Thread Rating:
  • 7 Vote(s) - 3.14 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Movie Reviews
#41
(2014-11-23, 12:52 PM)Chris D Wrote: John Wick...not a bad movie...perhaps a touch more violent than I thought it was gonna be..and it wasn't the right movie for my wife to see (she was very uncomfortable at one of the scenes, and almost left the movie)

easy theme...man out for revenge...kicks a lot of ass.

I'll give it a 7 out of 10

I'm guessing the scene with the dog? Question is would u have left with her? Laugh for the sake of one scene, cover your eyes or I'll meet ya at home lol movies are too expensive nowadays to walk out on ain't nobody got time for that lol Wink
Reply
Thanks given by:
#42
yep...it upset her a lot.

..and yes...I would have had to leave with her,
Reply
Thanks given by:
#43
Lol...

I watched Pacific Rim last night.

Good thing for the pre-film cannon.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#44
Watched the third Hunger Games movie... I wasn't impressed. I thought the first two films were just okay, but this one was a notch below. It kind of reminded me of Matrix Revolutions. The shots of non-Philip Seymour Hoffman were rather distracting, and I'm questioning the casting choice of Julianne Moore. The rest of the cast was great though, as they have been throughout the series.

I still enjoyed the movie, but I really only found the last quarter of it to be really entertaining.

6/10
 'The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.'
Reply
Thanks given by:
#45
Well what makes the hunger games movies exciting are the crazy traps/twists in the arenas. The overall plot, characters, etc are fairly weak.

The third movie was almost all focused in that political plot, so it was weaker than the other movies because it lacked the primary elements of excitement that made the other two decent.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#46
don't really have any interest in seeing any of the hunger games movies.. gonna try to go see Dumb & Dumber tomo night.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#47
(2014-11-25, 10:13 PM)tmleafer Wrote: Well what makes the hunger games movies exciting are the crazy traps/twists in the arenas. The overall plot, characters, etc are fairly weak.

The third movie was almost all focused in that political plot, so it was weaker than the other movies because it lacked the primary elements of excitement that made the other two decent.

That's a great point. There really hasn't been much character development at all throughout the series. A perfect example is the Liam Hemsworth character (Gail I think?). He shows up for brief periods in the first two films as some sort of love interest of Katniss' but in the third one, he's a central character who's apart of some Navy Seal Team 6 group. I feel like his character was really forced on us in the third film, and I never really liked the Peta character either.

It's funny because in the second film, I actually liked the political aspect of the movie (the first half) more then the actual stadium portion. That's why I thought I would like this one more.
 'The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.'
Reply
Thanks given by:
#48
(2014-11-25, 10:13 PM)tmleafer Wrote: Well what makes the hunger games movies exciting are the crazy traps/twists in the arenas. The overall plot, characters, etc are fairly weak.

I actually hated that aspect. Would have much preferred a more bare-bones lord of the flies arena. I find the gimmicky arena to be too much of a cop-out for the writer.

Someone is about to die, no problem, we'll have a sponsor air drop the medicine you need. Someone is about to win, no problem, we'll create a wall of fire and kill or burn everyone bad. Or set off a killer gas. There's no buildup of anticipation for me in that. Fabricated tension.. bleh.

Haven't seen the third yet..
Reply
Thanks given by:
#49
I would say put the third movie in the "watch at home" pile.

I also dont necessarily like supporting these movies that are splitting up ultimately small pieces of source material into multiple movies in order to maximize profit (The Hobbit being another example). I wouldnt have gone to see this if my GF hadnt been pushing for it.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#50
Also people, put spoiler tags in your reviews, please lol. We don't need to know if a movie has a twist etc.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#51
without seeing it yet, I figure Mockingjay pt 1 is going to be a let down, because it is half of a complete story...it is setting up for the finale. Much like Harry Potter Deathly Hollows pt 1, it ends at a point that is not a natural ending.

It may have to be seen at home, with pt 2 right after it.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#52
(2014-11-26, 08:22 PM)Singh66 Wrote: Also people, put spoiler tags in your reviews, please lol. We don't need to know if a movie has a twist etc.

I was thinking the same thing about that mention of a twist.

btw, I apologize if my hunger games complaints were too revealing.. but they're a few years old now, whereas odin's post is about a movie just a few weeks released in theatres.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#53
I saw Interstellar last night on 35mm (the only way to see it outside of 70mm) and I thought it was an outstanding cinematic experience. Paid $6 as a member of the Mayfair theatre I feel sorry for all the people who've been hoodwinked into paying $12-$18 to watch it in Shitigal. Projected by some pimply kid following a bullit list of instructions on a notepad. The bulb probably too dim, but it saves money on replacement fees, the sound, so important in this film, poorly broadcasted through the PA.

*sigh*

For Ottawa folks, you still have a few more days to see Interstellar the way it's meant to be seen. For others, google Interstellar film 35mm and 70mm projection and find a list of theatres showing it in that format in your city.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#54
I can't sit in those old theatre seats for a full movie.. its literally painful. Let alone a 3 hour movie like Interstellar.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#55
Watched 'Chronicle' last night.

I really liked it.

I'm a sucker for the super-powers films.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#56
(2014-11-28, 10:07 AM)Seamus Wrote: I saw Interstellar last night on 35mm (the only way to see it outside of 70mm) and I thought it was an outstanding cinematic experience. Paid $6 as a member of the Mayfair theatre I feel sorry for all the people who've been hoodwinked into paying $12-$18 to watch it in Shitigal. Projected by some pimply kid following a bullit list of instructions on a notepad. The bulb probably too dim, but it saves money on replacement fees, the sound, so important in this film, poorly broadcasted through the PA.

*sigh*

For Ottawa folks, you still have a few more days to see Interstellar the way it's meant to be seen. For others, google Interstellar film 35mm and 70mm projection and find a list of theatres showing it in that format in your city.



its a must see if you've got a 70mm imax in your town.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#57
Watched "What We Do in the Shadows" last night.

Vampire-spoof movie, but pretty well done....only character most casual movie/TV watchers would know is Jemaine Clement from "Flight of the Conchords".

It was actually pretty funny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv568AzZ-i8
Reply
Thanks given by:
#58
(2014-11-27, 12:03 PM)Chris D Wrote: without seeing it yet, I figure Mockingjay pt 1 is going to be a let down, because it is half of a complete story...it is setting up for the finale. Much like Harry Potter Deathly Hollows pt 1, it ends at a point that is not a natural ending.

It may have to be seen at home, with pt 2 right after it.

At least HP and the Deathly Hollows is a 750+ page book. It was a money grab, but had they made a stand alone movie it probably would have felt pretty rushed and had to cut a lot of details.

Mockingjay is UNDER 400. It's like the Hobbit, there simply isnt enough material to warrant multiple movies.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#59
(2014-11-27, 04:47 PM)RyeRocks Wrote:
(2014-11-26, 08:22 PM)Singh66 Wrote: Also people, put spoiler tags in your reviews, please lol. We don't need to know if a movie has a twist etc.

I was thinking the same thing about that mention of a twist.

btw, I apologize if my hunger games complaints were too revealing.. but they're a few years old now, whereas odin's post is about a movie just a few weeks released in theatres.

Mayfair upgraded their seats a while ago. They ain't so bad.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#60
(2014-11-28, 03:23 PM)ReservoirDog Wrote:
(2014-11-28, 10:07 AM)Seamus Wrote: I saw Interstellar last night on 35mm (the only way to see it outside of 70mm) and I thought it was an outstanding cinematic experience. Paid $6 as a member of the Mayfair theatre I feel sorry for all the people who've been hoodwinked into paying $12-$18 to watch it in Shitigal. Projected by some pimply kid following a bullit list of instructions on a notepad. The bulb probably too dim, but it saves money on replacement fees, the sound, so important in this film, poorly broadcasted through the PA.

*sigh*

For Ottawa folks, you still have a few more days to see Interstellar the way it's meant to be seen. For others, google Interstellar film 35mm and 70mm projection and find a list of theatres showing it in that format in your city.



its a must see if you've got a 70mm imax in your town.

You got to see a 70mm print? Lucky you!

I'm hoping to see it again before it leaves the theatre. It didn't feel like 3hours to me.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)