Author Topic: Movies (Read 299323 times)

Jo'ou Ranbu · « **Reply #1600 on:** June 19, 2012, 03:59:56 AM »

Djinn can't even pull off plaid shirts, so this is a given. But then, Djinn and shirts don't usually agree much (insert obvious innuendo joke here).

DjinnAndTonic · « **Reply #1601 on:** June 19, 2012, 01:58:15 PM »

It's true. That shirt was all like "Dude man, I totally want to be on you!" and I was like "Step away, bro."

Dark Shadows:

The latest vehicle for getting my Tim Burton/Johnny Depp/Helena Bonham Carter fix. It is exactly what you expect from Tim Burton. This is not a bad thing.

I know nothing about the original series of Dark Shadows (apart from what Nostalgia Chick's reviews have told me), but I enjoyed the interpretation here. It had a lot of energy, and the melodrama was intentionally over-the-top in a hilarious way (At one point, a supernatural character literally rips her still-beating heart out of her chest and offers it to her love, only to have it shatter like glass seconds later... a more on-the-nose metaphor does not exist!)

I suspect that had Burton played the characters closer to their original incarnations it would have been incredibly boring and cliched by today's standards.

Clear Tranquil · « **Reply #1602 on:** June 19, 2012, 10:34:54 PM »

Sin City - Mind ... BLOWN.

Shale · « **Reply #1603 on:** June 20, 2012, 03:02:40 AM »

Superman vs. The Elite: That was shockingly good. The first DC animated movie that feels like it's really using its runtime, instead of straining to fit a story that should be longer into the time allotted - mainly because it's based on "What's So Funny About Truth, Justice and the American Way," which was a single issue (and worse for being so short). The Elite have personalities now! They're not just vague stand-ins for the Authority! I didn't even think that was possible. Also, holy shit at the final fight. It's played absolutely perfectly, thanks in equal part to some really great directing and George Newbern being an awesome Superman. The only knock on it is the art style - feels like they're going for a super-cartoony Ed McGuinness vibe but it comes off just looking kinda sloppy. Stops mattering once the action scenes kick in, though.

Meeplelard · « **Reply #1604 on:** June 20, 2012, 03:40:46 PM »

Was "What's so funny about Truth, Justice and the American Way?" Issue #776 or whatever, which my friend deemed like the single best issue of Superman because it explains why he's such a good character in just one issue?

Shale · « **Reply #1605 on:** June 20, 2012, 05:16:38 PM »

That's the one (#775, I think? It was a round number). The movie is written by the same guy who did the original comic, and it feels like the story he meant to tell in the first place, but couldn't fit into a single issue.

Anthony Edward Stark · « **Reply #1606 on:** June 22, 2012, 09:17:59 AM »

The FP- Is amazing. It's perhaps summed up with this quote from KC/DC:

"Now, no one drinks unless L-Dubba-E says so. With no booze, we ain't got no drunks. With no drunks, we ain't got bums. And with no bums, ain't nobody takin care of the ducks at the park! What's a town without ducks? Huh? IT AIN'T NOTHIN! How's a nigga s'posed to sort his shit out without no ducks? We the last of the 2-4-8 and we bringin booze back to the people from the Underground."

His plan to do this is to have the main character beat L-Dubba-E at Dance Dance Revolution. It's like the Warriors and The Wizard had a baby and then it got real fucked up on some medium-grade booze and everybody acted like they were in weird post-nuclear gangs except they're just in a shitty town in Bumfuck, NorCal.

metroid composite · « **Reply #1607 on:** June 25, 2012, 02:10:03 AM »

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Pure entertainment. Also pretty much exactly what you expect (barring some bad CG; seriously, movie studios: it's 2012).

Brave:

Not at all what I was expecting. Definitely good, and appeals to me much more than the typical Pixar movie. But part of that might just be Pixar deciding to break from their tradition of having only one "smurfette" token female character who is also the token love interest.

AndrewRogue · « **Reply #1608 on:** June 25, 2012, 03:41:49 PM »

Brave: Right. I saw this.

Kind of in a weird spot on this one. The movie was fun, but it wasn't that good/was highly forgettable. Could have done a lot better focusing in on certain elements and abandoning others.

Captain K. · « **Reply #1609 on:** June 26, 2012, 12:33:11 AM »

Men in Black 3: This was actually... good. I wasn't expecting much after the phoned-in MiB2, but this is a worthy successor to the first film. Good characters, good story, and the villain does one hell of a Tim Curry impression.

Captain K. · « **Reply #1610 on:** July 01, 2012, 11:38:08 PM »

Brave: rather boring actually. Not up to the usual standards of Pixar.

DjinnAndTonic · « **Reply #1611 on:** July 02, 2012, 01:23:40 AM »

Brave: Went into the movie only having seen a few trailers. None of which inspired any confidence. I expected it to be all "RAWR! Female Empowerment Bitches!" Thankfully, it was better than that.

Not that I don't think Pixar could make a good feminist story, but they instead chose to make it more of a mother/daughter relationship story against a High Fantasy setting. Lots of really good moments there. The actual "plot" going on in the background was much less interesting, despite my being a sucker for A) Strong Female Characters, B) High Fantasy, and C) Pretty Backgrounds.

So basically: see it for a cool mom story and some humorous one-liners.

Despite it not being the best Pixar movie, I really enjoyed it overall, I should make that clear.

Captain K. · « **Reply #1612 on:** July 02, 2012, 10:21:09 AM »

See I think that's what bugged me about it. Meryda *isn't* a strong female character. She's spoiled, whiny, and disobedient. When things don't go her way, she resorts to cheating to get what she wants. And it's her mother that undergoes character growth, not her. Meryda acts like a brat and ends up getting what she wants anyway.

DjinnAndTonic · « **Reply #1613 on:** July 02, 2012, 10:57:30 AM »

So... you're saying because she has faults that she's not a strong character?

I disagree. Yes, she's young, but she's also clever, resourceful, and skilled. Also, strong-willed enough to try to break out of predetermined gender roles. She doesn't always go about it the right way, being whiny, disrepectful, or manipulative (to a magical degree even) at times. But I think having flaws doesn't preclude her from being a strong character. You'll notice that in the end, she was even willing to make a sacrifice back into her hated gender role until her mother basically let her off the hook. I think this shows growth for both of them. It was probably the hilight of the movie for me, too. Bear Sign Language and all.

Anthony Edward Stark · « **Reply #1614 on:** July 02, 2012, 06:23:30 PM »

If you're not cheating, you're not trying.

Clear Tranquil · « **Reply #1615 on:** July 03, 2012, 07:14:56 PM »

Moving out and into my new house this week - barring any further unforseen circumstances - and will be staying over my first night/weekend later this week, so to settle in, to have something to do/watch/etc < celebrate is totally the wrong word! =P I bought Tape 407 and the entire sixth series of Dexter on DVD. Totally the best way of doing it right!?!~

I've never watched Dexter before. Read the books though. At least the first three, don't know if there were more~

First though I am going to watch the latest repeat of Dr Who~

Anthony Edward Stark · « **Reply #1616 on:** July 09, 2012, 06:16:13 AM »

Jesus, season six is all you've seen? That would turn anybody off that show.

Watch Season 4. Lithgow is magnificent.

Shale · « **Reply #1617 on:** July 09, 2012, 07:14:52 PM »

Amazing Spider-Man: Overlong, but quite enjoyable. There was really no need to rehash the origin yet again, but if they had to do it, the story they told was as good a way as any. Hit the same notes as the “real” origin, and hit them well, while changing up the actual events so they weren't just re-filming the first hour of the Raimi movie. Garfield makes a pretty great Peter Parker, Emma Stone looks creepily like Gwen Stacy, and Martin Sheen and Sally Field are downright perfect as Ben and May. Seriously, Sheen is the only Uncle Ben who's ever actually come across as a character, and the way Field's Aunt May slowly falls apart as Peter's life does is genuinely heartstring-tugging. She's still a pretty flat character, but even giving her two dimensions is shockingly better than how the character is usually treated.

Plot after the origin wasn't special, but did the job well enough. Fight scenes were good. Spidey's costume didn't bother me for long. Will definitely see the inevitable sequel (Spectacular Spider-Man, presumably), especially since they're following the broad strokes of Gwen's arc and that's going to be fun to see on film.

Meeplelard · « **Reply #1618 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:23:26 PM »

Amazing Spider-man: Mostly echoing Shale, the main thing that got me was rehashing the Origin story, not in how they did it, but rather given the Raimi movies are still quiet modern, most people know Spider-man's origin story, so devoting nearly half the movie to the origin story felt off. Not that this was badly done or anything, more saying I felt they probably should have abbreviated that (maybe even montage'd it?) and then devoted more time to the actual meat of the plot.

Other than that, good stuff. Different take on Spider-man, but worked out pretty well, and that's all you can ask for. It is nice to see Spider-man actually acting like Spider-man (namely the quips), which is especially notice-able after reading a good deal of USM, and seeing the series Spectacular Spider-man, and yeah, sequel should be interesting.

Also, is it wrong that, ignoring the existence of X-men Origins (probably a good thing), this further shows how X-men and Spider-man as movie series are quite parallel? Observe!

1st Movie: Good start to series.
2nd Movie: Sequels that surpassed the already good predecessors
3rd Movie: Dramatic drop in quality compared to the other two (to be fair, Spider-man 3 was more just "mediocre", while X-men Last Stand was...uhh...significantly worse than "mediocre")
Reboot/Prequel/Etc.: Different take on characters, lore, etc. of the other movies, but generally well done and back on par with the good parts of the previous series.

EDIT: Oh, one major flaw of the movie?

No JJJ

Sierra · « **Reply #1619 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:04:38 PM »

Lack of J. K. Simmons is a flaw shared by far too many movies.

I'm curious whether they're making any attempt to tie new Spider-Man into the same universe as the other recent Marvel movies? I kinda figured that was part of the point of the reboot.

Meeplelard · « **Reply #1620 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:15:04 PM »

From my understanding, the plan with the new Spider-man continuity is that they're going to make a movie based entirely on Venom (without Spider-man), about him being a hero, and ultimately tie that in with Amazing Spider-man continuity, getting both into the same movie, where they fight.

I'm curious about this mostly because it seems they're just giving the entire Black Suit the finger which as classic as story and lead-in to Venom as that is, its probably better for concise narrative in this format all things considered.

Dunno about tying it into other Marvel films though...

Grefter · « **Reply #1621 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:18:54 PM »

Won't tie in. Sony owns the movie rights to the character not Marvel/Warner. Even if the had good intentions they likely wouldn't do it with the cost involved.

Anthony Edward Stark · « **Reply #1622 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:35:31 PM »

Quote from: El Cideon on July 18, 2012, 09:04:38 PM

Lack of J. K. Simmons is a flaw shared by far too many movies.

I'm curious whether they're making any attempt to tie new Spider-Man into the same universe as the other recent Marvel movies? I kinda figured that was part of the point of the reboot.

The point of the reboot was the opposite, actually. If Sony doesn't put out a new Spider-Man movie once every like four years, I think it is, the rights revert back to Marvel, who will then do a movie that integrates Spider-Man into the Avengers continuity. X-Men is in the same situation, but with a different company (that's why Wolverine got made).

Grefter · « **Reply #1623 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:47:04 PM »

That is it. Same reason First Class got made. So hey it isn't all bad! But yeah you aren't likely to see Spiderman or Wolverine in an Avengers movie any time soon no matter how long they have been on the team in comics.

Meeplelard · « **Reply #1624 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:13:46 PM »

Oh, one thing occurred to me that I did want to bring up regarding the Origin story that I forgot to!

The way they handled the web shooters. One thing that bugged me (as well as my father back when he read Spider-man in the 60s) was how this High School kid could invent this complex chemical compound that mimics spider-webs so well. I mean, ok, he's smart enough I can buy, but how would he get all the resources needed to pull this off?

This movie did it better by saying Parker DIDN'T invent the material, just the shooters, so yeah, props to the movie for avoiding that little nuisance.

The Raimi films side stepped it with Organic webbing, which is fine, and avoids the problem entirely, just wanted to say that and illustrating "one isn't better than the other, just different approaches!" thing.

News:

Author Topic: Movies (Read 299323 times)