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

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

PLANET OF THE APES and BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES. The sequal just as good as the original. I think there are more sequals just as refreshing as the original with Chuck Heston. James Francicus shines in the sequal, as does the female lead as does Kim Hunter.
Both rated. 9/10

Planet of the Apes (1968)
Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)
Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971)
Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972)
Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973)

Five originals. All awesome. I love how they continously made it more and more blatant as the series progressed that it was about the evils of racism, because people just didn't get it. It was certainly a different time back then.
 
Mad Max: Fury Road

What fantastic imagery! I'm not really a fan of action movies, but holy crap. The real stunts and minimal CGI that was done so well in this movie hopefully inspires future filmmakers to step away from the blue screen a little more and do the more difficult work that those who came before them did. Not that CGI doesn't have its place, but it's become the fast food of the movie industry. There's rarely any consideration of whether or not to use CGI, it's just what's done. So anyway, the action is kickass.

As for the rest, well, it depends on how you look at it. If you're there to see action, it's the greatest movie since I don't know when. If you're there to see a tight script, the realistic limits of human capability, and a well told story, then the Frog and Toad are Friends series is probably a better bet.

One of the worst sins in storytelling and therefore movie making is clumsy expository work. And as far as that goes, this movie has the grace of a one legged Frankenstein's monster. Star Wars did it best when in the beginning of the movie it presents you with what's going on. The words scroll up the page and set the viewer up to settle in and watch what happens. This movie could have been made so much better by spending about two minutes doing something similar. Instead, it's crammed with a bunch of clunky and awkward dialogue that's just lame.

Also, some of the action could have been sacrificed for the same purposes. Ten minutes less of action and ten minutes more of good writing could have made this movie truly great. Instead it's filled with multiple moments of "Why didn't he/she just kill that man/woman?" The character's abilities and behaviors are mind numbingly inconsistent and the plot/device holes are enough to drive all those super cool cars, trucks, motorcycles, and other contraptions through side by side. Just egregious.

5.5/10
 
Kingsmen - Interesting film. I walked into it thinking it was PG-13. After not too long of a while, became quite clear it was R. The movie is entertaining and goes over the top a bit. The warnings of graphic violence should not go unheeded. At one point the movie leaves the viewer wondering, should I laugh, should I find this disturbing, wtf?! Overall, they crammed a lot into two hours. The movie didn't lag or anything, it just felt like a lot of ground was covered in the film length. Pretty good over all. To sumise the film in two words, "It's British". 3 of 4

River of No Return
- Marilyn Monroe and Robert Mitchum star in this film about a river that only flows one way. It's the typical love story, couple finds father and boy, shit happens, then the plot is inexplicably forced along to get to a certain conclusion. And then the ending ending just makes you scratch your head and wonder what the original plan was. Everything else about the film is fine. However, the main driving force of the film seems to suffer from too much arbitrary intervention by the script writer to make things just so. 2.5 of 4
 
Has Solo is gone.

Abrams made a really bad movie.

Good Idea Disney get your money now. The Story is ruined forever.

We always knew the real star was Luke Skywalker. Great beard.

Could have cut yourself on the faces of most starring in this one.

Can anyone say derivative? A spherical robot doesn't cut it.

Episode one is now number six. (for those who forget it was 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, so what is this seven thing.)

Han's kid had to be a spoiled brat. More over Jar Jar Binks.
 
Unbroken, 7/10: Directed by Angelina Jolie, this is the story of the remarkable life of Louie Zamperini. At a young age, he competes in 5,000 meter race at the 1936 Olympics in Munich. By 1941 he has enlisted in the US air corp. Trouble starts when his plane ditches at sea where him and two other survivors drift in the sea for 47 days. one of the survivors passed away during this time. They are picked up by the Japanese and held in POW camps where they endure horrific treatment at the hands of their captors, one of which is particularly brutal. It is an interesting story but it's not a particularly captivating or entertaining film but I am glad I watched it as it really is incredible what this man (and many others) endured during wartime.
 
Unbroken, 7/10: Directed by Angelina Jolie, this is the story of the remarkable life of Louie Zamperini. At a young age, he competes in 5,000 meter race at the 1936 Olympics in Munich. By 1941 he has enlisted in the US air corp. Trouble starts when his plane ditches at sea where him and two other survivors drift in the sea for 47 days. one of the survivors passed away during this time. They are picked up by the Japanese and held in POW camps where they endure horrific treatment at the hands of their captors, one of which is particularly brutal. It is an interesting story but it's not a particularly captivating or entertaining film but I am glad I watched it as it really is incredible what this man (and many others) endured during wartime.

It could have been great but it was unnecessarily melodramatic and the hokey cliches pushed the limits of my endurance. Still, like you said (more or less), it's worth watching because much of it is pretty good.
 
Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief

8/10
 
The Danish Girl I think once again Eddie Redmayne nailed it. Loosely based on the life of Lili Elbe. I found it really enjoyable (but sad) and my 12-yo daughter just loved it.
 
I wish someone would send Ben Afleck to Mars and leave him there! Is this guy the worst actor in existence, or is that just my opinion? :)

Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms.

- - - Updated - - -

I rate him worst than Adam Sandler, no wait, Sandler is the worst actor in the galaxy. Affleck is the worst on earth, along with that bimbo Tara Reid.
Is Sandler a bad actor or just casted in poorly written films that seem to make too much money? Didn't he get good reviews for Punch Love Drunk?

Affleck at best is passable as an actor. I'm not certain who the worst mainstream Hollywood actor is. Not even certain how to judge it.

Sly Stallone, hands down, and whatever you do, don't let him produce, write, direct, and star in the same film, then you end up with a travesty like The Expendables.
 
I agree about First Blood. I liked Rocky too. Trying to squeeze more money out of a concept just turns into him making cartoon characters.
 
What We Do in the Shadows

This is an offbeat film about Vampires that does a great job of lampooning both Vampire myths as well as the annoyingly hip. It has nothing to with the recent Vampire craze. It's absurd realism that takes a moment to tune into, but once you do it's really good and really funny.

The vampires are a bunch of out of touch weirdos, utterly confused by modern life, and range in age from 180 to 8,000 years old. They squabble over household chores, dating, and pretty much everything else. The movie cracks on almost every single Vampire myth and does so intelligently and throughout. It's hard to encapsulate the move briefly though.

Just see it.

8/10
 
What We Do in the Shadows

This is an offbeat film about Vampires that does a great job of lampooning both Vampire myths as well as the annoyingly hip. It has nothing to with the recent Vampire craze. It's absurd realism that takes a moment to tune into, but once you do it's really good and really funny.

The vampires are a bunch of out of touch weirdos, utterly confused by modern life, and range in age from 180 to 8,000 years old. They squabble over household chores, dating, and pretty much everything else. The movie cracks on almost every single Vampire myth and does so intelligently and throughout. It's hard to encapsulate the move briefly though.

Just see it.

8/10

Do they say "Blah blah blah"?
 
Terminator: Genisys
6/10

Ok, by now everyone who even remotely cares about the Terminator movies knows this one is a shitty sequel and nowhere near the first two. But actually, watching the movie with expectations set appropriately, what it ended up being was still kind of an okay popcorn scifi action flick. It's main fault is that it focuses too much on stupid time travel technobabble and offers absolutely nothing over any other modern action movie: when you've seen one CGI fight scene with superpowered robots, you've seen them all, so don't expect more from Genisys than yawns. Rest of my pet peeves contain spoilers... and really, the only reason you might want to watch this movie is to see what happens so I would feel bad about ruining it.

Ok, so it's a sequel bait. Everyone survives, and Arnold gets a pokemon-style "upgrade". I guess they should realize that Arnold is getting too old to play this fucking part. But then again, Arnold dying heroically at the end would also be a stupid-ass cliche so I guess it would be really hard to get right. It's incredibly annoying that they write a movie with sequel in mind, but don't have a clear idea what it'll be other than round six against Skynet. The writers didn't even bother explaining who the hell sent the terminator from the future, probably thinking that they can wing it if and when they do the sequel. That's just lazy. And really, the time travel shit ... they don't evne bother makng it consistent anymore or thinking it through. It has pretty much every stupid movie time travel cliche crammed together that you can think of: Kyle Reese having memories of a past he never had, then implanting his younger self with those same memories even if they just thought they stopped Skynet for good, and most certainly prevented the John Connor that he knew from being born. People saing how thinking about time travel makes their "head hurt". Star Trek technobabble. And apparently building time machines is at the same time super-easy and for some reason only our heroes or the villains have one. And time travel at the same time somehow changes the future and doesn't without any kind of consistency.

And really, it's that consistency that sets it apart from the first two movies. The original Terminator had past that couldn't be changed. Skynet tried to kill John Connor by sending a terminator to the past, but all it did was cause John Connor to be born in the first place. The sequel turned this upside down, and changed the rules but it was still consistent internally within that one movie: the future could be changed and there is no fate. The problem is that those pretty much exhaust all the options. When you try to mix and match, all you get is a horrid mess, which itself wouldn't be a problem if the entire premise of the movie didn't depend on it. For example, why the hell would Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese travel just moments before the Skynet comes online? Why not, say, five years in advance? Or heck, if there was a chance that world was going to end in 1997, why not travel there just to be sure and if it turns out Kyle is right and it's really 2017 then you get twenty year head start. That's just bad planning.

Speakign of silly technology, the first two movies were great because they pretty much just had the heroes deal with tech and weapons they can find in our time. Only anachronisms were the terminators. But now there are time machines and factories that make T1000s and sentient AIs with lifelike holographic projectors like it's nothing, and those magic superweapons are what bring the villains down, so it doesn't feel as grounded. It just feels like a cartoon. And also, if Skynet is an AI, wouldn't it be easily replicated to any number of places around the globe, so what would blowing up one building really do?

 
The Hundred-Foot Journey, 5/10; Stars Helen Mirren, usually worth watching. The story kicks off about a displaced family from India who's fate takes them to France (via England) and the family open an Indian restaurant across the street (100 feet) from Helen Mirren's Michelin star restaurant. A less than friendly rivalry ensues between the proprietors but all ends well when Helen discovers the chef at her competitor knows a thing or two about cooking and takes him under her wing. A pretty bland feel good movie that was too long and some dopey scenes in it.

And no, Helen did not get her kit off. She's in her 60's FFS you pervs !
 
Back
Top Bottom