What was the last movie you watched?

[panfan4lyfe 4]

Breakfast Club.

[Duck Fallas 209]

42. Honestly, I was expecting a bit more from the movie. I enjoyed it, but something was missing.

[SteVo+ 3,702]

Shame. Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan were both incredible, and it's much more emotionally involving than you'd expect a film about sex addiction to be.

[SteelersNation36 128]

I wasn't aware we needed, or even wanted, a live-action TMNT movie.

 

Well with the new "lets reboot every movie ever created" mentality in holly wood right now you didnt think that the live action TMNT's movies were off limits did you?

[Bay 2,003]

 

[Barracuda 629]

 

So terrible to the point that it is great.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

42. Honestly, I was expecting a bit more from the movie. I enjoyed it, but something was missing.

 

Ya, I was surprised they only cared to cover one season in the major leagues. And then one in the minors...They relied on the intro and ending to fill in everything they didn't or couldn't show. Kinda lame, but still a really great movies.

[Duck Fallas 209]

I wasn't aware we needed, or even wanted, a live-action TMNT movie.

That is because Hollywood hadn't told us that we wanted a live-action TMNT movie.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Evil Dead. It's overrated.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Evil Dead. It's overrated.

 

I would agree in a general sense. But it does have pretty mixed reviews. . It kind of lost me when the demon was openly pushing to suck cock.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Finally wrote up my review for 42.

 

42

3.5/5

 

In what is undoubtedly one of the most empowering and insightful battles and eventual victories in sports -- Boseman does more than give justice to the legend that is Jackie Robinson. He brings the heart, the passion, the rage, and the man himself alive.

 

Ford also does a wonderful job in bringing to life an uncanny and unorthodox yet deeply insightful mind to the big screen in Mr. Rickey.

 

With a story so true, so powerful, and so inspirational -- it begs one question in particular. Did the film add to the legacy of a great man and cause, or did the film get carried by an already defined glory?

 

Unfortunately in this particular instance, it's the latter. The film vaguely details the true suffering outside of a few instances. It doesn't expound upon a great baseball career, nor does it give justice to the life long fight and determination contained in the life of Jackie Robinson.

 

No, instead 42 takes you into a postcard. A short, but sweet window into the life of Mr. Robinson spanning no more than a couple years. Enough to show a glimpse of the struggle. Enough to represent the good fight. And just barely enough to bear witness the color barrier being shattered in America's past time.

 

All of which was expected. All of which was in line with the status quo and mediocrity. The film itself didn't dare reach for the same stars Jackie Robinson once did, and that is truly a disappointment.

 

While a fine film in it's own right, the power of the story itself can't propel the film to greatness alone. We will look back on this film yearning for more and wishing it had clawed , scratched, and fought for every inch -- just as 42 once did.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Favre4Ever

[BwareDWare94 723]

I would agree in a general sense. But it does have pretty mixed reviews. . It kind of lost me when the demon was openly pushing to suck cock.

 

It lost me when none of the acting performances were even slightly memorable. It took itself way too seriously.

 

This is why Cabin in the Woods is the best horror flick to come out in several years, because it balanced itself. Not only was it an amazing parody, but an overall funny and alarmingly entertaining movie. Evil Dead was just excessive gore with cliche storyline spread out over 90 or so minutes. It was much more well done than most horror movies in today's age, but that isn't saying much. Horror movies suck these days. The only two in recent memory that I give a shit for are the already mentioned Cabin in the Woods and The Exorcism of Emily Rose.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Acting performances in horror movies, especially cheesy ones that rely on a ton of blood with no-name talent, are going to struggle to stand out. Didn't really expect much on that end. We'll have to disagree that it took itself seriously, because I didn't think it did it all. It tried being funny/entertaining like the original except in measured doses and failed pretty horribly. Even if they didn't try, that's still pretty awful. lol

 

Agree with the rest of what you said though. But you had to have known this wasn't Cabin in the Woods... There's no Joss Whedon attached to this one. Just another bad remake, and I already see 2 or 3 sequels spawning from this, unfortunately.

[Bay 2,003]

Caught some of The Usual Suspects on Sundance. Seen it a bunch of times but if its on I'm going to watch.

 

See it if you haven't... RIGHT NOW.

[SteVo+ 3,702]

The Great Gatsby. As Fitzgerald's novel of the roaring twenties is my favorite of all-time, I was very excited to see this movie, but it ended up being somewhat of a disappointment. The emphasis is all on the visuals, which are, in my opinion, way too over-the-top. I imagine Michael Bay's Gatsby would have looked much like this. The musical score makes heavy use of contemporary music, taking the movie out of the 1920's time period it is supposed to define. Consequently, Fitzgerald's thoughts about the decline of the American dream don't translate to the big screen, a task that every adapting director has failed to this point.

 

Nevertheless, there are things to like. The film's middle section is the best, when the extravagant elements of the film subside and the filmmakers let the story tell itself. Carey Mulligan is pitch perfect as Daisy, as are supporting characters Wilson, Jordan Baker, and Myrtle. Tobey Maguire is good-not-great as Nick Carraway. As for Leonardo DiCaprio's portrayal of Jay Gatsby, it is inconsistent; he is brilliant one scene, then off-track the next. His performance contrasts with the Jay Gatsby I see when I read Fitzgerald's book, but then, that is my individual interpretation. The trouble with adapting novels to film is you have to run with one precise interpretation of a character, tricky business for a complex literary character like Gatsby.

[Vin+ 3,121]

IM3.

 

Awesome.

[Vin+ 3,121]

Star Trek: Into Darkness

 

Benedict Cumberbatch is kind of a badass.

 

J.J. Abrams is going to ruin Star Wars.

 

 

Good movie. Solid movie, but I really disliked where they decided to go in this one. Instead of a going with an original villain, or even deciding to use one of the lesser known villains of the past, they decide to go the route that everyone expects. Now, that's not to say the Cumberbatch is bad. Quite the contrary, but the fact Cumberbatch's character is even in the movie is frustrating. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I never wanted Khan in this. It's a cheap way out and incredibly disappointing. You couldn't come up with anyone else? And then, if that wasn't bad enough, this movie has to be like, bizarro Wrath of Kahn. It's like Abrams and co. went, "Hey, you remember in Wrath of Khan where Spock died? We should flip things around in this one and have Kirk die. It'll be awesome". And of course, we also couldn't do without a needless cameo from Leonard Nimoy. I don't hate that they did, but I do hate how they decided to do it.

 

The rest of the cast was good as usual, with the exception of Karl Urban's "Bones". It's been a while since I saw the first Star Trek in 09, and even longer since I've seen any of the original movies, but I don't recall this character being that bad until now. It's like Urban is just playing a character instead of an actual person. Nearly every line of his dialogue is some cliche'd "Bones"ism that gets old quick. Though that's more of an indictment on the scriptwriters than on Urban. And again, maybe it was like that in the first film as well, but I just don't remember it being that bad.

 

 

TL;DR version

 

Solid movie.

Bad Villain choice.

Bones is bad.

IM3 is better.

R.I.P. Star Wars

 

 

[The Burfict Storm 39]

The Great Gatsby. I never read the book.

[OSUViking 505]

I'm not trying to come off as a dick, but you probably did yourself a huge disservice in that regard. I haven't even seen the movie, and I can already conclude that the book is FAAAAAAAAR better than the movie (as awesome as I think Leonardo DiCaprio is).

[SteVo+ 3,702]

I'm not trying to come off as a dick, but you probably did yourself a huge disservice in that regard. I haven't even seen the movie, and I can already conclude that the book is FAAAAAAAAR better than the movie (as awesome as I think Leonardo DiCaprio is).

 

It's an unfilmable novel.

[OSUViking 505]

It's an unfilmable novel.

 

I can completely agree with this. I kind of feel like making it into a film defeats the meaning of the book. That might just be me, though.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

Blindness.

 

Saw the trailers for it back in '08 and was intrigued, but just watched it for the first time last night.

 

Way more intriguing and creepy than I was expecting it to be. Had a feeling of helplessness while watching the movie. Makes you think how critically fucked society would be if a blindess epidemic were to break out lol.

[The Burfict Storm 39]

I'm not trying to come off as a dick, but you probably did yourself a huge disservice in that regard. I haven't even seen the movie, and I can already conclude that the book is FAAAAAAAAR better than the movie (as awesome as I think Leonardo DiCaprio is).

 

Was it supposed to be a love story?

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

The Great Gatsby was a very very good movie, IMO. Toby completely sucks (maybe that's just me) and brought it down a couple notches... But Leo was an amazing Gatsby, and the film really captured the spectacle. Very well done.

 

Also, I am literally laughing over here regarding Vin's review of Star Trek. Just last week he was saying how much he enjoyed seeing everyone complain about Iron Man because he doesn't read the comics.... Well, the tables have turned... Star Trek was AMAZING. Khan was AMAZING. Epic movie, and I will be seeing it again Tuesday night... It was so good, I literally don't know if I would have changed much of anything. The Star Trek universe is quite clearly in competent hands with JJ Abrams.... When all is said and done on this series of films... It may very well be one of my favorites of all time. I like it that much, really. And even though it is fun pouring salt into Vin's wound as he did to me last week, the movie was just awesome from start to finish.

[Vin+ 3,121]

 

Cumberbatch was awesome, I don't have a problem with that. The events of the first film open them up to go in any direction, and instead of going in a new direction, they decide to rehash something that didn't need to be done. And instead of putting an original spin on it and making it their own, they just decided to take key events from the original and flip who does the actions. That's my problem with it. It's lazy and it disappoints me.

 

Still a good movie, though.

Edited May 20, 2013 by Vin