• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?

Full disclosure, I haven't seen the movie. I am just going off what people are saying regarding the situation presented.

credoconsolans said:
KeepTalking said:
You were looking at it from the POV that Pratt was not in a terrible situation, that he would live a life of luxury. If that is the case, then his waking up Lawrence was in no way terrible, she would be living a life of luxury as well, so it's all good. If you want to reverse yourself, and say that Pratt was indeed in an untenable situation that would only lead to a life of madness, then that's cool, as it makes him a more sympathetic character, and his actions can be better understood from that viewpoint.
Click to expand...

He would be living a life of luxury with company (robot) but unable to do what he had planned. That is, wake up on a world and have a future. Instead, he has to live and die in a spaceship with no future. Purely bad luck.

SHE also has plans. There was nothing wrong with HER capsule. SHE has a future, so yes, waking her up is an asshole, selfish pig thing to do. To serve as someone's sex slave no less. She has no choice to even be alone. He sees to that.
Click to expand...

After waking her up, does Pratt force her to do anything? Does he force her to have sex with him? If not, it is hard for me to see her as a sex slave.

credoconsolans said:
So, no, sorry, Pratt had it better than her.
Click to expand...

And there's the problem for me. Pratt did not have it better than her. Before waking her up, he had it worse, condemned to a life of solitary confinement. A robot is not a human, and cannot provide the same depth of companionship as a human. After waking her up, they both had it the same, they just arrived at it by slightly different paths. If he abused her after waking her, that would be a different story, but I have seen no indication that this happened in the movie, I could be wrong.
 
KeepTalking said:
And there's the problem for me. Pratt did not have it better than her. Before waking her up, he had it worse, condemned to a life of solitary confinement.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he got a raw deal.
After waking her up, they both had it the same, they just arrived at it by slightly different paths.
Click to expand...
One the consequences of a malfunction, the other, entirely premeditated.
If he abused her after waking her, that would be a different story, but I have seen no indication that this happened in the movie, I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
He played god with her life. Almost anything else he does after that point becomes a bit irrelevant.
 
Saw "Deathtrap" (1982). A lot of good snappy dialogue and a plot that kept me guessing.

8/10
 
Hotel Rwanda 9/10. Remarkably close to the propagandist rhetoric and violent oppression and mass murder that actually occurred. One of the worst modern human driven disasters in a country not deemed internationally profitable enough for either Europe or America to engage in real peacekeeping efforts, so the U.N. sent Belgians with express orders never to engage unless directly fired upon, which never happened so they at times had to watch stone-faced as whole families got dragged into the street and cut apart by machete wielding zealots relying on one part scapegoatism and one part faith to justify it.
 
Finally watched Premature Burial (1962) again. First time since childhood. 5 of 10 stars. Good creepy atmosphere, and a good story, but I was ultimately disappointed because it failed to freak me out.

The problem for me, as an adult, was that the coffins in the film were nothing like modern coffins, where the wakened person wouldn't be able to scarcely move, since the lid seems to close nearly against the body. If a person were to waken in a modern, standard, up-to-techspecs coffin, I imagine the horror would be so intense as to cause a fatal heart event. Thankfully! Unless there are actually some people who are completely free of claustrophobic fear and could actually think and reason in such a situation. I know people who boast that the situation wouldn't bother them all that much, apart from not being able to escape. Yeah. Go 'head and try it, dude. But it's NOT like reality TV, where you know there's a crew standing by to disinter your ass.

Thank goodness for embalming and modern science.

There's a scene in the film where the Miland character dreams he wakens in the coffin. There's this lurid green light, and he has plenty of space to move around. Maybe they made coffins that way back then? But the scene failed to have any real effect. Yeah, I get that they needed light so we could see him in the box - but it just doesn't work that well. When I was a kid it scared the dickens out of me.

The most frightening scene is at the very beginning, where the main character gets handed the lid of a coffin with bloody marks all over it, and then peers into the box to see the cadaver with screaming panic-face. OUCH. That earned my respect. How godawful!

Anyway - my nightmares still occur, but they now have to do with being shipped in a coffin-like compartment across space and time. Fuckin' Sci-Fi bastards! :mad:
 
Independence Day: Resurgence
AKA This is what HBO is for.

From what I remembered, the reviews for this one were awful and expressed much disappointment. But the thing is, the first one was awful. I felt like one of the few people in the world who, when the first one came out, thought it was a crap flick dressed up in amazing special effects and visuals.

Anyway, this one was stupid too. Great special effects coupled with bad dialogue, terrible cliches, and annoying characters. However, it was no dumber than the first. Maybe even slightly less dumb, which means it was a mild pleasant surprise. So it gets two ratings.

1. 3/10 as a movie
2. 8/10 in expectations because it's crappiness wasn't such that it required me to turn it off.
 
William A. Baurle said:
Finally watched Premature Burial (1962) again. First time since childhood. 5 of 10 stars. Good creepy atmosphere, and a good story, but I was ultimately disappointed because it failed to freak me out.

The problem for me, as an adult, was that the coffins in the film were nothing like modern coffins, where the wakened person wouldn't be able to scarcely move, since the lid seems to close nearly against the body. If a person were to waken in a modern, standard, up-to-techspecs coffin, I imagine the horror would be so intense as to cause a fatal heart event. Thankfully! Unless there are actually some people who are completely free of claustrophobic fear and could actually think and reason in such a situation. I know people who boast that the situation wouldn't bother them all that much, apart from not being able to escape. Yeah. Go 'head and try it, dude. But it's NOT like reality TV, where you know there's a crew standing by to disinter your ass.

Thank goodness for embalming and modern science.

There's a scene in the film where the Miland character dreams he wakens in the coffin. There's this lurid green light, and he has plenty of space to move around. Maybe they made coffins that way back then? But the scene failed to have any real effect. Yeah, I get that they needed light so we could see him in the box - but it just doesn't work that well. When I was a kid it scared the dickens out of me.

The most frightening scene is at the very beginning, where the main character gets handed the lid of a coffin with bloody marks all over it, and then peers into the box to see the cadaver with screaming panic-face. OUCH. That earned my respect. How godawful!

Anyway - my nightmares still occur, but they now have to do with being shipped in a coffin-like compartment across space and time. Fuckin' Sci-Fi bastards! :mad:
Click to expand...

Your name is an anagram of "lame burial wail".
 
credoconsolans said:
KeepTalking said:
You were looking at it from the POV that Pratt was not in a terrible situation, that he would live a life of luxury. If that is the case, then his waking up Lawrence was in no way terrible, she would be living a life of luxury as well, so it's all good. If you want to reverse yourself, and say that Pratt was indeed in an untenable situation that would only lead to a life of madness, then that's cool, as it makes him a more sympathetic character, and his actions can be better understood from that viewpoint.
Click to expand...

He would be living a life of luxury with company (robot) but unable to do what he had planned. That is, wake up on a world and have a future. Instead, he has to live and die in a spaceship with no future. Purely bad luck.

SHE also has plans. There was nothing wrong with HER capsule. SHE has a future, so yes, waking her up is an asshole, selfish pig thing to do. To serve as someone's sex slave no less. She has no choice to even be alone. He sees to that.

So, no, sorry, Pratt had it better than her.
Click to expand...

At the risk of extending an already extensive derail, I would like to point out that we all find ourselves awake on a spaceship with no future. And none of us were asked for our consent before being placed in this situation.
 
bilby said:
At the risk of extending an already extensive derail, I would like to point out that we all find ourselves awake on a spaceship with no future. And none of us were asked for our consent before being placed in this situation.
Click to expand...

:boom::boom::boom:

Fuckin' far out (and true). Maybe Passengers was deeper than any of us realized.
 
Entourage - 7/10

Everyone was going on about how this movie sucked so bad that people wouldn't even steal it. I quite enjoyed it, though. It was stupid, shallow and pointless, but that's the entire point of he show. It was mindless fun that was worth watching and it wrapped up the series nicely.

It did remind me that I have no idea who famous people are, however, since I didn't recognize half of the cameos in the film.
 
Business said:
James Bond 007: Octopussy
View attachment 10699
Ahh... the memories. 8/10
Click to expand...

I've stayed at the hotel the India part is recorded in. Shiv Nivas in Udaipur. Every hotel in that city has a screening of Octopussy every night. My room was the suite directly above James Bonds' in the movie. That felt good. The vibe that hotel is going for is preposterous opulence. I never got to the lake palace. My wife got a dodgy stomach. So we had to cancel it. That would have been nice to visit.

I can recommend going to that city. It's incredibly romantic.
 
Ghostbusters (2016) - 5.5/10

I finally got around to watching the new Ghostbusters over the weekend. I caught it on one of the movie channels at like 1am when I couldn't sleep. Unfortunately it wasn't the cure for insomnia that I had heard it would be. It was mildly entertaining, but nothing special. At least it wasn't just a gender-swapped scene for scene rehash of the original movie. It did have a few funny moments, and I liked Kate McKinnon's role, but I dislike Melissa McCarthy so much that it likely took a star or two off of the rating for me. I think the only role I have enjoyed her in is her portrayal of Sean Spicer on SNL.

War Dogs - 7/10

This was the 2nd movie of my Saturday night insomnia double feature, which also failed to lull me to sleep. It is based on a true story, and was fascinating from the point of view of US weapons procurement at the time. Jonah Hill did a great job of portraying a despicable man, but that was also part of the problem with the movie for me. He overshadows Miles Teller's role, and Teller is supposed to be the sympathetic protagonist. I found it hard to sympathize with him, so I was never really emotionally invested in his journey through the film. Yes, he got screwed by Jonah Hill's character, but he kind of deserved it, and probably should have paid more for his part in their schemes.
 
I recently watched "John Wick" at a movie night with friends. I give it about 3/10. The movie is about how Keanu Reeves, who knows thinking what, plays the eponymous character who kills about a zillion people after some guy kills his dog. But he lets the door guy live, so he's not just some psycho, apparently. Features some of the dumbest antagonists ever. One of whom decides to finally (after losing nearly everything) to sell his douchebag son out in exchange for his own life, only to taunt the same killer (Reeves) who he just sold his son out to by killing his friend. Because his friend didn't do what he was told. What, was he worried he'd look weak? Yeah he's weak, his stash got burned, a zillion of his dudes got killed, and he sold out his son! But he has to kill this guy and ruin the peace he just bought with his son's life, for, you know, reasons. And in the end, Reeves gets a new dog, which is exactly the fucking thing he should have done to begin with. Fuck this movie. I'm not letting them choose next time.
 
KeepTalking said:
Ghostbusters (2016) - 5.5/10

I finally got around to watching the new Ghostbusters over the weekend. I caught it on one of the movie channels at like 1am when I couldn't sleep. Unfortunately it wasn't the cure for insomnia that I had heard it would be. It was mildly entertaining, but nothing special. At least it wasn't just a gender-swapped scene for scene rehash of the original movie. It did have a few funny moments, and I liked Kate McKinnon's role, but I dislike Melissa McCarthy so much that it likely took a star or two off of the rating for me. I think the only role I have enjoyed her in is her portrayal of Sean Spicer on SNL.
Click to expand...
What about Spy and Gilmore Girls? Her characters in movies do tend to be a bit over the top.
 
The Lego Batman Movie 6/10. A good bit of throwaway fun.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 - 9/10 Excellent stuff. There must be faults in it, but frankly I couldn't care less. I told myself I wasn't going to buy anymore home media of the MCU but for this I am.
 
Sarpedon said:
I recently watched "John Wick" at a movie night with friends. I give it about 3/10. The movie is about how Keanu Reeves, who knows thinking what, plays the eponymous character who kills about a zillion people after some guy kills his dog. But he lets the door guy live, so he's not just some psycho, apparently. Features some of the dumbest antagonists ever. One of whom decides to finally (after losing nearly everything) to sell his douchebag son out in exchange for his own life, only to taunt the same killer (Reeves) who he just sold his son out to by killing his friend. Because his friend didn't do what he was told. What, was he worried he'd look weak? Yeah he's weak, his stash got burned, a zillion of his dudes got killed, and he sold out his son! But he has to kill this guy and ruin the peace he just bought with his son's life, for, you know, reasons. And in the end, Reeves gets a new dog, which is exactly the fucking thing he should have done to begin with. Fuck this movie. I'm not letting them choose next time.
Click to expand...

I liked it. No, it will never get an academy award but it had some pretty good action scenes. He does love his head shots. Did you not get the fact that the dog was a final gift to him from his deceased wife?
 
I do get that. I still think that around 70 murders is a little excessive a response for that. Also, the antagonist is still stupid no matter where the dog came from. If you sell out your son to obtain peace, you should then keep the peace. If one dude can sacrifice his son in a tactical move to buy time, then the other guy can say to himself "its just a dog."

Also the woman who breaks the rules of the murder hotel, and then is apparently surprised when she gets murdered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom