Rate the last film you watched out of 100 Page 2130

  • Page

    of 2703 First / Last

  • Bremenacht 19 Feb 2013 22:49:19 17,600 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    jonsaan wrote:
    The A Team.

    8/10

    Went into this expecting to hate it. Totally accepted the actors in their roles. Hopefully there will be more.
    I thought it was great. I had a bit of trouble getting used to Neeson, but not for long.
  • Maturin 19 Feb 2013 22:58:20 2,889 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    3/10

    Took my five year old twins to see Wreck It Ralph this afternoon. They enjoyed it.

    I wasn't so keen. The first half an hour was good fun. But once the action moved to Sugar Rush the whole thing got bogged down and became another sentimental Disney movie with nothing very unique about it.

    Didn't like the female space marine character. That's not how a character like that would appear in a game. Jane Lynch was re-doing her usual Glee schtick - too agressive, too masculine - din't work here. Calhoun would have been more feminine in a game, not sounding like John Wayne, and certainly wouldn't have had that sneer.

    I suppose the film wasn't that bad. But it was the worse thing from a movie - it was boring. First film in ages that's had me looking at my watch. And I've enjoyed recent Disney animated output - loved Tangled.

    Great visuals though, especially the snowy/ice-cream section of Sugar Rush.

    Oh and all the classic videogame stuff was a complete tease. If you've seen the trailer you've seen it all. Surprised they didn't get Seth Rogan to play Ralph. Given that Ralph is pretty much every character Rogan plays.

    Edited by Maturin at 23:01:26 19-02-2013
  • Deleted user 19 February 2013 23:15:27
    Not sure you need to spoiler stuff that's heavily featured in the trailers and promo stuff.
  • speedofthepuma 19 Feb 2013 23:30:07 13,266 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I am at odds with everyone about Wreck it Ralph.

    I thought the video game referential stuff was too adult specific and dry, and didn't really engage with it until the second half when it was more of a traditional kids film. I liked Vanelope. About the only thing I agree with was it was a pity to have so much of the film in Sugar Rush, and they wasted the premiss by doing this.

    Overall though I quite enjoyed it

    I've turned off all the avatars and crap, so don't expect me to be impressed by yours.

  • Maturin 19 Feb 2013 23:35:30 2,889 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I agree that some of the videogame references were pointless. Qbert got waaaaay too much screen time.

    I did like Vanelope too. But they needn't have stayed in Sugar Rush. It would have been more interesting to keep things moving to other games.
  • Tomo 20 Feb 2013 00:26:25 13,878 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Not a film review, but tonight I shook hands with Sean Bean after we lost to his quiz team in a tie breaker.

    True story.

    One does not simply beat Sean Bean at quizzes.
  • Max_Powers 20 Feb 2013 00:27:29 1,083 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @TOOTR

    Completely agree about Indie Game: The Movie.

    Don't understand the hate for Fish either. Five fucking years of grueling, uncertain development! I felt sorry for him at one point.

    Most of the guys in this film seemed interesting and the film made me want to explore their games.
  • L0cky 20 Feb 2013 00:27:30 1,498 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    ronuds wrote:
    I clicked to play and the video came up as being private.
    Ugh. That was actually posted by Disney, the muppets.
  • Deleted user 20 February 2013 01:08:50
    Indie Game: the Movie 8/10

    Actually really enjoyed it and feel like it gave me a whole new appreciation of Indie gaming. Part of me thought tee likes of smb and fez involved small teams (10-20 people) not bloody two! Loved the passion and the two smb guys were awesome. Makes me want to give fez another shot.
  • Kosmoz 20 Feb 2013 01:35:45 7,580 posts
    Seen 14 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    L0cky wrote:
    thedaveeyres wrote:
    Oh, and I'd have paid to see the animated short they screen beforehand - 'paper man' or some such. It was fantastic.
    For anyone who hasn't seen it:

    Paperman
    Also known as "Ted Moseby's wet dream"

    Every girl I ever kissed I was thinking of a pro footballer.

  • pistol 20 Feb 2013 12:15:06 13,019 posts
    Seen 7 months ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    The Breakfast Club

    80's classic and seen it countless times.

    Excellent 9/10
  • Deleted user 20 February 2013 13:44:08
    pistol wrote:
    The Breakfast Club

    80's classic and seen it countless times.

    Excellent 9/10
    Classic night of film with ITV4 showing Raging Bull and then The Breakfast Club on BBC.

    Raging Bull 9/10
    THE Breakfast Club 10/10
  • Ultrasoundwave 20 Feb 2013 14:18:55 3,264 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Bremenacht wrote:
    jonsaan wrote:
    The A Team.

    8/10

    Went into this expecting to hate it. Totally accepted the actors in their roles. Hopefully there will be more.
    I thought it was great.
    Completely agree - cant stand these people who say "UGH!, OH-EM-GEE, HOW CAN THEY POSSIBLY FLY A TANK!, THIS MOVIE SUCKS!".

    Morons like that clearly have no idea what 'The A Team' was - it is the very definition of a 'popcorn action movie', switch your brain off and enjoy.

    Unfortunately, someone asked Bradley Cooper about a sequel not long back and he said it wasnt happening because it didnt make enough money. I would personally think that making $180 million off a $110 million budget would be enough to greenlight a sequel.

    True, its not a massive profit, but its not by any means a flop IMO.

    "The worst part is, I'll have to have the break-up sex with myself!"

  • Deckard1 20 Feb 2013 14:23:51 27,069 posts
    Seen 43 seconds ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I thought it was shit personally.
  • evild_edd 20 Feb 2013 14:36:31 3,010 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Thought the A-Team was poor, even for a popcorn flick.

    As for a sequel, I recall reading somewhere that the rule of thumb is that a film needs to take twice its budget to make it profitable, as studios generally spend their budget again to advertise a flick. Of course there are DVD/Blu Ray sales to factor in, and some films do get sequels on the basis that they've a strong home market and late-to-the-party following. Perhaps the A Team didn't have the home video sales needed to justify another.

    No great loss in my opinion.

    Why look, it's a blog:
    http://www.edwardlaven.blogspot.co.uk

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife 20 Feb 2013 14:48:53 7,003 posts
    Seen 57 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Ultrasoundwave wrote:
    cant stand these people who say "UGH!, OH-EM-GEE, HOW CAN THEY POSSIBLY FLY A TANK!, THIS MOVIE SUCKS!".

    Morons like that clearly have no idea what 'The A Team' was - it is the very definition of a 'popcorn action movie', switch your brain off and enjoy.
    So it's moronic to keep your brain on..? Erm..

    Anyhow, I watched The A-Team the other day it's a fucking awful film. It's nonsenscial, boring, lacking in pace, drama or wit with universally dreadful performances from all involved. It's a lumpen, leaden zombie of a film that neatly encapsulates all that is wrong with this kind of luke-warm reheat of a old IP.

    Edited by Pac-man-ate-my-wife at 15:09:56 20-02-2013
  • Ultrasoundwave 20 Feb 2013 14:56:27 3,264 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Well if you're going to quote part of what i said but not quote what i was referring to then yes, it would seem like i'm saying its moronic to keep your brain on.

    :rolleyes:

    "The worst part is, I'll have to have the break-up sex with myself!"

  • RichieTenenbaum 20 Feb 2013 15:01:18 2,180 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Things I really can't stand in modern movies:

    #34 : A lack of pace leading to a lack of tension
    See: A-Team, Die Hard 4.0

    #1: The movement from trying to capture an exaggerated reality to trying to use GGI to make the impossible plausible.
    See: A-Team, Die Hard 4.0
  • craigy Staff 20 Feb 2013 15:02:26 7,497 posts
    Seen 47 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Alastair wrote:
    kalel wrote:

    I would suggest they just failed to capitalise on the opportunity, where many (more) others like Bruce Willis, Travolta, Sam Jackson, Steve Buscemi, Uma Thurman, Harvey Keitel, Ving Rhames, Christopher Walken etc have.

    I hesitate to jump into a film debate as I don't consider myself much on an expert of either films of debating, however, all the names on your list kal were in the same film - Pulp Fiction (Possibly a couple were in Reservoir Dogs, and I know Uma Thurman was in Kill Bill).
    What about the other films he's made - did he have a career boosting effect on those actors - Jackie Brown, Deathproof, Planet Terror, Inglorious Basterds...??
    I think his influence on the ability to boost careers is overinflated a touch:

    - Travolta: I'll give you that Tarantino definitely revived his career, but it's not like he wasn't famous before Tarantino came along.
    - Bruce Willis: already massively famous before Tarantino, and if anything the thing which really gave him a name as a serious actor was The Sixth Sense, as he played against type. In Pulp Fiction he's very much playing within his comfort zone.
    - Samuel L. Jackson: appeared in a Spielberg and a Scorsese before working with Tarantino. Jurassic Park!
    - Steve Buscemi: always been a jobbing character actor. I'd argue he's not a "name" actor, even to this day, and that he was working steady for years and years before Tarantino. I'd say the Coen brothers take more credit for his success.
    - Uma Thurman: hasn't been in a good film since Kill Bill. Did anyone see the train wreck which was Bel Ami? Again, I'd say she's not a "name" actor, and certainly not any more so than before Tarantino.
    - Harvey Keitel: a funny one. Never been part of a massively successful franchise, was working steadily before Tarantino. Made famous by Scorsese.
    - Ving Rhames: probably benefitted with working with Tarantino, as he was mostly doing TV work and small movie roles before Pulp.
  • TOOTR 20 Feb 2013 15:06:52 9,493 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Um so...is A-Team better than Wolverine?

    I gots, I gots to knows I tells ya.

    Uck, Uck,Uck

    Everybody should just calm down a little bit and have a nice cup of tea.

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife 20 Feb 2013 15:12:00 7,003 posts
    Seen 57 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Ultrasoundwave wrote:
    Well if you're going to quote part of what i said but not quote what i was referring to then yes, it would seem like i'm saying its moronic to keep your brain on.

    :rolleyes:
    Okay, I've added the bit you were referring to.

    It still doesn't excuse shit filmmaking, nor does it make someone a moron for calling attention to fucking shit plot devices and crap nonsensical set-pieces.
  • Deckard1 20 Feb 2013 15:14:18 27,069 posts
    Seen 43 seconds ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Stop thinking so much moron!
  • Ultrasoundwave 20 Feb 2013 15:23:10 3,264 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Calling attention to THE A TEAM movie for having scenes (for example) where a tank falls out of a plane, lands in a river and drives away is quite harsh IMO.

    If that happened in Schindlers List, fair enough.......but THE A TEAM movie should not be marked down for it.

    "The worst part is, I'll have to have the break-up sex with myself!"

  • nickthegun 20 Feb 2013 15:30:48 58,782 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Samuel L. Jackson: appeared in a Spielberg and a Scorsese before working with Tarantino. Jurassic Park!
    A bit disingenuous there! He even worked with eddie murphy and spike lee! All bit parts, all of little consequence apart his turn as a crackhead in jungle fever.

    Pulp Fiction allowed him to open the taps and he turned Jules into a force of nature. It absolutely put him on the map.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Deleted user 20 February 2013 15:32:12
    Yes it should. It absolutely should. Action scenes, even in brainless movies, still have to make some semblance of reality, otherwise you might as well be watching a Road Runner cartoon. The tank scene was ludicrous in almost every way. It was poorly orchestrated, badly filmed and had terrible, terrible CGI. Literally every single second of it ended up going "I AM A MOVIE, I AM A MOVIE, YOU ARE WATCHING A MOVIE". Even the original TV show would have blinked in disbelief at that.

    Kinda wonder how you feel about Indy 4's Fridge Nuke scene, to be honest.
  • Phattso Moderator 20 Feb 2013 15:35:36 13,195 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Actually, much as I have a soft spot for the new A-Team movie (yeah, I will be going to hell) even I baulked at the tank scene. Didn't ruin the movie for me mind you.

    I'm gonna be really upset if there aren't a whole bunch of posters in here tomorrow rating the Sony reveal conference video out of 100, by the way.
  • nickthegun 20 Feb 2013 15:37:49 58,782 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Alastair wrote:
    did he have a career boosting effect on those actors - Jackie Brown, Deathproof, Planet Terror, Inglorious Basterds...??
    Christoph Waltz and Fassbender for certain and Kurt Russell was quite well received in Death Proof.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • mrpon 20 Feb 2013 15:39:00 28,416 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    ...on the end of steel pipe.

    Give yourself £5 or ½ gig, you're worth it.

  • Mr_Sleep 20 Feb 2013 15:40:14 16,838 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    meme wrote:
    Yes it should. It absolutely should. Action scenes, even in brainless movies, still have to make some semblance of reality, otherwise you might as well be watching a Road Runner cartoon. The tank scene was ludicrous in almost every way. It was poorly orchestrated, badly filmed and had terrible, terrible CGI. Literally every single second of it ended up going "I AM A MOVIE, I AM A MOVIE, YOU ARE WATCHING A MOVIE". Even the original TV show would have blinked in disbelief at that.
    I have a very similar problem with the scenes in Die Hard 4.0 where he crashes a car into a helicopter and that ludicrous scene near the end with the lorry and the aeroplane. So unnecessary and farcical that it makes me cringe and breaks any suspension of belief. It makes the film less enjoyable, which is presumably not the point.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • LeoliansBro 20 Feb 2013 15:41:08 43,170 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Not sure Tarantino was the making of Fassbender. And I don't think Waltz is allowed to make films that aren't directed by Tarantino ;)

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Page

    of 2703 First / Last

Log in or register to reply