterly fantastic. This movie really resonated with me. The photography is beautiful and Stiller's acting is uncharacteristically fantastic. The soundtrack is also excellent and well placed. I'd give it a 10/10 except for one thing, product placement. The Papa Johns thing I can forgive because it fits with the story and it's used as a backdrop for Stiller's lost dreams. The rest seems out of place.
Utterly fantastic. This movie really resonated with me. The photography is beautiful and Stiller's acting is uncharacteristically fantastic. The soundtrack is also excellent and well placed. I'd give it a 10/10 except for one thing, product placement. The Papa Johns thing I can forgive because it fits with the story and it's used as a backdrop for Stiller's lost dreams. The rest seems out of place.
The Hobbit Part 2: The Desolation of Smaug - 6.0/10
So disappointed. The Smaug stuff is just lame, as is the action as a whole. Effects seemed very spotty to me. Sometimes they looked good and other times looked very cheesy and obvious. The Characters also seemed to annoy me this time round with Bilbo too dependant on the ring and the dwarves being so easily defeated at every turn.
So disappointed. The Smaug stuff is just lame, as is the action as a whole. Effects seemed very spotty to me. Sometimes they looked good and other times looked very cheesy and obvious. The Characters also seemed to annoy me this time round with Bilbo too dependant on the ring and the dwarves being so easily defeated at every turn.
Seriously, why the fook is the Dragon talking ? Hate it.
TH:TDOS in 3D Imax 7/10
As a guy who generally goes in with an open mind and a good attitude I loved this movie! the effects were great in my mind and in 3d I was at the edge of my seat all the while. Yet the pursuit in me who had read the Hobbit and LOTR dozen of times in my youth I found it troubling and a sell out for more thrills.
I have said before that the Hobbit , though flawed, was almost lyric and read like a poem, this movie was a complete 180 departure from that for the sake of "wowing" the casual movie goer.
I understand that directors should have some artistic license and even though some things defy our laws of physics(i.e. the molten gold in 3 minutes bit , etc) and I am able to suspend my realistic self and engross in the story being told, I am however, at a bit of a lost when we are being told one thing in the prequel yet another in the "sequel".
So I give this an above average score for thrills and chills and a great movie experience (if you see it in a good theater on IMAX and 3d helped it) yet I can't give it more than that since the story line contradicts a lot that was built up for LOTR.
As a guy who generally goes in with an open mind and a good attitude I loved this movie! the effects were great in my mind and in 3d I was at the edge of my seat all the while. Yet the pursuit in me who had read the Hobbit and LOTR dozen of times in my youth I found it troubling and a sell out for more thrills.
I have said before that the Hobbit , though flawed, was almost lyric and read like a poem, this movie was a complete 180 departure from that for the sake of "wowing" the casual movie goer.
I understand that directors should have some artistic license and even though some things defy our laws of physics(i.e. the molten gold in 3 minutes bit , etc) and I am able to suspend my realistic self and engross in the story being told, I am however, at a bit of a lost when we are being told one thing in the prequel yet another in the "sequel".
So I give this an above average score for thrills and chills and a great movie experience (if you see it in a good theater on IMAX and 3d helped it) yet I can't give it more than that since the story line contradicts a lot that was built up for LOTR.
It was awful. Saw it in theater. One of the very few I regret seeing in the theater, that, and The Other Guys.
Just finished watching The Lone Ranger. Seriously, what the hell people were complaining about that movie that I've heard all over the news? My wife and I thought this movie was really good afterall! I don't even understand why a lot of people thought it was bad. It's not like it's the worse film in the entire world (*cough*X-Men:LastStand*cough*). It is such a shame that it did not make a huge profit from the big screen ($260m) and it could've been better.
The Lone Ranger 2, please!!!!!!!
The Lone Ranger 2, please!!!!!!!
Not a movie but I'm currently rewatching Deadwood. Still hate HBO for not letting Milch finish the series (and Carnivale) looks great on bluray.
Lone Ranger Sucked big time. Action sucks. Writing is drivel. It is too long. The Hammer dude sucks.
Awesome show.
Manhunter
I can't fairly rate this movie, so I will skip the score part. This movie is flawed to a degree that will annoy quite a few people, but this is not a problem solely because of my admiration for the director's style.
The cover of the blu-ray says that it is "the movie that introduced the world to Hannibal Lecter", but, while Brian Cox's performance is impressive, the movie is not really interested in Hannibal Lektor. The parts where the movie describes the main criminal Francis Dollarhyde is boring and seriously flawed. His character and action are all cliched; an abused kid grown into an irredeemable adult (as in Will Graham's own words), trying to be loved by women by killing them and controlling them on his own. Even the style of describing him is cheesy. Plot points are boring, cinematography is somewhat predictable, and they are usually helped by licensed songs, which are clearly outdated and distract viewers. Even Hannibal Lektor is merely a side character here, giving him only a fraction of screen time that is not enough to impress viewers. If you are a fan of The Silence of the Lambs or Anthony Hopkins Lector, this movie is not for you.
That said, you kind of knew this if you know Michael Mann. As you might expect from a Michael Mann film, he is not interested in psychopaths. His cinema is all about self-destructive professionals that goes too deep into their own work, and in this regard Manhunter shines really, really bright. William Petersen as the protagonist Will Graham is downright fantastic. He is an extreme case of workaholic Michael Mann protagonist that had went crazy and is again on the verge of being so because he investigates psychopathic criminals by sympathizing with them. Throughout the movie he struggles to use his method while trying not to go crazy for the sake of his family, which results in the fact that every single shot with Will Graham is downright fantastic. All of this is supported by signature style of the director; the fast rhythm of jargon-filled dialogue between Will and his colleagues (including Lektor), the low-key, color-bathed cinematography that adds to the atmosphere, heavy electronic music that emphasizes his triumphant moments, all adds to the depth of his character, that it is no wonder William Petersen had hard time getting out of this character.
You kind of chuckle when the first line of end credit is "A Michael Mann Film", because there is no way mistaking who made this film. If you like his works, in my opinion, his works from 80s are must-watch. They are flawed, but the style is definitely there and way more extreme than they are now, that it's just fantastic to watch those moments even with all the flaws.
P.S. As many have noted, the final shootout is very badly edited for reasons I don't know, so if you are coming from the director's later works, keep that in mind.
I can't fairly rate this movie, so I will skip the score part. This movie is flawed to a degree that will annoy quite a few people, but this is not a problem solely because of my admiration for the director's style.
The cover of the blu-ray says that it is "the movie that introduced the world to Hannibal Lecter", but, while Brian Cox's performance is impressive, the movie is not really interested in Hannibal Lektor. The parts where the movie describes the main criminal Francis Dollarhyde is boring and seriously flawed. His character and action are all cliched; an abused kid grown into an irredeemable adult (as in Will Graham's own words), trying to be loved by women by killing them and controlling them on his own. Even the style of describing him is cheesy. Plot points are boring, cinematography is somewhat predictable, and they are usually helped by licensed songs, which are clearly outdated and distract viewers. Even Hannibal Lektor is merely a side character here, giving him only a fraction of screen time that is not enough to impress viewers. If you are a fan of The Silence of the Lambs or Anthony Hopkins Lector, this movie is not for you.
That said, you kind of knew this if you know Michael Mann. As you might expect from a Michael Mann film, he is not interested in psychopaths. His cinema is all about self-destructive professionals that goes too deep into their own work, and in this regard Manhunter shines really, really bright. William Petersen as the protagonist Will Graham is downright fantastic. He is an extreme case of workaholic Michael Mann protagonist that had went crazy and is again on the verge of being so because he investigates psychopathic criminals by sympathizing with them. Throughout the movie he struggles to use his method while trying not to go crazy for the sake of his family, which results in the fact that every single shot with Will Graham is downright fantastic. All of this is supported by signature style of the director; the fast rhythm of jargon-filled dialogue between Will and his colleagues (including Lektor), the low-key, color-bathed cinematography that adds to the atmosphere, heavy electronic music that emphasizes his triumphant moments, all adds to the depth of his character, that it is no wonder William Petersen had hard time getting out of this character.
You kind of chuckle when the first line of end credit is "A Michael Mann Film", because there is no way mistaking who made this film. If you like his works, in my opinion, his works from 80s are must-watch. They are flawed, but the style is definitely there and way more extreme than they are now, that it's just fantastic to watch those moments even with all the flaws.
P.S. As many have noted, the final shootout is very badly edited for reasons I don't know, so if you are coming from the director's later works, keep that in mind.
Last edited:
The Dark Knight Returns parts 1&2.
Brutal at times and really good. The news cuts felt a bit filler.
Brutal at times and really good. The news cuts felt a bit filler.
The Conjuring - 8/10 one of the better scary movies of the last few years i enjoyed it.
Master And Commander: Far Side Of The World - 9/10 picked this up on blu ray for $5. Love the film. Really wish they would carry on the story. I believe its based on a long series of books.
Master And Commander: Far Side Of The World - 9/10 picked this up on blu ray for $5. Love the film. Really wish they would carry on the story. I believe its based on a long series of books.
The director virtually retired by now, what a shame. It's a movie that's really dear to me.
Tucker & Dale vs Evil - 9/10
Brilliant move. Loved the cast, plot, action and gore. A must watch.
Brilliant move. Loved the cast, plot, action and gore. A must watch.
That Blu-ray has great audio. I'm not a fan of the movie though.
Yep. I loved it too.
The Wolf of Wall Street - Good
The Wolf of Wall Street is a major departure for Scorsese. While the movie is a drama it's by far his most comedic. I would say the movie is half drama and half comedy. I was surprised by that as that's not his norm. Sure, Scorsese has never shied away from comedy in his movies but The Wolf of Wall Street goes way beyond anything he's done in the past. It works very well in the film's world. DiCaprio was out of control with his acting. He played the part of Jordan Belfort to an absolute T. He was over the top and energetic. Jonah Hill was equally as over the top in his role as Donnie Azzoff.
Sex and drugs are abound in The Wolf of Wall Street. Every second someone is doing some drug or having sex anywhere. The film is a parody of Wall Street in the 80's and turns the absurdity of to the 100th degree. There's nothing to really learn from the film. You watch it for the story as with most Scorsese films. It's a movie that's for pure entertainment and nothing more. You won't leave the theater a changed person or left with many lingering questions. The movie is what it is, a spectacle of sex, drugs and money. It's no Wall Street (1987) but it's not trying to be.
The Wolf of Wall Street is a major departure for Scorsese. While the movie is a drama it's by far his most comedic. I would say the movie is half drama and half comedy. I was surprised by that as that's not his norm. Sure, Scorsese has never shied away from comedy in his movies but The Wolf of Wall Street goes way beyond anything he's done in the past. It works very well in the film's world. DiCaprio was out of control with his acting. He played the part of Jordan Belfort to an absolute T. He was over the top and energetic. Jonah Hill was equally as over the top in his role as Donnie Azzoff.
Sex and drugs are abound in The Wolf of Wall Street. Every second someone is doing some drug or having sex anywhere. The film is a parody of Wall Street in the 80's and turns the absurdity of to the 100th degree. There's nothing to really learn from the film. You watch it for the story as with most Scorsese films. It's a movie that's for pure entertainment and nothing more. You won't leave the theater a changed person or left with many lingering questions. The movie is what it is, a spectacle of sex, drugs and money. It's no Wall Street (1987) but it's not trying to be.