Last Movie you Watched?

1179180182184185988

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    Murdock wrote: »
    ERNT ERNT ERNT ENRT.
    That was SO bad... I haven't seen (heard) that in so long...
    :-O
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    ERNT ERNT ERNT ENRT.
    That was SO bad... I haven't seen (heard) that in so long...
    :-O

    Yeah. I have TMP on DVD and a rare version on VHS with a few extra minutes on it. I'm currently making my way though TOS and watching it with my mom. We watched City on the Edge of forever last. I pointed out Kirk and Spock were in Mayberry. :))
  • @chrisisall Good point, never considered what resolution new effects would be in. DVD can mask a lot, as much as a was impressed with The Directors cut on Bluray there were some scenes that really showed up a lot of noise and grain. (Paramount! A full restoration please.)

    @Murdock The nacell is a good example of doing maybe too much, though loved the sequence when they emerged from the Enterprise saucer and the path to V'ger started materialising and Vulcan also looked fantastic. The probe approaching the Enterprise looks great too, any extra shots of the Enterprise are always good B-)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    The Blind Side (2009) Really good movie. Emotional movie, but I liked it. Bullock was great but did she deserve the Oscar? I don't know. Rest of the cast was good too.

    Edge of Darkness (2010) My first non-Bond Martin Campbell movie. And I must say I am very disappointed. While Campbell masterfully directed GE and CR, 'Darkness' was quite boring. The directing, editing and cinematography made John Glen's 007 outings look like they were directed by Spielberg. Mel Gibson was good, however, but the film itself put me to sleep.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited September 2014 Posts: 16,359
    @fire_and_ice.
    My problem wasn't that it was too much, my Problem with the nacelle was it looked like they slapped in a low-rez photo in the background. It just looked distracting. Maybe if they darkened it up a bit.
  • Murdock wrote: »
    @fire_and_ice.
    My problem was it was too much, my Problem with the nacelle was it looked like they slapped in a low-rez photo in the background. It just looked distracting. Maybe if they darkened it up a bit.

    Agree was one of the uneccessary added effects for sure, does not add anything.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited September 2014 Posts: 17,827
    Star Trek: Into Darkness.
    Well, the first twenty minutes. OMFG was it crap. I *NEVER* turn a movie off without watching the whole thing, so this is a first. Piss on my legends, why dontcha? I tolerated a lot for the first one, but this is just so full of tossed-in nonsense by committee that I couldn't deal. Yes, it was LOOKING good, it was nicely edited & the FX were okay, but JHC (Jesus H. Christ) could they NOT go where a man has gone before, and NOT as badly or manipulatively??? :((
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    @chrisisall. Blame Damon Lindelof. He was so obsessed with fanservice that he just had to fill the film just full of it. I didn't hate the film, in fact I like it, but I did roll my eyes at a big chunk of it. I give it a 7 out of 10.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    Murdock wrote: »
    I didn't hate the film, in fact I like it, but I did roll my eyes at a big chunk of it. I give it a 7 out of 10.
    You are a generous man, sir!
    ;)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    I didn't hate the film, in fact I like it, but I did roll my eyes at a big chunk of it. I give it a 7 out of 10.
    You are a generous man, sir!
    ;)

    I need to go back and do a full Star Trek retrospective. I did one for TMP last year but didn't continue. What did you think of the USS Vengeance?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    I watched the rest of it. I didn't HATE it but I'll never waste my time with it again.
    The Vengeance was just a big, nasty Enterprise E.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    The Equaliser with Denzel. I liked it and thought it was a really good movie. Marton Caolas reminded me that a proper henchman in the Red Grant mould can EASILY and effectively still be done and where this film really built up Csokas as this potentially serious and worthy threat, they dropped the ball with it; surprise - surprise. Once again, the fist fight action in this movie with a 60 year old Denzel is better than anything seen in recent Bond films: particularly SF. I just hope Bond 24 really improves and delivers big time in the fist fight front.
  • Posts: 7,653
    So far as I understand the Equaliser has about nothing in common with the original series but the title?

    As I thought/suspected another sub par Denszel Washington actioner.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @doubleoego, I'm a sucker for a proper/entertaining fist fight. What would you compare the fist fights in 'The Equalizer' to?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    Just finished watching Terminal Velocity. Wow, what a cool 90's flick! Highly recommended! :)>-
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    Children Of The Corn II: The Final Sacrifice (1992)

    714.jpg

    It took them 8 years to release this sequel nobody wanted. But hey, if it works for Freddy, Michael and Jason, why not for the corn kids? Well, for starters because the first COTC had hardly been worth our time. Also, it's not exactly a slasher series with a well-established killer. He Who Walks Behind The Rows had previously been revealed only through a terrible computer effect. But who knows, perhaps the sequel does it better...

    Afraid not. The Gatlin kids are now put in the custody of people who are absolutely not repulsed by the thought of these kids slaughtering their parents. Everyone deserves a second chance, right? Well this new batch seems to think they deserve a second chance after Isaac and Malachai had failed to humour HWWBTR. And so we get a few sort of funny sort of scary deaths in the film. But since those deaths are simply not enough, we add extra layers of redundant story. Let's see, we have a wise Native American who explains the whole corn mystery from carvings in a rock. (Because according to filmmakers everywhere, that's what all Native Americans can do.) We also blame a chemical factory for polluting the harvests, a plot point that goes nowhere since it's been established before that HWWBTR is actually real. And we have a father and son that aren't on speaking terms because that sounds kind of fresh and new in 1992.

    If COTC barely made it, this one fails tremendously. About 5 minutes in, you just know this thing is going to eat your time without giving something back. Boring, silly and poorly acted; that's my final judgement.

    Children Of The Corn (1984): 2.5/5
    Children Of The Corn II: The Final Sacrifice (1992): 1.5/5
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    Matrix Reloaded (2003)
    Matrix Revolutions (2003)
    Rocky Balboa (2006)
    The Lone Ranger (2013)
    The Man with the Iron Fists (2012)
    Cleanskin (2012)
    Get the Gringo (2012)
    The Grey (2011)

    Some remarks: Both Matrix sequels were good but the ending of 'Revolutions' was a bit complicated, didn't understand everything :(

    Rocky Balboa was great, really loved it. Cleanskin was very good, Sean Bean was a badass and I liked that it wasn't a flat-out action movie. 'Iron Fists' was ridiculous, bad acting all round and the special effects were laughable, but the actors, specially Russel Crowe, seemed to have the time of his life filming this, so it was a fun movie nonetheless. The Grey was great, so was Get the Gringo. Only 'Lone Ranger' was just ok, some fun parts but some pretty bad pacing problems.
  • Posts: 1,631
    @DarthDimi, I agree with your assessment of The Children of the Corn films. The first one, while managing to hit a few of the story beats of the original Stephen King story, just completely missed out on what made King's story what it was. King's original story had a great sense of foreboding and dread, as the couple explored the town and eventually uncovered what was wrong there. The film is basically your typical cheesy 1980s horror film that takes a few of the things from King's novel.

    I would say that this is one of those rare instances that the remake greatly improves upon the original.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited September 2014 Posts: 24,254
    @dalton, I have yet to experience the remake but I'll let you know how I feel about that one. ;-)

    Children Of The Corn III: Urban Harvest (1995)

    cotc3_1.jpg

    After two pretty awful films, one tends to lose faith in a property that never really had much chance of being spectacularly good. This third instalment, however, is a beacon of light for me.

    Eli and Joshua are taken to the big city - well, sort of - where they get immersed in da hood - well, sort of. But while Joshua learns to adapt fairly quickly, Eli spends most of his time behind an abandoned warehouse where he grows corn. What else do you do when in the city, right? He also manages to get many kids in school under the spell of He Who Walks Behind The Rows. Will the forces of evil be stopped in time?

    Granted, this still isn't class A material. But the acting has improved over the last one - Eli in particular is a charmingly evil kid - and the setting is far more intriguing too this time. There are actually things happening that will turn out important later in the film, unlike in part II where not much amounted to something. Even the effects have grown somewhat more ambitious. The characters make sense, as do their conflicts, and are fairly interesting to follow around. And certain moments count as actual horror, which is something I couldn't experience much of either in the previous two films.

    I don't wish to overrate this film. Even if I called it the Citizen Kane of the Corn films, that would mean almost nothing. But as far as entertainment value is concerned, yes, we have something here all right.

    By the way, a certain Charlize Theron makes her début in this film but blink and you'll miss her. ;-)

    Children Of The Corn (1995): Urban Harvest 4/5
    Children Of The Corn (1984): 2.5/5
    Children Of The Corn II: The Final Sacrifice (1992): 1.5/5


  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    The Rock.
    Connery's Bond disavowed & left to rot. What a great film IMHO.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    Children Of The Corn IV: The Gathering (1996)

    children-of-the-corn-4-the-gathering-watts-salling.jpg

    Things seem to be slightly improving. Dimension Films is now in charge which after the success of Scream means there's at least some quality control. This fourth film once again ignores most of what’s come before. We see Naomi Watts, a few years before Mulholland Drive and The Ring. Former horror queen Karen Black is in this one too. The cinematography climbs a few levels higher compared to the previous Corn films and the music, though generic, adds a certain frightening mood to the whole thing.

    Despite those things, however, the story lacks cohesion and in fact gets pretty muddled towards the end. Things stop making sense after a while so either you go with the still somewhat creepy mood or you abandon this film entirely. Coasting on the goodwill from part III and being kind of impressed by the photography – considering it’s a corn film – I guess I went with it till the end.

    Not a great addition to the corn films but at least a little bit better and slightly more rewarding than the first and second film.

    Children Of The Corn III: Urban Harvest (1995) 4/5
    Children Of The Corn IV: The Gathering (1996) 3/5
    Children Of The Corn (1984): 2.5/5
    Children Of The Corn II: The Final Sacrifice (1992): 1.5/5

  • chrisisall wrote: »
    The Rock.
    Connery's Bond disavowed & left to rot. What a great film IMHO.
    It's what NSNA could have been, if Hollywood had any balls!

  • Posts: 7,653
    Inkheart based upon Cornelia Funke her childrens novel by the same name. And I can only say that having kids opens up your world to some great movies I would otherwise never have sat through without any kids. And adding how you can finaly enjoy a Disney flic without mothers looking very suspicious at me, Now I am a good dad instead. ;)
    Inkheart is a nice modern fairytale with as subject books and their readers. Original and fun.
  • Pajan005Pajan005 Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts: 432
    Ariel - Great finnish film. As many of the Kaurismäki films it follows a poor man looking for work. I like how the dialogue is always straight to the point. It's also very funny. Highly recommended.

    A Most Wanted Man - I was surprised by how mixed the movie audience was. From elderly to kids. The film was alright. It was well made and has an interesting topic.
  • Posts: 6,021
    That's Entertainment Parts I and II. A critic I've read said that, while a musical number in a movie is like a jewel on a beautiful lady, while these compilation movies were like a cake with fruits and whipped cream. Well, I like both. Plus, in the second movie, Doris Day singing "Ten Cents a Dance"... Well, I'll buy the song.

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    Rage (2014) Ok movie, not as bad as I thought it would be. Slow start but once it gets moving, it's fairly entertaining.

    Cosmopolis (2012) One weird, sick movie. Not the best Cronenberg film but it was ok aswell. But I felt dirty at the end of the film.

    Crank: High Voltage (2009) Completly crazy, sick, twisted movie, but it was so entertaining. But you need to switch your mind of completly :))

    The Frozen Ground (2013) One of the better Nic Cage movies he made recently. Cage was good, Cusack was excellent. Really liked the Alaska setting.

    42 (2013) Great film. Interesting story, good acting, specially by Harrison Ford. The 2 hours went by really fast.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited September 2014 Posts: 13,999
    Sniper Reloaded (2010)
    sniper-reloaded-movie-3.png
    "Overcompenwhat?"

    Berenger is sorely missed, even if we do have the return of Richard Miller (Billy Zane; and I swear Zane's mustache is lop-sided), it still can't cover up the blandness of Chad Michael Collins (who is like a bargain Sam Worthington). Miller scores the best kill (I had to rewind and see it again), and there's a nice play on the series mantra of "One shot, one kill", otherwise there isn't much else to mention, even as an action/thriller.

    1. Sniper (1993)
    2. Sniper 2 (2002)
    3. Sniper 3 (2004)
    ---
    4. Sniper: Reloaded (2010)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @doubleoego, I'm a sucker for a proper/entertaining fist fight. What would you compare the fist fights in 'The Equalizer' to?

    Sorry for the late reply.

    Hmm, I'm not too sure but I suppose its the sort of similar to the aggressive style of taken and a bit of Bourne.
  • I recently picked up the Halloween Collection on Blu Ray, and BY THE WAY, don't make the mistake I made.

    Master Dahark's PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT


    Buy THIS:

    71aKzHz7e0L._SL1500_.jpg

    Not THIS:

    51zojTRgT1L.jpg

    The second picture is absolutely not complete. It includes the bare-bones movies and no Producer's Cut of Halloween 6.
    I went straight back to the store and exchanged it.

    Anyway, I went ahead and watched them all (except Resurrection. Maybe I'll get around to it sometime). They all look great on Blu Ray and I'm so happy with the purchase! It looks so goon on the shelf too. My only disappointment is the fact that Rob Zombie's Halloween is the Director's Cut and, at least to my knowledge, there is no option to see the theatrical version. This is one of those rare instances where I much prefer the theatrical version. The deal breaker comes from Michael's escape from the asylum. In the theatrical version, Michael takes advantage of the fact that he's being moved to another location and kills the guards as soon as he's uncuffed. However in the Director's Cut, two guards rape a catatonic female patient in Michael's room(!!!) and Michael kills them and gets out through the door they left open. It's stupid for one thing, and pretty uncomfortable too. There are two totally different endings too, but I don't mind that as much as the escape. Oh well, I still have it in DVD :D

    For the purposes of this thread, I watched Rob Zombie's Halloween II for the first time since it was first released in 2009 (the only other time I've seen it). It still sucks, I'm afraid. It was a bit of a chore to finish in fact. I hope they have something good in mind for Halloween III. Hopefully it'll be a case of Quantum of Solace/ Skyfall-- they are taking their time to make it good.
    The Producers Cut of Halloween 6 rocks. No more squinting to see what's going on with the bootleg VHS! I was never really a fan of the whole 'Thorn' plotline, but at least this Producer's Cut gives us some closure
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    The_Resident_Poster.jpg

    Other than seeing Christopher Lee back in a hammer film (though in all to small of a part) from the revived studio, I didn't come away all that impressed.

    31 Days Of Horror:
    Day 1: The Resident (2011)
Sign In or Register to comment.