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

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

Jimmy Higgins said:
Being derivative was the best part of that film... which isn't a good thing. There were just too many problems with VII, such as almost nothing could kill anyone. The only thing that kills people seems to be large planet sized guns. Rei, flung up against a tree, plummets 20 feet... just give me a second to catch my breath. Finn split from behind with a light saber... I'll sleep it off. And Han Solo's death is the most anti-climatic death of all film. You know it is coming, but after it happened, it felt a lot like when Anakin finally becomes Darth Vader... and you think... 'that's it?!?!'

And of course, the luck of the plot, how things just work out. Solo finds the Millennium Falcon, an hour after it gets in the air?! There is a piece of map that they don't have any idea where it is located, but they plop it into a larger map and all is well?!

And of course, the derivative nature... or as a college professor would call it... plagiarism, was tedious.

Some people are impossible to please. Others don't like watching a remixed movie sold as a new movie.
These are decent action movies.
Click to expand...
VII sucked hard. It was pretty (A grade stuff), but the script was nonsensical (Treat Williams starring role B movie).

I'll see about VIII when the time comes.
Click to expand...

Wow, in a Star Wars movie, you found a plot hole and/or something unrealistic?

This must be your first Star Wars movie. I'm sorry to hear that you did not enjoy your first ever experience with Star Wars.
 
Underseer said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Being derivative was the best part of that film... which isn't a good thing. There were just too many problems with VII, such as almost nothing could kill anyone. The only thing that kills people seems to be large planet sized guns. Rei, flung up against a tree, plummets 20 feet... just give me a second to catch my breath. Finn split from behind with a light saber... I'll sleep it off. And Han Solo's death is the most anti-climatic death of all film. You know it is coming, but after it happened, it felt a lot like when Anakin finally becomes Darth Vader... and you think... 'that's it?!?!'

And of course, the luck of the plot, how things just work out. Solo finds the Millennium Falcon, an hour after it gets in the air?! There is a piece of map that they don't have any idea where it is located, but they plop it into a larger map and all is well?!

And of course, the derivative nature... or as a college professor would call it... plagiarism, was tedious.

Some people are impossible to please. Others don't like watching a remixed movie sold as a new movie.
These are decent action movies.
Click to expand...
VII sucked hard. It was pretty (A grade stuff), but the script was nonsensical (Treat Williams starring role B movie).

I'll see about VIII when the time comes.
Click to expand...

Wow, in a Star Wars movie, you found a plot hole and/or something unrealistic?
Click to expand...
A plot hole? Something unrealistic? The whole thing suffered from it. It was lazy and ridiculously predictable. And the McDonalds drive thru voice bad guy stupid. You make it sound like I'm whining about how they found Vader's mask and other trite issues.

This must be your first Star Wars movie. I'm sorry to hear that you did not enjoy your first ever experience with Star Wars.
Click to expand...

*meow* [emoji6]

Clearly this is your first time on the Internet and don't realize my opinion is pretty much gospel.
 
Rushmore

This is a movie about a 15 year old kid (who looks 20) who goes to a private academy and falls in love with a first grade teacher. He becomes friends with Bill Murray, who's a lonely millionaire. But then Murray falls in love with the first grade teacher and has an affair with her. Sparks fly.

It's quirky, funny at times, and godawful pretentious. I mean, it's a good movie, but not the 90+ minute film-gasm the critics made it out to be. Maybe it was hipper or something when it came out in 1998.

5/10
 
Blade Runner 2049

Saw this in the theater and then got the digital version. I don't know how this film could've possibly bombed at the box office. I suppose kids nowadays just want to see the same superhero/star wars movie done over and over again instead of something real.
 
My wife and I saw Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri a few weeks back, and were very impressed. It’s full of very dark humor, which we both like. The plot is very simple, but it’s really a character study in different aspects of rage. The acting (Frances McDormand and Woodie Harrelson among others) is superb. Here’s the trailer.

WARNING: NSFW!!

[youtube]Jit3YhGx5pU[/youtube]

Anyway, we liked it so well we looked up other movies by the same writer/director (Martin McDonagh), and the other night streamed his In Bruges. It’s even darker and funnier than Three Billboards. It’s also got more of a plot, I guess. The various elements come together in a kind of surprise ending. But on the whole I think Three Billboards is the more complete movie, with more reliance on acting and character development.

[youtube]KoE9edjEDCI[/youtube]
 
Seven Psychopaths is not bad either. Not a must see, but entertaining nevertheless.
 
Tharmas said:
My wife and I saw Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri a few weeks back, and were very impressed. It’s full of very dark humor, which we both like. The plot is very simple, but it’s really a character study in different aspects of rage. The acting (Frances McDormand and Woodie Harrelson among others) is superb. Here’s the trailer.

WARNING: NSFW!!

[youtube]Jit3YhGx5pU[/youtube]

Anyway, we liked it so well we looked up other movies by the same writer/director (Martin McDonagh), and the other night streamed his In Bruges. It’s even darker and funnier than Three Billboards. It’s also got more of a plot, I guess. The various elements come together in a kind of surprise ending. But on the whole I think Three Billboards is the more complete movie, with more reliance on acting and character development.
Click to expand...

I was bored one night a couple years ago, and caught In Bruges on one of the movie channels. It certainly cured my boredom, and was an unexpectedly good movie. I haven't seen Three Billboards yet, but if it is anything close to In Bruges I am going to have to move it up on my watch list.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Underseer said:
Wow, in a Star Wars movie, you found a plot hole and/or something unrealistic?
Click to expand...
A plot hole? Something unrealistic? The whole thing suffered from it. It was lazy and ridiculously predictable. And the McDonalds drive thru voice bad guy stupid. You make it sound like I'm whining about how they found Vader's mask and other trite issues.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I did not find it predictable at all, which was one of the things that I liked about the movie. It certainly was not the best Star Wars movie, but I found it to be one of the better ones, and would place it just behind the original trilogy.
 
Coco - Pixar back to its best. I cried like a baby. Wonderful. Guessed it's plot twist, but at the end couldn't care less.

Darkest hour - Not as good as I imagined from the trailers, but still good all the same. Feels like a somewhat different take on Churchill.

The Post - as with Lincoln and Bridge of Spies it feels like Spielberg should be working on radio. Good, but I'm really waiting for Ready Player One to see some visuals that make me think I'm watching a movie again.
 
Dawn of the Dead (1978)

I hadn't watched this flick in at least 10 years. I saw a Youtube video going on about the remake from 2004. It was okay, and had some solid moments, but it fell flat for me. Anyway, it got me to thinking about the original and how much I loved it when I was a teenager. So I watched it.

Still holds up. It really goes to shit at the end, and of course it's dated. However, it's story progression and the characters are so well developed given the era it was made in and considering the budget.

It's just so much more human than the 2004 remake. It also has an adventure-movie quality to it that's never been matched by any other zombie film.

And the critique of consumerism is far better communicated than in the remake.

8/10
 
Opoponax said:
Dawn of the Dead (1978)

I hadn't watched this flick in at least 10 years. I saw a Youtube video going on about the remake from 2004. It was okay, and had some solid moments, but it fell flat for me. Anyway, it got me to thinking about the original and how much I loved it when I was a teenager. So I watched it.

Still holds up. It really goes to shit at the end, and of course it's dated. However, it's story progression and the characters are so well developed given the era it was made in and considering the budget.

It's just so much more human than the 2004 remake. It also has an adventure-movie quality to it that's never been matched by any other zombie film.

And the critique of consumerism is far better communicated than in the remake.

8/10
Click to expand...

It's [ent]rarr[/ent] contraction of "it is"
Its [ent]rarr[/ent] possessive form of "it"

[/languagenazi]
 
Mad Max Thynder Road
1/10

No plot or acting. One long car chase in the desert. Seems like Aussies are really into leather and S&M.

The Martion
8/10
Decent Scifi plot with a few twists. OK acting and no overuse of CGI.

Interstellar
01/10
Boring, monotonous, bad acting, and way too long.
 
The Martian
8.5 / 10

Not a great movie by any stretch, but damn good. Standout performances from Sean Bean and Donald Glover.

I hate that we have a special term for "hard science fiction" when it used to be called "science fiction." Meh.
 
Both place he used "It's" can be substituted to say it is..........? Where is it improperly used?
Underseer said:
Opoponax said:
Dawn of the Dead (1978)

I hadn't watched this flick in at least 10 years. I saw a Youtube video going on about the remake from 2004. It was okay, and had some solid moments, but it fell flat for me. Anyway, it got me to thinking about the original and how much I loved it when I was a teenager. So I watched it.

Still holds up. It really goes to shit at the end, and of course it's dated. However, it's story progression and the characters are so well developed given the era it was made in and considering the budget.

It's just so much more human than the 2004 remake. It also has an adventure-movie quality to it that's never been matched by any other zombie film.

And the critique of consumerism is far better communicated than in the remake.

8/10
Click to expand...

It's [ent]rarr[/ent] contraction of "it is"
Its [ent]rarr[/ent] possessive form of "it"

[/languagenazi]
Click to expand...
 
Playball40 said:
Both place he used "It's" can be substituted to say it is..........? Where is it improperly used?
Underseer said:
Opoponax said:
Dawn of the Dead (1978)

I hadn't watched this flick in at least 10 years. I saw a Youtube video going on about the remake from 2004. It was okay, and had some solid moments, but it fell flat for me. Anyway, it got me to thinking about the original and how much I loved it when I was a teenager. So I watched it.

Still holds up. It really goes to shit at the end, and of course it's dated. However, it's story progression and the characters are so well developed given the era it was made in and considering the budget.

It's just so much more human than the 2004 remake. It also has an adventure-movie quality to it that's never been matched by any other zombie film.

And the critique of consumerism is far better communicated than in the remake.

8/10
Click to expand...

It's [ent]rarr[/ent] contraction of "it is"
Its [ent]rarr[/ent] possessive form of "it"

[/languagenazi]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

"...however it is story progression and the characters..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom