What movie(s) have you seen IX:The Police Academy Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
Then he would still be on screen for more time than Godzilla :mischief: :)
Hey, it works. I'll admit it isn't much if you're coming for Godzilla, but you've got at least a dozen movies worth seeing for that all ready.

This was a good movie first, that had Godzilla in it.
 
romantics anonymous (les émotifs anonymes) (2010)

very fast (80 minute) film that is very fun and cute. I just finished watching it, and I'm not quite sure how I'll think of it in the future, but I really enjoyed it.

I would give it about a 9.5/10 or 9/10, but the last 20 minutes or so was a little bit weak. Just a tad unable to really close out the story, or at least just felt a little bit silly*.

It gets pulled from netflix june 12 I believe, I definitely recommend it. And honestly, I loved the vast majority of the film (it was funny when it needed to be, upbeat, the right level of awkward, etc). If you want to see a romcom, definitely see it.

It's about chocolatiers with severe social anxiety, so some of it is "awkward". That's what i mean when I refer to that, but it's a solid film.

*
Spoiler spoilers below :

Eh, it felt a bit silly at the end with the car chase (like, slapstick? I don't know the right term for that), and the wedding, but hey, what are you going to do.
 
Watched the giant mechanical man (2012)

Pretty good. Jenna Fischer is very good in it, and I like the side characters. The titular giant mechanical man is actually my least favorite (in terms of fitting into the story, and he flip flops between being more sad vs more cynical, etc).

7/10 would be a fair rating.
 
Veronica Mars (2014) tonight.

I recently watched the series, which the series was alright overall (3 seasons). Season 1 was the "freshest" and the best--pretty fun IMO--and turned into mediocrity. But, you know, Kristen Bell is cute and was something to do to kill time.

That being said, the movie surprisingly would be OK without seeing the series. Obviously there is plenty of fanservice, but compared to some terrible movie adaptions (X-files I'm looking at you most specifically), this did pretty well at that balance of "well is the movie going to feel like an extended episode, or a movie [that may or may not be good]"

I liked it, Kristen Bell still a cutie, and they wrapped up all the side characters well. Not devoting too much time to any of them but devoting just enough time.

6.3/10.
 
For D-Day I watched Saving Private Ryan and The Longest Day.

:goodjob:

Oh, man! So did I! We use them as educationals.

The former/ Fritz Nyland ("Ryan") story illustrates a good leadership example in Capt. Miller/ Hanks -- not to mention his final "Earn this!" admonition to Ryan.

That latter Zanuck masterpiece I could teach a week-long course on! From opening to closing credits... What a film.
 
Now that I'm working at the movie theater again, I'll finally get around to seeing movies and talking about them again.

First movie I saw was Edge of Tomorrow in IMAX, and I thought it was great! Funny, well shot, and well acted. The weakest aspect of the entire movie was the ending, but even then, it still worked. Highly recommend.

I just got back from an advanced screening of The Signal as well, since my friend managed to get some tickets for it. And, well, I didn't like it at all. Interesting concept sure, and it's well shot, especially for an indie movie, but everything else was off. It either needed more time, or better pacing, but whatever was missing completely ruined the film, and what should have been serious or mysterious just ended up being funny, and not in a good way. For a 90 minute film, there was a surprising amount of fluff and useless scenes. The ending also completely invalidated like 90% of the preceding movie, so there's that as well.
 
Anyone watched the (2014) 'alien abduction' movie?

I know it likely will be on the crap side of things, but i suppose i could ask (or read the wiki..) :)

Just to answer my own question... Not a good movie at all, couldn't watch more than 20 min, and (spoilered)

Spoiler :
the movie begins with a video-camera falling from a height and just having its lens glass broken as a result, while the data is still collected. Yes, but this time it actually seems to have fallen from an orbiting spaceship :rotfl:
 
...
First movie I saw was Edge of Tomorrow in IMAX, and I thought it was great! Funny, well shot, and well acted. The weakest aspect of the entire movie was the ending, but even then, it still worked. Highly recommend.
Agreed. I always go into "cinema sins" mode when I watch Tom.Cruise films, but I will refrain. On the edge of my seat the whole time and barely touched my "Whoppers"... 8/10 easy.


Though, what ending would you expect from a Tom Cruise film?


Link to video.
 
Watched part of Noah then walked out, one of the stupidest films I've ever seen. Never walked out on a Russel Crowe movie before. On the flip side watched Edge of Tomorrow which I thought was well done and entertaining.
 
I tried to watch Godzilla but gave up after 1 hour (the movie lasts for almost 2 hours).

Noted before, but: They really should have had at least the protagonist be someone mildly interesting.
Spoiler :
Not the son of someone who dies 30 min into the movie, and otherwise is a random soldier.


And Binoche accepted to play a 5 min role? :( How things change.
 
Godzilla was okay. The biggest problem was the abundance of action movie cliches and nonsensical plot devices. Take that dog tied to the tree as Godzilla creates the tsunami for instance. They always throw cute animals in harm's way to keep our attention (Armageddon, Independence Day, etc.) and as we gasp and pray for Buster we don't shed a tear for any people who are actually dying. And the kids trapped on the Golden Gate bridge. I'm so sick of children being the focal points of action sequences. In like half the action sequences, some child's life was in danger, and just like with the dog, it's just an overdone attempt to keep us interested. Besides that, nearly every action sequence involved some character either hanging on for dear life or running from something that'd destroy them. From nuclear radiation to a crashing train, there's something scary for our characters to run from as it chases after them. As for the nonsense, too many things going on didn't make any sense. Take Bryan Cranston demanding to know where is son was when he got captured. But when Godzilla's rival starts raising hell, Cranston immediately spots his son in the back of some random army truck and starts yelling for him. And I could never make sense of why the characters and monsters were where they were, when they were. Basically just stuff happening in different places like the last hour of Transformers 2.

But for some reason most of these issues just made the movie really funny and the monster battling scenes were cool enough that I don't think the movie was that bad. Maybe it's just because I liked Godzilla as a youngster and the 2000 one was so God-awful that this movie was like Citizen Kane in comparison.
 
Godzilla was okay. The biggest problem was the abundance of action movie cliches and nonsensical plot devices. Take that dog tied to the tree as Godzilla creates the tsunami for instance. They always throw cute animals in harm's way to keep our attention (Armageddon, Independence Day, etc.) and as we gasp and pray for Buster we don't shed a tear for any people who are actually dying. And the kids trapped on the Golden Gate bridge. I'm so sick of children being the focal points of action sequences. In like half the action sequences, some child's life was in danger, and just like with the dog, it's just an overdone attempt to keep us interested. Besides that, nearly every action sequence involved some character either hanging on for dear life or running from something that'd destroy them. From nuclear radiation to a crashing train, there's something scary for our characters to run from as it chases after them. As for the nonsense, too many things going on didn't make any sense. Take Bryan Cranston demanding to know where is son was when he got captured. But when Godzilla's rival starts raising hell, Cranston immediately spots his son in the back of some random army truck and starts yelling for him. And I could never make sense of why the characters and monsters were where they were, when they were. Basically just stuff happening in different places like the last hour of Transformers 2.

But for some reason most of these issues just made the movie really funny and the monster battling scenes were cool enough that I don't think the movie was that bad. Maybe it's just because I liked Godzilla as a youngster and the 2000 one was so God-awful that this movie was like Citizen Kane in comparison.

:yup:

Spoiler :
Let alone that Cranston seems to die a scene after he actually collapses along with an iron bridge ( :) ) for the sole reason to have Watanabe tie him to his son and advance the plot so seemlessly :D
 
Agreed. I always go into "cinema sins" mode when I watch Tom.Cruise films, but I will refrain. On the edge of my seat the whole time and barely touched my "Whoppers"... 8/10 easy.


Though, what ending would you expect from a Tom Cruise film?


Link to video.

:lol:

22 Jump Street, saw it tonight, absolutely fantastic. It's literally just the first movie again, but they did such a wonderful job with it. Loved it.
 
:lol:

22 Jump Street, saw it tonight, absolutely fantastic. It's literally just the first movie again, but they did such a wonderful job with it. Loved it.

This is the kind of thing that confuses the hell out of me.

Hangover: Loved it! Totally original, great, funny movie!
Hangover 2: Terrible movie. Literally just the exact same movie over again!

21 Jump Street: Loved it! Great, funny movie!
22 Jump Street: Loved it! Literally just the same exact movie over again!

This isn't just directed at you. My gf has been getting hyped about this movie for the last 6 months, but I've been wary, mostly because the above. The above is also how I imagine she'll react to 22.
 
Suburban Girl (2007)

A lot of it was mediocre and moving towards just being "empty" or "forced" perhaps. As in forcing emotions onto the characters that really wasn't a natural flow or feeling.

But then I was pleasantly surprised that some of the movie was very very good, actually pretty top notch. Now that was only a few moments, but it really made me enjoy the movie a lot more.
Spoiler spoilers :
I really liked in the hospital when Alec Baldwin says he had been drinking the whole time/the hospital scene in general, that the dad of sarah michelle gellar just came up and asked about "is he an alcoholic," and some of how sarah michelle gellar gets successfully angry at the previous patronizing behaviour of alec baldwin's characters


Not that it's really much of a plot to spoil. Sarah michelle gellar forms a romantic relationship with an older man (alec baldwin). It's supposed to be a comedy but it's really not very funny, there is some quirky sarah michelle gellar moments but the parts that are good are actually a more realistic down to earth portrayal of the situation.

Overall mediocre, 6/10, but this probably would be a good film to define an edge between "meh it was alright" and "you know, that one was good".

re: sequels and/or rewatchability

Spoiler brainstorming bs :
It is an odd thing across many movies, and I imagine it also correlates a lot to the "rewatchability" of a movie [which is not going to be well defined].

Hangover, while also slapstick-y, relied quite a bit of what I'll make up a turn for, "situational development". A lot of the humor, for me at least, was just in how the story unwravelled, and now that I've seen that I don't really need to see it again.

21 Jump street had quite a few moments that are just loosely connected to each other. E.g. getting high and tripping, etc. Now I haven't rewatched it, but my gut feeling is that I could and enjoy it.

It's a little bit like how I wouldn't really rewatch some tarantino or coen brother films that are very formulaic to the respective directors, even though I love them. E.g. tarantino has super long conversation seen that has an outburst of violence. I don't think I'd really enjoy the dinner scenes of Django Unchained or Inglorious Basterds again (and inglorious basterds was a bit tidious in the first time around, but meh).

And people do also get tired of the same director using the same style quite often (a few people I know just were tired of coen brother films being "just a giant misunderstanding" and, for example, disliked Burn After Reading for really be the most prototypical coen brother formula.

All this of course is in the context of watching stuff by myself alone, since rewatching a movie that a person has seen with X number of people who haven't seen the movie is a very different experience (particularly if it was chosen and recommended by that person; I'd definitely watch trying to focus on what I really liked to describe in conversation afterwards).
 
This is the kind of thing that confuses the hell out of me.

Hangover: Loved it! Totally original, great, funny movie!
Hangover 2: Terrible movie. Literally just the exact same movie over again!

21 Jump Street: Loved it! Great, funny movie!
22 Jump Street: Loved it! Literally just the same exact movie over again!

This isn't just directed at you. My gf has been getting hyped about this movie for the last 6 months, but I've been wary, mostly because the above. The above is also how I imagine she'll react to 22.

The key here is that 22 Jump Street was fully aware that it was doing the same exact thing again, and played up the fact for laughs. It wasn't like the Hangover where they just did the same movie again and hoped for the best. 22 is a very meta movie.
 
The key here is that 22 Jump Street was fully aware that it was doing the same exact thing again, and played up the fact for laughs. It wasn't like the Hangover where they just did the same movie again and hoped for the best. 22 is a very meta movie.

Doesn't that just fall into lampshading territory though? Sure it's great you're aware that you're literally doing the same thing twice, but does pointing that out change the fact that you're literally doing the same thing twice?

I guess I'll have to watch the movie and report my findings.
 
Doesn't that just fall into lampshading territory though? Sure it's great you're aware that you're literally doing the same thing twice, but does pointing that out change the fact that you're literally doing the same thing twice?

I guess I'll have to watch the movie and report my findings.

Trust me, it's done in a very clever and funny way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom