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

[another1]

Son of Saul 8.9/10

This movie is filmed close-up and it follows the face of Saul, while panning around with a lot of skill as Auschwitz horrors are flawlessly recreated in the background. It has the grey-washed concentration camp movie colors, like a lot of Auschwitz and WWII movies I've seen. Actually most Nazi related movies have that visual effect.

The movie takes place at Auschwitz during a two day period of killing over a thousand people, so it is very graphic but it isn't gory. A lot of bloody scenes are blurry because the camera is more often than not on Saul's face. The actor who plays him wore the thoughts on his face well. I was really impressed with his acting. None of the acting can be complained about. Saul (Géza Röhrigs) has so much talent and I was surprised to see he has no work on IMDB. He looks familiar, he just has that kind of face.

The languages are spoken in German and Hungarian but you could watch it without subtitles and know what is going on if you read the cover of the DVD. I watched another time with subtitles turned on and they seem incorrect and just really bad. If they had an English sound track for the German and subtitled the Hungarian, that would be ideal. This movie made me go on another concentration camp movie binge. Last time it started with The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. Son of Saul is every bit as good as that.

Any concentration camp/WWII moive suggestions?

 

[Sarpedon]

If you haven't seen "Escape from Sobibor," that's a good one, and a rare concentration camp movie with an upbeat ending. Its a made for TV affair, but well done, with Rutger Hauer and Alan Arkin. 7/10

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Watching San Andreas.

46 minutes in

So glad I did not spend money to see this.

SOOOOOOOOOO Glad!

 

[another1]

I found it uncut and in English. Probably going to watch tonight thank you!

 

[Horatio Parker]

Playing for Time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfBwTpRi_C8

Fania Fenelon (Vanessa Redgrave), a classical pianist and singer in Paris, is arrested during the Nazi occupation for her support of the French underground resistance. After being sent to the Auschwitz concentration camp, she is recognized as a famous musician, and becomes a member of the camp's all-female orchestra. Although the group, under the leadership of conductor Alma Rose (Jane Alexander), forms a close bond, the strain of performing for their tormentors grows.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Watching San Andreas.

46 minutes in

So glad I did not spend money to see this.

SOOOOOOOOOO Glad!

What???

You get to see The Rock fly a helicopter, drive a truck, fly an airplane, and even pilot a boat! I was only disappointed that he didn't get to ride a skateboard. How they left out such a crucial element to such a masterful movie is something I still mourn.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Guardians of the Galaxy

A great looking film with great special effects. It was also entertaining even though it hit the 9/10 on the predictability scale about 25 minutes into the movie. The characters are stock, but done better than most stock characters... That's what this movie is: quality stock characters in stock situations doing stock things, with eyeball rolling quirkiness thrown in.

5.75/10

 

[credoconsolans]

Guardians of the Galaxy

A great looking film with great special effects. It was also entertaining even though it hit the 9/10 on the predictability scale about 25 minutes into the movie. The characters are stock, but done better than most stock characters... That's what this movie is: quality stock characters in stock situations doing stock things, with eyeball rolling quirkiness thrown in.

5.75/10

When I first saw the trailers, I thought, "How lame. What a stinker this movie is." Then the movie went on to make half a billion at the box office. People were nuts about the movie, critics gave it great reviews. My friends and family loved it.

So, I thought, OK, maybe I'm wrong.

I went to go see it.

And it turned out to be lame and dumb and I was bored halfway through it. Some great looking scenes, but most of it was unfunny and by-the-numbers.

 

[James Brown]

Guardians of the Galaxy

A great looking film with great special effects. It was also entertaining even though it hit the 9/10 on the predictability scale about 25 minutes into the movie. The characters are stock, but done better than most stock characters... That's what this movie is: quality stock characters in stock situations doing stock things, with eyeball rolling quirkiness thrown in.

5.75/10

When I first saw the trailers, I thought, "How lame. What a stinker this movie is." Then the movie went on to make half a billion at the box office. People were nuts about the movie, critics gave it great reviews. My friends and family loved it.

So, I thought, OK, maybe I'm wrong.

I went to go see it.

And it turned out to be lame and dumb and I was bored halfway through it. Some great looking scenes, but most of it was unfunny and by-the-numbers.

I thought I was the only one.

 

[Shadowy Man]

When I first saw the trailers, I thought, "How lame. What a stinker this movie is." Then the movie went on to make half a billion at the box office. People were nuts about the movie, critics gave it great reviews. My friends and family loved it.

So, I thought, OK, maybe I'm wrong.

I went to go see it.

And it turned out to be lame and dumb and I was bored halfway through it. Some great looking scenes, but most of it was unfunny and by-the-numbers.

I thought I was the only one.

My wife and I rented it at home and I fell asleep in the middle of it.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Pixels

I was pleasantly surprised at the first 20 minutes or so. Then it began to devolve. By the end it's the equivalent of modern video games crawling back into the primordial soup of Pong.

Cool idea, poorly executed. It's what Adam Sandler's headstone should read.

Technically, it took a lot of effort to make this film. That said, it's difficult to understate just how fucking lazy the writing gets after the opening 20 minutes. To be fair, it took some imagination to create classic arcade games into the kind of brought-to-lie manner that this one did, but that applies for one or two scenes. As for the rest, it's the same exact plot and lead character that Sandler has used since Billy Madison and rarely varied from.

Loser is a loser. Loser meets girl. Loser cannot possibly get gorgeous girl. Gorgeous girl somehow sees something in him anyway. Loser wins over girl and wins the day.

The End.

Sandler's been on autopilot for over 20 years now.

And what is Peter Dinklage doing in this? If the script would have been worth a shit, okay. And breaking type is important. But this was the wrong vehicle for him to do that in. And frankly, he sucked in this role anyway. Over the top buffoon is not in Dinklage's repertoire.

It's rare that a film can embarrass you when you're sitting by yourself at home on your couch. This is one of those rare films.

3/10

 

[Colonel Sanders]

When I first saw the trailers, I thought, "How lame. What a stinker this movie is." Then the movie went on to make half a billion at the box office. People were nuts about the movie, critics gave it great reviews. My friends and family loved it.

So, I thought, OK, maybe I'm wrong.

I went to go see it.

And it turned out to be lame and dumb and I was bored halfway through it. Some great looking scenes, but most of it was unfunny and by-the-numbers.

It's in roughly the same category of films like Titanic and Avatar. They're fantastic moneymakers and on first impression people just go apeshit for them. But then when you watch them with the slightest critical eye, that voice inside your head begins to tell you pretty early on, "Hey man, this movie kinda sucks."

 

[James Brown]

Pixels

I was pleasantly surprised at the first 20 minutes or so. Then it began to devolve. By the end it's the equivalent of modern video games crawling back into the primordial soup of Pong.

Cool idea, poorly executed. It's what Adam Sandler's headstone should read.

Technically, it took a lot of effort to make this film. That said, it's difficult to understate just how fucking lazy the writing gets after the opening 20 minutes. To be fair, it took some imagination to create classic arcade games into the kind of brought-to-lie manner that this one did, but that applies for one or two scenes. As for the rest, it's the same exact plot and lead character that Sandler has used since Billy Madison and rarely varied from.

Loser is a loser. Loser meets girl. Loser cannot possibly get gorgeous girl. Gorgeous girl somehow sees something in him anyway. Loser wins over girl and wins the day.

The End.

Sandler's been on autopilot for over 20 years now.

And what is Peter Dinklage doing in this? If the script would have been worth a shit, okay. And breaking type is important. But this was the wrong vehicle for him to do that in. And frankly, he sucked in this role anyway. Over the top buffoon is not in Dinklage's repertoire.

It's rare that a film can embarrass you when you're sitting by yourself at home on your couch. This is one of those rare films.

3/10

I take it as a small matter of pride that I have never seen an Adam Sandler movie.

Yes, yes, there was that one movie he made that was actually not bad (or so people dutifully chime in to tell me.) And that other movie is worth a look.

But if I watched those, then I wouldn't be able to say that I've never seen an Adam Sandler movie.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Guardians of the Galaxy

A great looking film with great special effects. It was also entertaining even though it hit the 9/10 on the predictability scale about 25 minutes into the movie. The characters are stock, but done better than most stock characters... That's what this movie is: quality stock characters in stock situations doing stock things, with eyeball rolling quirkiness thrown in.

5.75/10

Last spring I saw this, and thought it was the best film ever. Re-watched it this year. I have no idea what I liked so much about it last year. Odd how tastes work. I think it was just so much new that I got enamoured by the newness. Now bored with it. It's a terrible story and the characters are paper thin. I do like the slave girl. She's still awesome.

 

[credoconsolans]

When I first saw the trailers, I thought, "How lame. What a stinker this movie is." Then the movie went on to make half a billion at the box office. People were nuts about the movie, critics gave it great reviews. My friends and family loved it.

So, I thought, OK, maybe I'm wrong.

I went to go see it.

And it turned out to be lame and dumb and I was bored halfway through it. Some great looking scenes, but most of it was unfunny and by-the-numbers.

It's in roughly the same category of films like Titanic and Avatar. They're fantastic moneymakers and on first impression people just go apeshit for them. But then when you watch them with the slightest critical eye, that voice inside your head begins to tell you pretty early on, "Hey man, this movie kinda sucks."

Never saw Avatar. I still like Titanic though. It soars for me mostly on the historical accuracy of the event and the actions of the historic characters and the fact the last hour of the movie is in real time. The love story was meh. DiCaprio was cute, but the Edwardian mores of the day and restrictions of upper class women was more interesting where that was concerned.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

It's in roughly the same category of films like Titanic and Avatar. They're fantastic moneymakers and on first impression people just go apeshit for them. But then when you watch them with the slightest critical eye, that voice inside your head begins to tell you pretty early on, "Hey man, this movie kinda sucks."

Never saw Avatar. I still like Titanic though. It soars for me mostly on the historical accuracy of the event and the actions of the historic characters and the fact the last hour of the movie is in real time. The love story was meh. DiCaprio was cute, but the Edwardian mores of the day and restrictions of upper class women was more interesting where that was concerned.

True enough. Titanic's historical re-creations are great and the drama created by the sinking of the ship on the macro end are excellent. It really does capture how terrifying it must have been. But the main characters are one dimensional to the point of being cartoonish.

As for Avatar, you actually have already seen it as long as you've seen any one of the following:

Dances with Wolves
Pocahontas
Fern Gully
The Last Samurai

Or, just watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofca4uUU0_I

 

[credoconsolans]

Never saw Avatar. I still like Titanic though. It soars for me mostly on the historical accuracy of the event and the actions of the historic characters and the fact the last hour of the movie is in real time. The love story was meh. DiCaprio was cute, but the Edwardian mores of the day and restrictions of upper class women was more interesting where that was concerned.

True enough. Titanic's historical re-creations are great and the drama created by the sinking of the ship on the macro end are excellent. It really does capture how terrifying it must have been. But the main characters are one dimensional to the point of being cartoonish.

As for Avatar, you actually have already seen it as long as you've seen any one of the following:

Dances with Wolves
Pocahontas
Fern Gully
The Last Samurai

Or, just watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofca4uUU0_I

So I heard, which is why I never saw it. Good to hear that is confirmed.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Guardians of the Galaxy

A great looking film with great special effects. It was also entertaining even though it hit the 9/10 on the predictability scale about 25 minutes into the movie. The characters are stock, but done better than most stock characters... That's what this movie is: quality stock characters in stock situations doing stock things, with eyeball rolling quirkiness thrown in.

5.75/10

Last spring I saw this, and thought it was the best film ever. Re-watched it this year. I have no idea what I liked so much about it last year. Odd how tastes work. I think it was just so much new that I got enamoured by the newness. Now bored with it. It's a terrible story and the characters are paper thin. I do like the slave girl. She's still awesome.

Guardians of the Galaxy is not a bad movie. I have seen worse. WAY WORSE! It's cute in some places and it's quirky in some places and, personally I had such low expectations of the movie going in that pretty much anything that was pleasant in the movie made me, well, pleasantly surprised. Would I pay to see it again? No. But on a Saturday afternoon in my living room with nothing else on, I would watch it again.

It is a "something to do" movie.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Last spring I saw this, and thought it was the best film ever. Re-watched it this year. I have no idea what I liked so much about it last year. Odd how tastes work. I think it was just so much new that I got enamoured by the newness. Now bored with it. It's a terrible story and the characters are paper thin. I do like the slave girl. She's still awesome.

I learned my lesson rewatching Cool Hand Luke and rereading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. If something's a fond memory, leave it be.

 

[Thomas II]

AIRPLANE! vs ZERO HOUR!