What movies have you seen recently?

Viktor said:
team56th Plainview

I honestly had no idea Blackhat was a Mann film until about two weeks ago. Which is great because it meant less of a wait until I saw it. It's been way too damn long since Public Enemies came out.

Anyways, I loved it. Fck the critics. I haven't read any of their reviews but I did see a couple viewer reviews on IMDB and their complaints are pathetic. One person gave it a 1/10 and only complained about his style of cinematography or whatever. Um where the hell have you been? This is Mann's style and it looks amazing. Maybe not everyone likes it but I love his use of digital cameras. Then others being ignorant complaining about the hacking. I'm in IT and pretty much everything was spot on and plausible. There are other issues but I won't go into them because of the possible spoiler aspect. Either way most of them are garbage.

Maybe it's hard to judge it with my Mann colored glasses but I loved it. Might even find time to see it again before it leaves theaters. Oh yea and Wei Tang :ylove:
Click to expand...

Let's not fck all the critics. I know that many shallow reviews slammed the generic storyline and characters and all, but some of the positive ones are so well written and point out exactly what his movies since Miami Vice (2006) are all about. Like this: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/blackhat-2015

And Videodrome , that said the script is not 'decent' in a traditional sense, so you might not like it. However it seems like those with the background generally like the movie, so you may go, though with controlled expectations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viktor
team56th said:
Let's not fck all the critics. I know that many shallow reviews slammed the generic storyline and characters and all, but some of the positive ones are so well written and point out exactly what his movies since Miami Vice (2006) are all about. Like this: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/blackhat-2015

And Videodrome , that said the script is not 'decent' in a traditional sense, so you might not like it. However it seems like those with the background generally like the movie, so you may go, though with controlled expectations.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess one thing I'm looking for is a movie that doesn't make computer hacking look like a Johnny Mnemonic-like video game. I did think David Fincher was more realistic with it in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.
 
Saw American Sniper. Very good movie. Great action and dialogue, I like how much humor was sprinkled through out in-between all the drama, although there was one unintentionally funny moment I found funny where Kyle was about to hit his dog in a over reactive manner. Dipping more into the story, I find the actual man and the controversy he left behind him to be interesting to say the least. I don't fault him for being as talented as he was but it's obvious he had his own issues being worked out when he came back from the war. Man made some bold claims, but I can believe that he was proficient at what he did, cared for his fellow countrymen, and dealt with some really bad PTSD. I would say that's what Clint Eastwood focused on and he did so well.
 
Agreed, I just came back from American Sniper and it was great. I thought Eastwood would just play it safe but voila, I think he made a revisionist Western out of contemporary war film. A Texan cowboy declares himself a guardian of justice, but instead of a town he protects a country, and to do that he joins the SEAL. There is a duel between the good guy and 'the devil' that tries to kill each other, but the bad guy's flesh-and-blood nature is kept being alluded, and the final confrontation is almost a deliberate parody of Western duel with intentionally parodic distance and dangerous consequences. I think Eastwood was very serious about the whole "sheep, wolf, sheepdog" metaphor and wanted to see how Western Cowboy would and should live in America these days. It was a refreshing take on Iraqi war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sharkboy1200
The Zero Theorem:

Not one of Terry Gilliam's better movie, only because it felt constrained by a very tight budget. Something about it was just off in the pacing. Also, I suspect Gilliam used different kinds of lighting and video equipment (Probably Digital). It just looked different somehow from Brazil. Also, this movie seems to be carried more by story concepts and set design than a full story.
The main character is a loner computer tech of some kind who is obsessed with knowing the meaning of his life. He believes this meaning may one day be related to him by a telephone call, so he keeps bugging management to let him work at home to be by his phone. Management agrees on the condition he accept a new assignment working on The Zero Theorem:

0 = 100%

He pursues this with some strange math crunching video game while being distracted by random characters.

I don't mean to dump on the film and say it's all bad. It's an indy film with a low budget, but it is fueled by the passion of the cast and crew. Also, while it doesn't really have a solid plot, I don't think the movie was ever intended to work that way, but more make the audience consider the strange future that is also bright but suffocating with colorful loud advertising everywhere. Or consider such strange ideas as the main characters digital Psychiatrist Software program.


EDIT: Was thinking about this movie some more and almost unexpectedly find it's future world reminds me of Blade Runner. Except this movie isn't quite as dark or 'Noir'. It looks into a different kind of bleakness in a brighter but garish world full of video screens and advertising. I can picture this movie almost being in the Blade Runner universe but in a different city.

 
Last edited:
Watched the new Godzilla and quite enjoyed it. I'm not sure why it got so much hate.
 
team56th said:
Agreed, I just came back from American Sniper and it was great. I thought Eastwood would just play it safe but voila, I think he made a revisionist Western out of contemporary war film. A Texan cowboy declares himself a guardian of justice, but instead of a town he protects a country, and to do that he joins the SEAL. There is a duel between the good guy and 'the devil' that tries to kill each other, but the bad guy's flesh-and-blood nature is kept being alluded, and the final confrontation is almost a deliberate parody of Western duel with intentionally parodic distance and dangerous consequences. I think Eastwood was very serious about the whole "sheep, wolf, sheepdog" metaphor and wanted to see how Western Cowboy would and should live in America these days. It was a refreshing take on Iraqi war.
Click to expand...
I got a much different vibe from it. I felt like the movie portrayed a deeply troubled man who used war almost like a drug. He's very black and white about everything, to the point where he calls the enemy savages (had less kinder words in his book), was willing to repeatedly go back despite the strain he put on his own family, his wife confronting him about it, can't understand why fellow soldiers would question the war and methods of the government, especially his brother when he was leaving, and the obvious amount of PTSD he suffered from. I also felt like Clintwood tried to humanize the other sniper, not just make him evil, by having him be a olympic gold medalist (a bit silly) and have a family of his very own. I saw him more as a bounty hunter than an official member of Hydra.

Then again, Clintwood made it all quite ambiguous. It all happens in a moral and contextual vacuum. So you see almost what you want to see in a manner of speaking. Guess I saw someone who enjoyed his work a bit too much and had a hard time coming to grips with civilian life. Which is probably why I've been researching him so much and found out he wasn't as admirable as the movie does certainly portray him as, despite his flaws. Lots of stuff about him post war certainly didn't make it into the movie, like all the bad stuff he said about Ventura and having those comments be put on trial for slander and defamation, which the Kyle estate lost with evidence apparently weighing in favor of Ventura. The headshot was total bull though. That would have been a mid-body shot at best. Also, my brother didn't like how Clintwood portrayed the Marines. Specifically about how they bunched up together before clearing out houses and buildings. He was a Marine himself and did a couple of tours in Iraq, told me that they actually space themselves out before going in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: team56th
Hazard71 said:
Watched the new Godzilla and quite enjoyed it. I'm not sure why it got so much hate.
Click to expand...
I think the main complaint was that it took too long to get to the monster action. Also, lots of folks weren't fans of the monster designs. Godzilla could have standed to have a little less bulk in my opinion, but I actually thought the Mutoh's were actually pretty awesome. They reminded me of another old movie monster called Rodan.
 
23a68dd9-b051-44dc-a25f-78603871d84c-460x276.jpeg


Lol, this fake baby of American Sniper had me laughing.
 
sharkboy1200 said:
I got a much different vibe from it. I felt like the movie portrayed a deeply troubled man who used war almost like a drug. He's very black and white about everything, to the point where he calls the enemy savages (had less kinder words in his book), was willing to repeatedly go back despite the strain he put on his own family, his wife confronting him about it, can't understand why fellow soldiers would question the war and methods of the government, especially his brother when he was leaving, and the obvious amount of PTSD he suffered from. I also felt like Clintwood tried to humanize the other sniper, not just make him evil, by having him be a olympic gold medalist (a bit silly) and have a family of his very own. I saw him more as a bounty hunter than an official member of Hydra.

Then again, Clintwood made it all quite ambiguous. It all happens in a moral and contextual vacuum. So you see almost what you want to see in a manner of speaking. Guess I saw someone who enjoyed his work a bit too much and had a hard time coming to grips with civilian life. Which is probably why I've been researching him so much and found out he wasn't as admirable as the movie does certainly portray him as, despite his flaws. Lots of stuff about him post war certainly didn't make it into the movie, like all the bad stuff he said about Ventura and having those comments be put on trial for slander and defamation, which the Kyle estate lost with evidence apparently weighing in favor of Ventura. The headshot was total bull though. That would have been a mid-body shot at best. Also, my brother didn't like how Clintwood portrayed the Marines. Specifically about how they bunched up together before clearing out houses and buildings. He was a Marine himself and did a couple of tours in Iraq, told me that they actually space themselves out before going in.
Click to expand...

After I watched the movie I searched more about Chris Kyle, and the real Chris Kyle might have been an adrenaline junkie like the ones we saw in The Hurt Locker. But in this movie, if Kyle was on drug, it would be a self-destructive, almost masochistic sense of guilt. He is raised as an extremely conservative Texan, and throughout the movie he is rather stoic. He doesn't show any fear or indulgence, and unlike in real life he doesn't even get angry at the doubt of his peers. Even when his friends are suffering from the horrors of war, he is so concentrated into protecting them. All he thinks about is his duty, duty, duty, which slowly grows into PTSD, and that makes him go back three more times. He's exactly like a sheepdog that protects sheeps - Americans, and especially his fellow soldiers - from the wolves of Iraq. Even his most troubling aspects are underplayed or hidden in the movie to make him a likeable and relatable person, so that at the end of the film, I think he lives (and dies?) up to the title of 'legend'.

That's where the revisionist Western angle came in. It's about a concentrated, stoic, rather conservative cowboy-gunman trying to protect his people out in the desert. But while cowboys remain the same as they did in 19th century, the world they face is a little different of course. What you said about the Syrian sniper being a bounty hunter making a living sounds pretty compelling. The movie even shows his family once midway through the movie, right? Scenes like that, and scenes where American soldiers fail to save a shiekh's family, clearly tries to humanize Iraqians, but at the same time, the movie doesn't say no to Kyle's blunt conservatism and warring effort neither. In the end, it's all about observing a 'legendary' old-school cowboy thrown into a real world. How does an American hero stereotype hold up in the real world? Is it compatible with the contemporary world? By not easily judging what is right or wrong about Kyle and the world around him, Eastwood makes a political statement of his own, IMO. He doesn't shout "Cowboy lives!!!", but he kind of finds a sweet spot for them to live after a long struggle.
 
Last edited:
team56th said:
After I watched the movie I searched more about Chris Kyle, and the real Chris Kyle might have been an adrenaline junkie like the ones we saw in The Hurt Locker. But in this movie, if Kyle was on drug, it would be a self-destructive, almost masochistic sense of guilt. He is raised as an extremely conservative Texan, and throughout the movie he is rather stoic. He doesn't show any fear or indulgence, and unlike in real life he doesn't even get angry at the doubt of his peers. Even when his friends are suffering from the horrors of war, he is so concentrated into protecting them. All he thinks about is his duty, duty, duty, which slowly grows into PTSD, and that makes him go back three more times. He's exactly like a sheepdog that protects sheeps - Americans, and especially his fellow soldiers - from the wolves of Iraq. Even his most troubling aspects are underplayed or hidden in the movie to make him a likeable and relatable person, so that at the end of the film, I think he lives (and dies?) up to the title of 'legend'.

That's where the revisionist Western angle came in. It's about a concentrated, stoic, rather conservative cowboy-gunman trying to protect his people out in the desert. But while cowboys remain the same as they did in 19th century, the world they face is a little different of course. What you said about the Syrian sniper being a bounty hunter making a living sounds pretty compelling. The movie even shows his family once midway through the movie, right? Scenes like that, and scenes where American soldiers fail to save a shiekh's family, clearly tries to humanize Iraqians, but at the same time, the movie doesn't say no to Kyle's blunt conservatism and warring effort neither. In the end, it's all about observing a 'legendary' old-school cowboy thrown into a real world. How does an American hero stereotype hold up in the real world? Is it compatible with the contemporary world? By not easily judging what is right or wrong about Kyle and the world around him, Eastwood makes a political statement of his own, IMO. He doesn't shout "Cowboy lives!!!", but he kind of finds a sweet spot for them to live after a long struggle.
Click to expand...
I felt like they did do a few times. One of the soldiers questioning the war (he died in the scene after), his own brother just wanting out completely, and his wife telling him he needs to give up the military for his family. That's the most you'd get out of this movie because at the time, lots of those guys really did see everything as black and white. Many still do. Maybe later down the line when more truths about the war was known and how our country has come to hate the war. I'm not saying you're wrong in your assertion that Eastwood portrays Kyle as a modern day cowboy, but I don't think it's quite the advertisement either. That said, I feel like Eastwood should have made one of the shots be of a completely innocent person. To drive home the fact that sometimes we're unable to tell good from evil and are too jumpy on the trigger finger.
 
Swingers - money baby/10 can not believe I never got around to watching this over the years. Really enjoyed it. Good humor and the movie references.

The Equalizer - Denzel/10 i enjoyed it for what it was. As always Denzel is "the man" and i'm sure if it was another actor i would have not got that much entertainment from it. Pretty brutal and bloody in a few scenes. Was worth the rental.
 
Its hard for me to knock American sniper its difficult to portray this type of people SEALS are onscreen, but I think they did a good job. I think Kyle is a rare breed that most don't even believe exist until they witness it. I graduated from the same A school after boot camp as Kyle, actually about 3 months after him. I remember hearing his name, but nothing really specific about him. 2 of my classmates were actually attached to his team. Its just crazy, those little barracks I stayed at for months, Kyle did too, he might even had the same room they were so small.
 
sharkboy1200 said:
I think the main complaint was that it took too long to get to the monster action. Also, lots of folks weren't fans of the monster designs. Godzilla could have standed to have a little less bulk in my opinion, but I actually thought the Mutoh's were actually pretty awesome. They reminded me of another old movie monster called Rodan.
Click to expand...
I thought the pacing was fine and yeah Godzilla was a little chunky looking but I still thought he looked bad ass. I could see how other would't like his look though. I thought the Mutoh's where pretty well designed also.
 
The Monuments Men

Okay film loosely based on a true story of rescuing stolen artwork from the Nazis. I thought the direction and acting somehow lacked impact, but the movie does happen to be supported by it's interesting premise of preventing the destruction of a culture. Watching it made me think of when the Taliban decided to hit an ancient statue of the Buddha with demolitions.

As far as George Clooney directing historical films goes, I think his movie Good Night, and Good Luck was much better.
 
Saw Blade Runner the Final cut in the movies tonight. They had some thing this month where they were showing older movies. Was fun as s*** seeing it on the big screen. Man the movie and it's effects if you ask me hold up fine till this day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigfnjoe96, DLC and Videodrome
How To Train Your Dragon 2 - 9/10 just watched this with my son. I loved it! Looked great on my tv. One of the better animated/family movies we watched in awhile.
 
Fury - 9/10 damn good movie. I'm sure being a WW2 history buff raised my enjoyment. Was an interesting look into a tank crew. Some great action too. I thought the cast they went with was good.


Lets Be Cops - 6/10 was an ok rental. Had a few laughs. Would be funny being a cop for a day doing what you want... till a guy hyped up on PCP kills you.
 
Big Hero 6 -- 7.5/10

I really enjoyed it. Its like a comic book movie for kids. Found some of it funny too.
 
Jupiter Ascending

Lord this movie was cheesy. I love Sci Fi. But this was awful.

It's like a bunch of different movies thrown together without really having anything to say at all.

The villains are laughably bad.

D-
 
Big Hero 6 ---6/10

It was an ok movie.
The bad guy I said it's his brother or the one old scientist guy so that was to easy to guess. On the whole he had to leave the fat robot behind I was like hmm just take his data chip as they said in the movie that was him. He could have also shot off the glove and just used his other hand to hold onto the ship. I'm suck of Disney doing this s*** tiring to fake out people that someone gives their life then brings them back a min later it's dumb and has no impact as they do it all the god damn time and you know it's going to happen.

I mean really just make a back up of the damn robots data before you go out on missions nightly. So the whole the chip in the hand thing was pointless and dumb.
 
Dno69 said:
Jupiter Ascending

Lord this movie was cheesy. I love Sci Fi. But this was awful.

It's like a bunch of different movies thrown together without really having anything to say at all.

The villains are laughably bad.

D-
Click to expand...

Seems that is the only type of movies the Wachowskis know how to make. how they keep getting work is beyond me. I mean damn they can't still be reading the success of the Matrix movies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back