What I've Been Watching: The Catch-All Film Thread

NewDArt said:
I guess that means Metacritic and IMDb, yet again, "disproves" a certain theory ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're saying here, because the IMDB for the new one is a lot lower than the first one at this stage. And the ratings tend to fall over time rather than rise as all the biggest fans go to see it sooner.

I haven't seen it yet and am not sure I will in the cinema this time as I finally feel like I'm a bit too old for this kind of movie now. I only really saw the first one out of mostly curiosity. I quite liked the first one, but, no, I wouldn't call it an 8/10 (which is its current IMDB average), but I can see why it has that score, there's an awful lot of rabbid Star Wars fans out there that have been starved of a decent movie for a very long time.

I see from your later post that you've rated the new one 8/10, which is remarkably close to its current IMDB score of 7.6/10. For a moment there I thought you'd be giving it some bizarre rating for the sole sake of continuing a forum point. My God, do people actually do that? Well, at least you've proved you're not one of them.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
4,778
Interesting tweet thread here - https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/944694860531068930.html

If you don’t like #TheLastJEdi because you have a negative emotional response to it, or you feel frustrated by it or unsatisfied by it, that response is valid.

#TheLastJedi IS an upsetting, unsettling movie – one that upends so much of what’s come before. Maybe it isn’t for you. There’s nothing wrong if that’s the case.
But what does tire me are viewers who go out of their way to point out “plot holes” or apply weaponized YouTube-caliber snark to identify “everything wrong with [insert movie]” as if they’re approaching a film like a math problem. They want to “solve” the film, not review it.

I once knew someone who hated Doctor Zhivago because Zhivago could never have written poetry in his Siberian chalet in winter. Why? Because the ink would have frozen! Therefore the entire film had to be dismissed as junk. Don’t be that person. #TheLastJedi
Are there valid criticisms against Zhivago? Of course! Talk about a story where every character is related. A story which, as Roger Ebert once put it, goes “from nowhere to nowhere.” (But doesn’t life, really?) Which overuses Lara's Theme and underuses the (better) main theme.

That’s all fine to point out. And you can still love Doctor Zhivago even by acknowledging those flaws (love isn’t best when it’s blind, but when you see the flaws and still love that thing or person anyway). But don’t dismiss Doctor Zhivago because the ink should have frozen.

Let’s not confuse that with film criticism, guys. These folks are the 21st Century equivalent of the “let’s pick it apart” viewers who Hitchcock dismissed way back when as “the plausibles,” people for whom suspension of disbelief depends upon airtight literalism. #TheLastJedi
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,953
lackblogger said:
I see from your later post that you've rated the new one 8/10, which is remarkably close to its current IMDB score of 7.6/10. For a moment there I thought you'd be giving it some bizarre rating for the sole sake of continuing a forum point. My God, do people actually do that? Well, at least you've proved you're not one of them.
Click to expand...

Is it really rated that high on IMDB? I'm surprised. It's currently at 4.7 on Metacritic which, imo, is closer to what it deserves.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,395
Location
Florida, US
JDR13 said:
Is it really rated that high on IMDB? I'm surprised. It's currently at 4.7 on Metacritic which, imo, is closer to what it deserves.
Click to expand...

Do people use Metacritic for movies? I had no idea. Maybe I did know but have since forgotten? Anyway, I use IMDB for movies and Metacritic for games. I feel sure I'm not alone in this, but maybe I'm wrong. I could imagine a lot of gamer anger being vented at Star Wars after the Battlefront Loot Box fiasco, which might be a factor there. I still haven't got used to visiting Rotten Tomatoes as I don't really understand their binary rating system. They have it as 91% 'fresh' but a critic 'score' of 8.1/10, while their users rate it only 51% 'fresh' but 'score' it 3.1/5 (which would be 6.2/10), its like their own site contradicts itself, lol.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
4,778
JDR13 said:
Bright - 4/10

I rarely find myself siding with critics over fellow moviegoers, but, my god… what a terrible movie.

I went in with a positive attitude and some expectations after seeing how high the user reviews are. I was left scratching my head and wondering if I had watched the same movie so many others were raving about.

Utterly cliche and predictable to the extreme, and that's probably being too kind.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that, because I tried to watch Bright last night and had much the same experience.

It was supposed to be almost twice as good as Bladerunner!

I almost turned it off in the first 12 minutes then thought I'd push on a bit but god-damn this movie fucking sucks.

I don't even want to talk about it.

1/10
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
2,993
Location
Australia
That breaks the world, SirJames!

We need more Brights than can ever be assembled - millions so we can make trillions more!

We should own the stars!
 
NewDArt said:
That breaks the world, SirJames!

We need more Brights than can ever be assembled - millions so we can make trillions more!

We should own the stars!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I made it far enough into the movie to get the reference but if you want to contemplate owning the stars I'd recommend a vastly superior movie from 1974 called The Little Prince.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
2,993
Location
Australia
SirJames said:
I'm not sure I made it far enough into the movie to get the reference but if you want to contemplate owning the stars I'd recommend a vastly superior movie from 1974 called The Little Prince.
Click to expand...

Little Prince is vastly superior to Blade Runner 2049?

I'll take your word for it.

I bet the dialogue is better, at least ;)

But it's interesting that you expected a movie almost twice as good as another movie you've obviously never seen.
 
SirJames said:
I'm not sure I made it far enough into the movie to get the reference but if you want to contemplate owning the stars I'd recommend a vastly superior movie from 1974 called The Little Prince.
Click to expand...

Or just watch 1988's Alien Nation which was obviously the primary influence for Bright but was a hell of a lot more original.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,395
Location
Florida, US
Bright made me fall asleep inside of 20 minutes, and I awoke refreshed. Glad I didn't have to see any more of the damn thing, though.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
NewDArt said:
Little Prince is vastly superior to Blade Runner 2049?

I'll take your word for it.

I bet the dialogue is better, at least ;)

But it's interesting that you expected a movie almost twice as good as another movie you've obviously never seen.
Click to expand...

I was hoping you'd say "I was talking about blade runner" then I could say "so was I :("

Honestly, though, as underwhelming as bladerunner was it did get a lot right. The sound and visuals were awesome, the holograph girlfriend, and how about seeing Robin Wright again?!

You know, I just started day dreaming about The Princes Bride and how she could have been far more famous then considered the recent Hollywood sex scandals and maybe she just didn't want to watch Elves in the shower to get gigs.

PS… As for The Little Prince, it was based on a favourite childhood book of mine and I would say the story is superior to new bladerunner. Of course, the special effects are not from 2018, like new star wars, but it is still a childrens movie so you should enjoy it :p

It's a sci-fi about seeing things from outside the box told from the perspective of an alien prince from a strange world on a journey through the stars. It's even got Gene Wilder in it! I'll give it 9/10 because the book was better. =)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
2,993
Location
Australia
I've never been an huge x-men fan or anything like that, but I had heard so many good comments of wolverine films that I had to see whether those were true.

First of all I will say that even as someone who usually don't care much about superhero type films, I found these films extremly enjoyable. I think it is partly because wolverine is not writen like a typical superhero character. He is a really relatable antihero.

Secondly I will have to give huge praise to Hugh Jackman who brought him to life in such vivid and lifelike manner. Both X-Men Origins: Wolverine and the Wolverine are definitely worth of checking out, but the final chapter of wolverine journey is where things get really intresting. Logan really blew my mind. I don't think I've ever seen a superhero film of such raw quality. It is a perfect ending to the wolverine saga.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,469
Logan was indeed great :)

The other two were crap, though.

But to each his own and all that.
 
It's amazing to think that Huge Jackman has played Wolverine in 9 big movies now (though two were only cameos). That's quite an achievement. I've quite enjoyed all of them as well (not seen Apocalypse yet, but that's a cameo one), though I'd agree slightly with dart and suggest the first Wolverine solo movie was the one that could easily be described as the crap one. The second wasn't so bad relatively.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
4,778
NewDArt said:
Logan was indeed great :)

The other two were crap, though.

But to each his own and all that.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not going to argue that first two wolverine fims were on the same level since they weren't, but just they are worth of checking out. Atleast for me those earlier films were meaningfull experiences as watching them let me understand Wolverine as a character better. In those films, he is still in his prime kicking ass. Not to mention that the first film told his orgins story. Finally to see him in Logan drained, old and sickly was a like punch in the gut. The ending felt really powerfull and afterwards I just sat silently listening credits song (which happened to be Hurt by johnny cash. A brilliant music choise there :))
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,469
Dez said:
Well I'm not going to argue that first two wolverine fims were on the same level since they weren't, but just they are worth of checking out. Atleast for me those earlier films were meaningfull experiences as watching them let me understand Wolverine as a character better. In those films, he is still in his prime kicking ass. Not to mention that the first film told his orgins story. Finally to see him in Logan drained, old and sickly was a like punch in the gut. The ending felt really powerfull and I just sat there silently listening credits song (which happened to be Hurt by johnny cash. A brilliant music choise there :))
Click to expand...

That's fair enough :)

I'm not trying to start another argument over personal preferences, hehe.

I'm just not a big fan of superhero movies - especially not when they go all Hollywood.

I like Jackman - or at least I've liked him after Aronofsky pushed him to his limits in The Fountain, at which point he started to make an impression.

But the other Wolverine movies just aren't my style.

Didn't expect much from Logan, either - but I was pleasantly surprised.
 
NewDArt said:
That's fair enough :)

I'm not trying to start another argument over personal preferences, hehe.

I'm just not a big fan of superhero movies - especially not when they go all Hollywood.

I like Jackman - or at least I've liked him after Aronofsky pushed him to his limits in The Fountain, at which point he started to make an impression.

But the other Wolverine movies just aren't my style.

Didn't expect much from Logan, either - but I was pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...

I get all that. I don't usually end up watching superhero films either, but these wolverine films I enjoyed due to reasons I mentioned above. I should probably say that I watched these films in chronological order during relatively short 3 days period and I was pleasently suprised how the fims just kept getting better.

The first film is definitely the most hollywoodish one of all three, but Jackman's perfomance carried it well. In Wolverine he got to futher explore this character's inner thoughts and fears. However in Logan Jackman really took this character to a level where we normally don't get to see superheroes. After this wolverine run, I may have to check out other films of his. :)

I'd probably rate these films something like this.
  • X-men orgins: Wolverine 5.5/10
  • The Wolverine 6.5/10
  • Logan: 8/10
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,469
All the Money in the World (2017) - Highly Recommended

We went to see "All the Money in the World" this weekend, a 'based on real events' J Paul Getty story of the kidnapping of his grandson in the early 70s. I vaguely know the events, but didn't do any research before the movie so it would all be fresh. And in spite of being >2 hours, the movie was over in a flash.

Excellent performances in particular from Christopher Plummer, Michelle Williams and Romain Duris, with Marky Mark surprisingly solid and Charlie Plummer (not related) doing the most with every scene and being surprisingly effective in spite of playing the McGuffin.

It is simply incredible to me after watching that Christopher Plummer was a last second add-on replacement.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,953
Logan was fantastic. Actually I thought the second wolverine movie was not bad. I hear the 1st one sucked rotten eggs but I skipped it. The one thing about the third movie (logan) is that it is a passing of an era.

Dez said:
I get all that. I don't usually end up watching superhero films either, but these wolverine films I enjoyed due to reasons I mentioned above. I should probably say that I watched these films in chronological order during relatively short 3 days period and I was pleasently suprised how the fims just kept getting better.

The first film is definitely the most hollywoodish one of all three, but Jackman's perfomance carried it well. In Wolverine he got to futher explore this character's inner thoughts and fears. However in Logan Jackman really took this character to a level where we normally don't get to see superheroes. After this wolverine run, I may have to check out other films of his. :)

I'd probably rate these films something like this.
  • X-men orgins: Wolverine 5.5/10
  • The Wolverine 6.5/10
  • Logan: 8/10
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
7,758
Location
usa - no longer boston
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom