Tigers X Forum : Auburn Forum : Auburn Football : The Number 1 Forum to Talk Auburn Sports

The Library => Haley Center Basement => Topic started by: Kaos on May 14, 2009, 05:50:53 PM

Title: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 14, 2009, 05:50:53 PM
So this Netflix thing.  Got me watching movies I meant to watch and never did. 

We'll start today's reviews with The Wrestler.


Dear Marissa Tomei.  You were so hot in Cousin Vinny. Why couldn't you have gotten naked then?  Yeah your body is still pretty hot, but it sure would have been nice to see those little bitty titties when you were in your prime. 

Mickey Rourke plays himself dressed as the Cowardly Lion from the Wizard of Oz.  His damn face looked like an entire hive of bees stung him before every day on the set.  It was distracting.  He hasn't really done anything worth a shoot since banging Basinger or that Cosby chick.

The story itself was completely predicatable. It was like Rocky meets a Lifetime movie or some shoot. 

Glowing reviews but people today must be very easily entertained.  What a boring fudge of a movie. 


Quick hitters:

Max Payne - Damn what a turd.  What a festering turd.  I didn't give a shoot about the guy's wife or his kid. They stick Mila Kunis in there and she's constantly wearing some big ass fur coat or something so you never see anything but glimpses of her face.  What a waste.  One of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Rachel Getting Married -- fudge Rachel. No, don't. Or do. Who cares? I watched this hoping for some hotness from that skinny Hathaway chick.  Fail. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 14, 2009, 07:24:08 PM
I liked The Wrestler.  I didn't so much enjoy it for the plot, but I thought it was an interesting look into washed up entertainers.  Some people aren't so much addicted to drugs and alcohol as they are to attention and fame.  Both lead to the same end - a washed up loser who never really accomplished anything. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 15, 2009, 09:04:20 AM
I liked The Wrestler.  I didn't so much enjoy it for the plot, but I thought it was an interesting look into washed up entertainers.  Some people aren't so much addicted to drugs and alcohol as they are to attention and fame.  Both lead to the same end - a washed up loser who never really accomplished anything. 

Thumb.
In.
The.
Meat-slicer.

Ugh.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 15, 2009, 05:20:12 PM
Thumb.
In.
The.
Meat-slicer.

Ugh.

What's best is he did it on purpose.

"fudge this job.  I'm gonna slice my god damn thumb open." 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2009, 10:58:03 AM
Today's reviews:

The Brave One
Starring Jodi Foster, Terrance Howard and some ridiculous Indian/Pakistani dude

Okay let's start with the casting.  Foster pulled off the psycho killer part reasonably well.  Where she failed -- and failed miserably -- was in the "I'm interesting and attractive enough for this cop and this Indian doctor to give a shoot if I live or die."  She just didn't cut it there.  Killing people? Yeah, she did a good crazed look. Being the object of lust for TW?  With her leather face, no-titty body, slouchy attire and slumping demeanor? Give me a fudgeing break.  If they'd stayed away from that shoot and just let her whack people the movie would have been better.  TH also fails as a cop.  He didn't convince me that he could figure out where his own ass was much less catch a criminal. Hate I wasted my time.

Lakeview Terrace
Starring Samuel L. Jackson and a bunch of other non-descript people.

What the hell? Samuel L. is a racist?  Awesome. Is it wrong that I was pulling for him to get away with it and hoping his wooden-acting neighbors got riddled with bullets?  The only thing that elevated this movie from utter turd-dom was Sam's penetrating glare.  The two ditzes playing the neighbors?  I hope they get killed in every movie they're in from here on out.  Woman had a stupid trigger-fish mouth and her damn glasses annoyed the fudge out of me. The guy was a richardweed and his acting skills range from stoic-bland to stoic-terse. He sucked. I'll boycott any movies he's in from here on out unless he's playing a robot or a cigar-store Indian.

Iron Man
Starring Robert Downey Jr.., Terrance Howard, Gwenyth Paltrow and one of the Bridges guys

Seen this movie three times now.  It's entertaining. Very much so. RDJ is one of the better actors of our time. I suffered through Tropic Thunder just for his performance which was outstanding. He's almost on par with Johnny Depp, but Depp couldn't have pulled this role off and made it work like RDJ did.  Terrance was utterly unconvincing in his role, but that's a small complaint in an otherwise fairly perfect superhero movie.  I love Batman and The Dark Knight was an incredible film, but that franchise has lost the ability to laugh at itself. Iron Man strikes just the right balance between serious and silly. It understands that the mission is to entertain, not brood and preach for four and a half hours.  It is what it is. Escapist entertainment and done well.  I'd watch it again. The Blu-Ray features leave a little to be desired. The 3D views of the robots were interesting but only briefly.  I'll still buy this one.


Quick hitters:

House Bunny - Predictable. Anna Faris is cute, though.  It harms no one and is fun enough to waste time on.  Shouldn't have wasted time putting Demi Moore's plastic daughter in it. The makeover on the butch pin cushion is also nice.  There's a hotness factor there.

Role Models - Don't care much for either of the two lead characters, but the movie redeems itself with constant references to KISS and a ridiculous battle scene at the end.  Smart-mouth midget black kids can be entertaining, but only briefly. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 17, 2009, 12:20:38 AM
Today's reviews.  Actually saw two movies today at the theaters.  It was raining and my 8 year old had been bugging the crap out of me to see Wolverine.  Took in the 4:00 matinee.  The movie really jumps around and has way more story telling, slow parts than is needed.  But then, that's kind of the premise of the whole movie...the beginnings of the X-men etc.  Good special effects and Hugh Jackman is a bad ass, doing a lot of his own stunts in the movie.  It's a Marvel Comics story and surprisingly, a ton of people are actually killed but it's obvious they leave out all the blood and gore they could have put in to liven it up.  Not necessary though with a PG-13 rating.  It's a rental if you're into the Marvel Comic scene..which I am.

Okay, shortly after situating the 8 year old with grandma, I'm back to the theater with the wife for a uterus flick.  Ghosts of girlfriends past with Matthew McConaughey (sp?) So, within a couple of hours of each other, I'm watching movies with the last two sexiest men on earth.  Does that make me...?  Oh the hell with it.  I pacified the wife and sat through it.  Okay guys, if you have a date or wife and they want to take in a cutesy love flick...go.  It's actually funny as hell.  Matthew Mc plays a playboy who's fudgeed more hot ass than any man alive, but of course, there's the one girl..Jennifer Garner, who he's had a thing for since childhood.  All very predictable throughout but with a top notch cast, including Michael Douglas, it's really not bad for a chick flick.  It's worth the cash only if you have to pacify a date/wife who wants to see that kind of movie.  It's pretty entertaining.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 18, 2009, 07:47:26 AM
House Bunny - Predictable. Anna Faris is cute, though.  It harms no one and is fun enough to waste time on.  Shouldn't have wasted time putting Demi Moore's plastic daughter in it. The makeover on the butch pin cushion is also nice.  There's a hotness factor there.

I wasted 45 minutes of my life watching this before I had the good sense to cut it off.  I was ready to look for a gas oven.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 18, 2009, 10:44:40 AM
I wasted 45 minutes of my life watching this before I had the good sense to cut it off.  I was ready to look for a gas oven.

It was harmless fluff.  I may have had the sound turned off for portions of it, I really can't remember.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 18, 2009, 01:14:56 PM
It was harmless fluff.  I may have had the sound turned off for portions of it, I really can't remember.

Never said it wasn't harmless.  Just dumber than dogshoot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 02:49:31 AM
Never said it wasn't harmless.  Just dumber than dogshoot.

I'd watch a 48-hour House Bunny marathon over being subjected to any of the following Will Ferrel films for an hour:

Blades of Glory, Step Brothers or Semi-Pro.

They make dogshoot look like Einstein. 

I have "Doubt" sitting on the shelf.  Can't bring myself to watch it.  The idea of Meryl Streep clomping around for two hours in a black outfit sort of makes me ill. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 07:44:00 AM
I'd watch a 48-hour House Bunny marathon over being subjected to any of the following Will Ferrel films for an hour:

Blades of Glory, Step Brothers or Semi-Pro.

They make dogshoot look like Einstein. 

I have "Doubt" sitting on the shelf.  Can't bring myself to watch it.  The idea of Meryl Streep clomping around for two hours in a black outfit sort of makes me ill. 

Agree on all counts.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 12:21:14 PM


I have "Doubt" sitting on the shelf.  Can't bring myself to watch it.  The idea of Meryl Streep clomping around for two hours in a black outfit sort of makes me ill. 

Doubt was good.  I'm a sucker for most of Hoffman's movies, though.  If you haven't seen them, watch Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Capote, and Owning Mahowny.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 05:31:11 PM
I'd watch a 48-hour House Bunny marathon over being subjected to any of the following Will Ferrel films for an hour:

Blades of Glory, Step Brothers or Semi-Pro.

They make dogshoot look like Einstein. 

I have "Doubt" sitting on the shelf.  Can't bring myself to watch it.  The idea of Meryl Streep clomping around for two hours in a black outfit sort of makes me ill. 

Step Brothers and Semi-Pro are future classics.  This is horseshoot!  .....from planet Camel richards!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 05:36:36 PM
Step Brothers and Semi-Pro are future classics.  This is horseshoot!  .....from planet Camel richards!

Is that a quote from one of the movies?  That's turrible. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 05:44:47 PM
Is that a quote from one of the movies?  That's turrible. 

I think it says a lot about the relative mentality when either of those two festering turds is considered of even remote quality. 

My teenage daughter, who loves Will Ferrell, said Step Brothers was "painful" and a real disgrace.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2009, 07:45:18 PM
My bloody Valentine was what you would expect from a slasher movie. The 3d was pretty cool, but hard to watch the whole movie with the 3D glasses on. I give it a 2 out of 5 stars.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 21, 2009, 12:18:38 AM
High School Musical 3 and The Hannah Montana movies were teh bombz.  OMG, I luved it.  ROFL MY COPTERS!   :drool:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 21, 2009, 02:24:55 AM
High School Musical 3 and The Hannah Montana movies were teh bombz.  OMG, I luved it.  ROFL MY COPTERS!   :drool:
Step It Up 2 was a instant classic.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 01, 2009, 03:02:44 AM
Star Trek:

fudge this movie.  It was utter bullshoot.  Since it's still in theaters I'm not going to spoil the plot, but fudge whoever did this to the universe.  fudge Leonard Nimoy's ancient ass.

The special effects were good, but there were times they were so frenectic it was difficult to follow the action.  The actors were adequate.  The guy playing Spock was fair and the guy doing Kirk was outstanding. The rest were fairly forgettable.

There were a couple of the expected inside jokes.

But the story?  Whoever wrote this should be taken to a Star Trek convention and tribbled to death.

I wanted very badly to like this movie.  And maybe if I'd never watched Star Trek I might have. It just tried too hard to straddle the fence between pleasing the hard-core Trek fan and crafting a captivating film.

As the Batman franchise has proven, you can actually just start over. You don't have to tie up any loose ends.  I'd have been perfectly happy with a story line that picked a certain point in the career of Kirk and Spock and followed their exploits.  The unnecessary desire to try to tie up the entire series history really fudgeed the whole thing up. 

In the end, i left unfulfilled and calling bullshoot on the entire exercise. 


It was fudgeed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 01, 2009, 03:05:31 AM
I thought the Wrestler was an ok movie, it was better than I thought it would be. 2.5 stars
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 01, 2009, 03:08:58 AM
I thought the Wrestler was an ok movie, it was better than I thought it would be. 2.5 stars

You seen Star Trek? 

The Wrestler was okay.  I couldn't get past Rourke's bee-stung face.  He looked like that kid in The Mask or whatever with Cher.

(http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/uglymask.jpg)

It was like a low-rent version of Rocky Balboa, which was a low-rent recycle of Rocky.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 04, 2009, 05:10:55 PM
Three reviews today.  Short and to the point.

Drag Me to Hell
By all means drag me to hell. Just don't try to drag me back to the theater to see this shoot fest.  It's a PG-13 horror movie which should have indicated the suckage immediately, but I ignored the warning.  The girl was sort of hot and her choice of shoes was good, but that's where the quality ended here.  The best actor in the whole thing was a damn fly. 

Doubt
I doubt I could possibly have been any more bored.  Oscar can go fudge himself.

The Reader
If I read aloud to you, will you let me fudge you sideways?  And then can you go and kill a bunch of Jews?  Because that will give me lots of angst.  Kate Winslet's ass, Kate Winslet's ass, Kate Winslet's bush, Kate Winslet's titties all deserved best supporting actress awards.  Nerd boy's rooster and ass deserved to get the fudge off my screen.  I hate movies that strain to generate emotion from improbable circumstances.  Who the fudge is seriously going to live their entire life obsessed over a month-long fudgeing of a MILF when they're 16?  Hell, I did this one married chick for six months when I was 17 and I can barely remember her fudgeing name. Maybe if she'd massacred a bunch of Mexicans I would remember. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 04, 2009, 05:24:07 PM
Three reviews today.  Short and to the point.

Drag Me to Hell
By all means drag me to hell. Just don't try to drag me back to the theater to see this shoot fest.  It's a PG-13 horror movie which should have indicated the suckage immediately, but I ignored the warning.  The girl was sort of hot and her choice of shoes was good, but that's where the quality ended here.  The best actor in the whole thing was a damn fly. 

Doubt
I doubt I could possibly have been any more bored.  Oscar can go fudge himself.

The Reader
If I read aloud to you, will you let me fudge you sideways?  And then can you go and kill a bunch of Jews?  Because that will give me lots of angst.  Kate Winslet's ass, Kate Winslet's ass, Kate Winslet's bush, Kate Winslet's titties all deserved best supporting actress awards.  Nerd boy's rooster and ass deserved to get the fudge off my screen.  I hate movies that strain to generate emotion from improbable circumstances.  Who the fudge is seriously going to live their entire life obsessed over a month-long fudgeing of a MILF when they're 16?  Hell, I did this one married chick for six months when I was 17 and I can barely remember her fudgeing name. Maybe if she'd massacred a bunch of Mexicans I would remember. 
I have no interest in any of those movies so we are good. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 04, 2009, 05:29:28 PM

As the Batman franchise has proven, you can actually just start over. You don't have to tie up any loose ends.  I'd have been perfectly happy with a story line that picked a certain point in the career of Kirk and Spock and followed their exploits.  The unnecessary desire to try to tie up the entire series history really fudgeed the whole thing up. 

In the end, i left unfulfilled and calling bullshoot on the entire exercise. 


It was fudgeed.
You can go fudge yourself.

Signed,
George Lucas
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 04, 2009, 05:32:42 PM
On upcoming movies, this looks really good:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4K3aM5H5KM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4K3aM5H5KM)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 04, 2009, 05:40:12 PM
The only reason I want to see the Wrestler is to see Marissa Tomei naked.  Had she taken off her clothes for My Cousin Vinny it would have been an instant Acadamy award winner.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 05, 2009, 01:01:28 AM
You seen Star Trek? 

The Wrestler was okay.  I couldn't get past Rourke's bee-stung face.  He looked like that kid in The Mask or whatever with Cher.

(http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/uglymask.jpg)

It was like a low-rent version of Rocky Balboa, which was a low-rent recycle of Rocky.
I have heard from two people that Star Trek was a killer movie, I'm not big into sci-fi so I'll just wait until it comes out on Blu-Ray
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 05, 2009, 01:07:42 AM
Has anyone seen Anvil-The story of Anvil?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF4H8lB2Y_o (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF4H8lB2Y_o)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2009, 12:21:18 AM
Okay, startin' it up again.  Left with the intention of seeing Hangover...but ALL shows were sold out.  My daughter was with me so we were limited in alternatives.  One called Dance Flick was about to start and since she lives eats and breathes dancing, I decided to suffer through it.

I laughed my ass off.  I had forgotten that this was the movie I saw in the previews.  It's a movie by the Wayans brothers and it's basically the same kind of spoof on movies like High School Musical and Step Up etc. as the "Scary Movie" spoofs.  Corny as hell and a lot of racial humor.  Two times the black guy and white girl are about to kiss, the first time Damon Wayans Jr. pulls back..."Ooo black girls, Uh yeah, you just go three blocks down and take a left".  The second time, she pulls back..."Ooo white guys, (Holds up her keys) It's the white Honda with Coldplay in the CD player.  And don't steal anything".

One side note that means nothing to anyone but me and my daughter.  A girl from here in Dothan that we know pretty well did all the dance parts for the lead girl in the show. 

It's one to rent.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2009, 02:43:11 AM
Okay, startin' it up again.  Left with the intention of seeing Hangover...but ALL shows were sold out.  My daughter was with me so we were limited in alternatives.  One called Dance Flick was about to start and since she lives eats and breathes dancing, I decided to suffer through it.

I laughed my ass off.  I had forgotten that this was the movie I saw in the previews.  It's a movie by the Wayans brothers and it's basically the same kind of spoof on movies like High School Musical and Step Up etc. as the "Scary Movie" spoofs.  Corny as hell and a lot of racial humor.  Two times the black guy and white girl are about to kiss, the first time Damon Wayans Jr. pulls back..."Ooo black girls, Uh yeah, you just go three blocks down and take a left".  The second time, she pulls back..."Ooo white guys, (Holds up her keys) It's the white Honda with Coldplay in the CD player.  And don't steal anything".

One side note that means nothing to anyone but me and my daughter.  A girl from here in Dothan that we know pretty well did all the dance parts for the lead girl in the show. 

It's one to rent.
Probably a good thing that you didn't watch Hangover with your daughter.  That movie was one of the funniest movies that I've ever seen.  Towards the end, I thought that I couldn't laugh anymore, but I was wrong.  I'm going to have to see it atleast one more time, just to catch the parts that I missed, because I was laughing so hard.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2009, 02:54:51 AM
Probably a good thing that you didn't watch Hangover with your daughter.  That movie was one of the funniest movies that I've ever seen.  Towards the end, I thought that I couldn't laugh anymore, but I was wrong.  I'm going to have to see it atleast one more time, just to catch the parts that I missed, because I was laughing so hard.
That would have been an akward movie to watch with your daughter.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2009, 07:41:19 AM
That would have been an akward movie to watch with your daughter.

I was kinda' thinkin' that.  But Dance Flick had it's share of uncomfortable moments too. One part is the typical scene where the teacher (Lady dance teacher) is having the first day of class and writing her name on the board.  "My naaaame iiiiissss ....."

She turns around wearing spandex pants and well....I'll let you watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8687-wckwKo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8687-wckwKo)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2009, 03:15:40 PM
I was kinda' thinkin' that.  But Dance Flick had it's share of uncomfortable moments too. One part is the typical scene where the teacher (Lady dance teacher) is having the first day of class and writing her name on the board.  "My naaaame iiiiissss ....."

She turns around wearing spandex pants and well....I'll let you watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8687-wckwKo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8687-wckwKo)
LOL, yeah I could see where that would definitely be an uncomfortable moment...

"We do the Mash Potato here, we don't eat them."  :rofl:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:09:52 AM
Taken

I'd have taken that lying bitch daughter to the woodshed.  That spoiled bitch needed a serious whipping. And the mom, hot as she is, what a mommy part.  Liam should have saved some of that rage and unleashed it on those two whores.  mommy part punted both.  My advice to the actress who played the daughter (Maggie Grace) is to never do any movies where the director wants her to run. She looks like a spastic penguin.

Liam was good. The dinner scene was classic. 

My problem with the whole thing, though, is I can't imagine him working up that kind of rage for either of those ungrateful bitches.

Mr. Brooks
First, let me say that the things I would do to Danielle Panabaker cannot be said out loud.  There is something about her... (http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2009/02/danielle-panabaker-woods-gq-magazine.jpg)(http://www.denimblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/danielle-panabaker-woods-gq-magazine-03.jpg)
The scene at the end where she's getting sort of horny looking at the blood spraying on the wall? Damn, girl, stab me and let me bleed. 

Beyond that? Meh. The William Hurt device was contrived and not compelling. Dane Cook?  fudge that. Demi Moore? Yeah, she was utterly convincing. She's a female John Travolta.

Worst, though, was Kevin Costner. I didn't buy him as a killer -- he didn't get enough out of it -- nor did I buy him as a captain of industry.  This movie -- as all -- would have been better with Johnny Depp in the lead role. 

It was a decent filler. Just not noteworthy.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 09:05:05 AM
First, let me say that the things I would do to Danielle Panabaker cannot be said out loud.  There is something about her...

Your taste in women tends to run Howard-ish. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 09:20:31 AM
Your taste in women tends to run Howard-ish. 

My tastes run broad and deep... from Elisabeth Hasselbeck to Elizabeth Banks to Eva Mendes to Danielle Panabaker to Emily Procter to Jennifer Garner to Raven Riley. 

Expound please....
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 09:31:37 AM
Speaking of way behind...I finally got around to watching a couple of movies this weekend.

Quantum of Solace
I may be the last person in America to see this one, so I got that going for me.  Overall, the action was better than maybe the last few Bond flicks.  Otherwise, meh.
3 out of 5 stars

Then, the wife made me watch what I thought would be a chick flick...

Mr. and Mrs. Smith
The storyline was very far fetched, but the movie was very good.  Pitt and Jolie make a pretty good acting combo in this one.  The one downside was that she never got nekkid.
3.5 out of 5 stars
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 09:50:58 AM
Speaking of way behind...I finally got around to watching a couple of movies this weekend.

Quantum of Solace
I may be the last person in America to see this one, so I got that going for me.  Overall, the action was better than maybe the last few Bond flicks.  Otherwise, meh.
3 out of 5 stars

Then, the wife made me watch what I thought would be a chick flick...

Mr. and Mrs. Smith
The storyline was very far fetched, but the movie was very good.  Pitt and Jolie make a pretty good acting combo in this one.  The one downside was that she never got nekkid.
3.5 out of 5 stars

I have not seen Squanto's Solace yet.  You are not the last. 

I'm not buying that guy as Bond.  Would come closer had they chosen Jason Stratham.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 10:12:00 AM
Your taste in women tends to run Howard-ish. 

Dirty whores.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 11:13:10 AM
I have not seen Squanto's Solace yet.  You are not the last. 

I'm not buying that guy as Bond.  Would come closer had they chosen Jason Stratham.
Disagree, I think he kicks ass as Bond.  Stratham while excellent himself, I dont think fits the image. [side bar]Have you seen Layer Cake, good flick (minus the end) plus she gets nekkid

(http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/showbiz/images/attachement/jpg/site1/20080722/000d6065c51b09ef8a7b03.jpg) Sienna Miller [back]

IMO Craig is the second best bond since Connery, and I like how they have taken it more old school, not invisible cars that you can drive with a fudgein phone.  As for the movie itself Quantum of Solace while a good action flick, left much to be desired within the story line.  Casino Royale was much much stronger.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 11:17:11 AM
Between Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005) and Mr. Brooks (2007) we may need to rename this thread Kaos way, way, way, behind movie reviews.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 11:19:37 AM
Between Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005) and Mr. Brooks (2007) way may need to rename this thread Kao's way, way, way, behind movie reviews.

I told you I was behind. 

I will be reviewing Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen on June 25, however.  I'm geek like that. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:00:55 PM
IMO Craig is the second best bond since Connery, and I like how they have taken it more old school, not invisible cars that you can drive with a fudgein phone.  As for the movie itself Quantum of Solace while a good action flick, left much to be desired within the story line.  Casino Royale was much much stronger.

I agree about Casino Royale. 
I could also agree that Craig is second best, but look at his competition... :taunt:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:22:35 PM
I could also agree that Craig is second best, but look at his competition... :taunt:
True

[Another Side Bar] I thought Clive Owen would have been a decent choice for Bond back when.  I was disappointed when they picked Craig. However, he has been a change that the franchise needed.  Did I mention I am kinda a big bond fan.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:24:57 PM
True

[Another Side Bar] I thought Clive Owen would have been a decent choice for Bond back when.  I was disappointed when they picked Craig. However, he has been a change that the franchise needed.  Did I mention I am kinda a big bond fan ghey bitch?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:25:31 PM
I told you I was behind. 

I will be reviewing Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen on June 25, however.  I'm geek like that. 

My 7 year old wants me to take him to see it...he has watched the first one at least 15 times now.  I know...call DHR.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:25:55 PM
I will be reviewing Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen on June 25, however.  I'm geek like that. 
Yeah we know why (we all know your secret crush for:)

(http://www.newchatter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/megan-fox.jpg)

at least thats why me and about 3 guys will be going.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:42:53 PM
[Another Side Bar] I thought Clive Owen would have been a decent choice for Bond back when.  I was disappointed when they picked Craig. However, he has been a change that the franchise needed.  Did I mention I am kinda a big bond fan ghey bitch?

I am assuming you were agreeing with me only adding that you aare a big ghey bitch...we already knew that. and thanks for having my back in the Advice Old Men thread, that was a perfect lob.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 12:48:13 PM
Yeah we know why (we all know your secret crush for:)

(http://www.newchatter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/megan-fox.jpg)

I have decided that I would, in fact, fudge her. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 08:35:10 PM
I have decided that I would, in fact, fudge her. 
Baby steps!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 10:48:31 PM
I have decided that I would, in fact, fudge her. 
The first step is always admission.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 16, 2009, 11:30:13 PM
She has decided that she in fact, would call the cops if you got within 150 yards of her gated house.  She does not feel pivileged in any way that you would in fact fudge her.  She does in fact, laugh at your bitch ass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 17, 2009, 06:26:58 AM
She has decided that she in fact, would call the cops if you got within 150 yards of her gated house.  She does not feel pivileged in any way that you would in fact fudge her.  She does in fact, laugh at your bitch ass.

She has no say in the matter.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 17, 2009, 10:28:08 AM
She has decided that she in fact, would call the cops if you got within 150 yards of her gated house.  She does not feel pivileged in any way that you would in fact fudge her.  She does in fact, laugh at your bitch ass.
Hey she was fudgein Brian Austin Green, I haven't seen Kaos, but I like his chances.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 25, 2009, 12:00:31 AM
TRANSFORMERS

I've read the reviews. I've seen the universal pans of this movie. I've read all the problems the critics have with it and their utter disdain for Michael Bay. 

Well you know what?  fudge them. 

They bitch because the movie has no plot.  What the fudge do they want? Annie Hall or some miserable shoot like The Reader?  Here's the plot:  Lots and lots and lots of shoot blows up.  Robots brawl.  People run and scream. More shoot blows up. The good guys win. 

They complain because certain aspects of the movie are unrealistic or far-fetched.  What the bleeding fudge? They're watching a movie about CARS THAT TURN INTO fudgeING ROBOTS.  That's the premise.  So if they have an alien that can shoot Chinese take out, is that really any further off the reality chart?

They piss and moan because Megan Fox can't act.  Well I don't even care for her all that much, but let me be the first to say that I don't give a fudge.  She wasn't hired to do Shakesperean soloquies. She was hired to look fudgeing hot in those shorts and those jeans and to have a sexy little sassy ass attitude.  Mission accomplished. Yeah, I'd fudge this character.  Maybe not Megan herself, but her character in this movie would get the stiff richard.  And I'd damn sure tell her I loved her.

The movie was what it was. Like Pirates of the Caribbean II it wasn't quite as good as the first one, mainly because the first one set the bar so high that the second couldn't quite measure up.  Doesn't mean it was bad. It was a fun movie.

Yeah, there's some unnecessary throwaway shoot.  The dog humping? What the fudge? That meant nothing and was a cheap attempt to draw a laugh.

There were things that didn't make sense.  Don't want to give too much away, but after you've seen it ask yourself these questions:

1) What happened to the litthe traitor Decepticon after it converted? After playing an integral role, it just vanished.

2) Where the fudge did all the flashlights come from? Seriously. I want somebody to answer that one.

3) Do they sell lip gloss in Egypt? I think they must.

4) What happened to theAllSpark sliver? Another important plot point that just vanished with no elaboration.


Other problems? Why they had to add the shoots, fudges and pussies to the dialogue was beyond me. This is a movie that kids want to watch. The profanity added nothing. Neither did the silly ass pot brownie moment. I had to explain that ridiculous shoot to my nine year old on the way home.

I've also got to fault Bay for flubbing  a pivotal confrontation between Optimus Prime and Megatron. What should have been an emotionally charged moment was completely drained of feeling. That's bad direction.

The movie was supposed to entertain. fudge those snobby ass critics. I was entertained. My daughter laughed at the right parts and clapped at the end. What else can you expect?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 25, 2009, 07:49:58 AM
Good review and let me add dogs humping is always funny unless Jumbo is present.


Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 26, 2009, 02:12:42 PM
Good review and let me add dogs humping is always funny unless Jumbo is present.



Do the hump!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 30, 2009, 07:42:40 AM
No County for Old Men

Won a ton of awards.  Not sure why.  It was okay.  Tommy Lee Jones was good in his role as a world-weary sheriff who's more interested in why the world is going to hell in a handbasket than he is in trying to halt the descent. Josh Brolin looks like he lives in a trailer and his wife was acceptably Texas plain (even though she's actually from Scotland). 

Where the movie fails is in its end. I realize that not every film has to have a tidy ending because life rarely does. Still, you don't build a confrontation for 90 minutes and then jerk your richard out and go "Ha ha, not going to come!"

The performances were good enough although the acclaimed Javier Whatthefudgeever completely overacted. Would have been better with somebody who could have played that role with an air of cool as opposed to his bug-eyed lunacy.

Overall, just an okay movie. If I'd paid to see it in the theaters I'd probably want my money back because the ending is so ignorant. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 30, 2009, 10:56:14 AM

The performances were good enough although the acclaimed Javier Whatthefudgeever completely overacted. Would have been better with somebody who could have played that role with an air of cool as opposed to his bug-eyed lunacy.


Gotta disagree here.  Bardem was awesome.  That character was a bug-eyed lunatic, pure sociopath.  The scene in the store where he forces the guy to flip a coin for his life was so fudgeing good.

I'm predisposed to loving everything McCarthy related, but this movie was awesome in my humble opinion.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 30, 2009, 02:54:10 PM
No County for Old Men

Where the movie fails is in its end. I realize that not every film has to have a tidy ending because life rarely does. Still, you don't build a confrontation for 90 minutes and then jerk your richard out and go "Ha ha, not going to come!"


Overall, just an okay movie. If I'd paid to see it in the theaters I'd probably want my money back because the ending is so ignorant. 

Couldnt agree more.  Saw this movie On Demand with a friend who just raved about it being one of his top 5 favorite movies.  I couldn't believe how he or anyone else could feel that way.  Spent no money but I wanted those two hours back... and still do.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 01, 2009, 08:27:54 AM
Notorious

Decent movie.  Worth watching if you care at all about the rise of rap music and the East Coast-West Coast feud. 

Be warned, though, that this movie tells things strictly from the East Coast perspective as it was produced by Sean Combs.  B.I.G is a leaf-turning angel, Combs is an earnest, hard-working hand up from the ghetto and Tupac is a crazy ass, reckless young negro who caused all the strife and tension. 

I bet if you got the same story told from the West Coast perspective it would have an extremely different flavor. The film glosses over the fact that Christopher Wallace was a thug in real life. It does show portions of that, but is careful to make sure that there are justifications for his indiscretions.

All in all, though, it's a pretty decent portrait of an ignorant street hood who stumbled into fame and then infamy.  He was probably not, as the movie portrayed, angelic and blameless.  Nor was Combs probably the heroic figure this film makes him out to be. 

Still haven't figured out how that fat bastard snared the decent-looking females, however. 

I enjoyed this movie much more than The Reader, Doubt, Gran Torino, No Ending for fudgeed Up Movie and other films I've watched lately.  Maybe it was just because I liked the beat.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 02, 2009, 12:03:14 AM
The Wrestler

I rented it today and It's one badass film and Marisa Tomei is still smokin, and she shows lot of tits in the film rent it for that at least.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 02, 2009, 12:42:33 AM
The Wrestler

I rented it today and It's one badass film and Marisa Tomei is still smokin, and she shows lot of tits in the film rent it for that at least.
She looked better that I thought she would, I enjoyed the special features better than the movie IMO. The roundtable discussion with the wrestlers I watched growing up is worth a view.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 02, 2009, 09:40:28 AM
The Wrestler

I rented it today and It's one badass film and Marisa Tomei is still smokin, and she shows lot of tits in the film rent it for that at least.

I already reviewed this movie. 

Is the title of this thread bzzzwhatever's re-reviews of movies that have already been reviewed ? I didn't think so.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 02, 2009, 10:10:10 AM
I already reviewed this movie. 

Is the title of this thread bzzzwhatever's re-reviews of movies that have already been reviewed ? I didn't think so.

 :rofl:

I wondered when someone was going to get that reaction from you...

It was coming...only a matter of the wrong person at the wrong time...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 02, 2009, 06:43:47 PM
TRANSFORMERS

I've read the reviews. I've seen the universal pans of this movie. I've read all the problems the critics have with it and their utter disdain for Michael Bay. 

Well you know what?  fudge them. 

They bitch because the movie has no plot.  What the fudge do they want? Annie Hall or some miserable shoot like The Reader?  Here's the plot:  Lots and lots and lots of shoot blows up.  Robots brawl.  People run and scream. More shoot blows up. The good guys win. 

They complain because certain aspects of the movie are unrealistic or far-fetched.  What the bleeding fudge? They're watching a movie about CARS THAT TURN INTO fudgeING ROBOTS.  That's the premise.  So if they have an alien that can shoot Chinese take out, is that really any further off the reality chart?

They piss and moan because Megan Fox can't act.  Well I don't even care for her all that much, but let me be the first to say that I don't give a fudge.  She wasn't hired to do Shakesperean soloquies. She was hired to look fudgeing hot in those shorts and those jeans and to have a sexy little sassy ass attitude.  Mission accomplished. Yeah, I'd fudge this character.  Maybe not Megan herself, but her character in this movie would get the stiff richard.  And I'd damn sure tell her I loved her.

The movie was what it was. Like Pirates of the Caribbean II it wasn't quite as good as the first one, mainly because the first one set the bar so high that the second couldn't quite measure up.  Doesn't mean it was bad. It was a fun movie.

Yeah, there's some unnecessary throwaway shoot.  The dog humping? What the fudge? That meant nothing and was a cheap attempt to draw a laugh.

There were things that didn't make sense.  Don't want to give too much away, but after you've seen it ask yourself these questions:

1) What happened to the litthe traitor Decepticon after it converted? After playing an integral role, it just vanished.

2) Where the fudge did all the flashlights come from? Seriously. I want somebody to answer that one.

3) Do they sell lip gloss in Egypt? I think they must.

4) What happened to theAllSpark sliver? Another important plot point that just vanished with no elaboration.


Other problems? Why they had to add the shoots, fudges and pussies to the dialogue was beyond me. This is a movie that kids want to watch. The profanity added nothing. Neither did the silly ass pot brownie moment. I had to explain that ridiculous shoot to my nine year old on the way home.

I've also got to fault Bay for flubbing  a pivotal confrontation between Optimus Prime and Megatron. What should have been an emotionally charged moment was completely drained of feeling. That's bad direction.

The movie was supposed to entertain. fudge those snobby ass critics. I was entertained. My daughter laughed at the right parts and clapped at the end. What else can you expect?

Saw this last night, I agree with your review I thought for what it was it was an entertaining movie.  Then again I could have watched Megan Fox dance around the screen for 2hrs and I would have been entertained.  I have the answer to #4 for you.

The used that sliver to "restart" the old decepticon (the stealth bomber).  I think a better question was why that sliver gave Sam all that knowledge and the other sliver the decepticons stole didn't have that same knowledge, huh...huh.  It was an action movie pure and simple and it did not disappoint.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 03, 2009, 06:32:53 AM
Succubus: Evil Never Dies

Pirates (XXX) set the bar high for adult films. It had a semi-serious plot and a huge budget. It took the interest in high sea adventure spawned by Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean and infused a dose of naked swashbuckling. The result was a film that men could somewhat legitimately pitch to their mates and trick them into watching raw porn.  It's much easier for the mate to justify watching Pirates than it is to accept pleas to sit down to "Cum Swapping Whores IV."  As a result it became one of the biggest adult films in history. It was good enough that Netflix offers a sanitized version.

Here, Internet porn icon Raven Riley attempts to follow in the Pirate wake by combining a tried and true genre (horror) with a heavy dose of adult action. 

Raven, who co-produced the film, recruits goth pal Liz Vicious to play the titular Succubus and adds a handful of other online peek peddlers like Brandi Love to the cast. 

The camera work is good quality, it has the look and feel of a real movie. The concept itself isn't bad.  Cursed girl returns to her ancestral home to battle an awakened evil that only she can destroy. The destruction involves a saber-laced wooden dildo. It's got potential.

So what's the problem? Nobody in this movie can act a lick. The acting is so bad you don't even really care about the screwing when it commences. The worst of all is Raven's partner in the film. The guy is perhaps the worst actor to ever grace any screen.  Poor Raven's not far behind. 

The sex scenes are average at best and lack passion.

Yes, I realize that you're not looking for Oscar-worthy performances in a film like this. (Sidebar: Anybody seen Chloe Sveginy in The Brown Bunny? )  But the acting shouldn't be so godawful that it detracts from the "other." 

For what it is, it's not bad. I've seen worse mainstream movies and worse adult films. In the right hands, though, it could have been so much better. Raven's hands -- while talented in many ways -- don't have the filmmaking touch.

The production values are better than average porn, so it's possible that this is a film you could justify to the wife/girlfriend as a real movie, a la Pirates. Not sure, though, that they'll get the same charge out of it they drew from Pirates, however.

Overall? A C at best.  If this is Raven's attempt to launch herself into the mainstream, she misfired.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 06, 2009, 05:26:21 PM
Public Enemies
Starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale

The problem with going to a movie based on real life, particularly a life as well-chronicled as that of John Dillinger, is that you already know how it's going to end.  In some cases you also know how they get from beginning to end.  When that's the case, the challenge for the filmmaker is to entertain along the way. 

That was the case with Public Enemies.  I've always liked the gangster lore and was familiar with most of the pieces of Dillinger's rise, run and fall.  Public Enemies really did little more than provide motion and characterization to the hundreds of still images I've seen in reading about Public Enemy Number One over the years. 

Huge fan of Johnny Depp. Think he's brilliant in most roles.  Unfortunately he falls just a little short here.  His performance was just a bit too smooth, he didn't seem to have the hard edge he'd need to actually be Dillinger.

Christian Bale left me flat. His here and gone accent as Melvin Purvis was a distraction and kept jolting me out of the film.  He's simply been in too many movies lately.  I kept waiting for him to put on the batsuit or go kill a robot or something. 

I think the movie missed its mark also by focusing on the John-Billie aspect and not giving enough attention to the gangster life itself.  The differing styles between Dillinger and Nelson, forced together by circumstance, could have been a movie all its own. Instead it got a glossing over. 

All that aside, the movie did a good job of following the chain of events without unnecessarily sensationalizing them.  It managed to entertain while telling a story that I already knew. 

I was hoping for a Goodfellas for the 30s and got something a little less. That doesn't mean it wasn't good.  I'd see it again. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 13, 2009, 10:16:13 AM
Before The Devil Knows You're Dead

I'd never heard of this movie before I ran across it on Showtime the other night.  The combination of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ethan Hawke, Albert Finney and Marisa Tomei was too intriguing to resist so I gave it a chance.

Those of you whapping the paddle to Tomei's stripper turn in The Wrestler? She's nekkid in this one, too, -- a super and unexpected bonus -- and she looks a hundred times better than she did in the other flick. Even if you care nothing for the story, it's worth fast forwarding to see her tight body.

The story itself had so much potential.  Brothers conspire to rob parent's jewelry store, but the plot is bungled and it ends in the death of a family member.

There were good sequences and Hoffman's performance was quality.  Overall, though, the movie took a great premise and dropped the ball.

Marissa's dalliance with Hawke -- completely miscast in this role -- wasn't credible and did nothing to advance the story.  Had Hoffman's character actually taken the financial liberties with his employer we were led to believe, the response would have been much more agressive than a barrage of "you need to come talk to us" phone calls.

Hawke stood out like a sore thumb, completely unable to pull off the bumbling dumb brother act.

The ending was flat and didn't provide the resolution you'd expect from the drawn out emotional conflict. 

I'd watch it again, but only to see Marissa naked.  Since I can google that, it's not really necessary to sit through the flick.

(http://flisted.files.wordpress.com/marisa_tomei_before_the_devil_knows_you_re_dead_720p-025.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2009, 06:07:03 PM
The Uninvited

I love Elizabeth Banks.  I now also love Arielle Kebbel.  (see photo below).  I like knowing that Arielle's favorite ice cream is cookies and cream.  Because I would.... nevermind.  Back to the movie.

Other than slight flash of Elizabeth's midriff and some tacked on shots of Arielle in a bikini, this "horror" movie is absolutely worthless.

It's the remake of a Japanese flick (what horror movie isn't these days?) and for an hour and a half nothing much happens.  Oh, it's got the requisite grim-faced children that seem to populate all Japanese remakes but even they aren't frightening in any way. 

I kept waiting and waiting for something to happen and when it finally did?  Pffffffftttttttt.  Who gives a poop?

The ending provided an alleged twist and although I didn't see it coming, I also didn't give a phuk. 

Don't bother renting this garbage unless you're the kind who can bust a nut over a young girl in a bikini during about five decent minutes of screen time.


(http://www.uncoached.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/arielle_kebbel_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2009, 10:03:29 PM
Slumdog Millionaire

One of the best movies I've seen in a long, long time. 

That is all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2009, 10:28:17 PM
Slumdog Millionaire

One of the best movies I've seen in a long, long time. 

That is all.

I rented it and it surprised the hell out of me as well.  Great flick.  Obviously you were keeping it short here, so I will do the obligatory work:

(http://thelipstickdiaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/freida-pinto-wallpaper.jpg)


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vWB6F7DVGa0/Sa0NB2scsKI/AAAAAAAAAxI/KTCZ0mBqjC8/s800/freida-pinto-hot-photo.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 22, 2009, 10:36:24 PM
Public Enemies
Starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale

The problem with going to a movie based on real life, particularly a life as well-chronicled as that of John Dillinger, is that you already know how it's going to end.  In some cases you also know how they get from beginning to end.  When that's the case, the challenge for the filmmaker is to entertain along the way. 

That was the case with Public Enemies.  I've always liked the gangster lore and was familiar with most of the pieces of Dillinger's rise, run and fall.  Public Enemies really did little more than provide motion and characterization to the hundreds of still images I've seen in reading about Public Enemy Number One over the years. 

Huge fan of Johnny Depp. Think he's brilliant in most roles.  Unfortunately he falls just a little short here.  His performance was just a bit too smooth, he didn't seem to have the hard edge he'd need to actually be Dillinger.

Christian Bale left me flat. His here and gone accent as Melvin Purvis was a distraction and kept jolting me out of the film.  He's simply been in too many movies lately.  I kept waiting for him to put on the batsuit or go kill a robot or something. 

I think the movie missed its mark also by focusing on the John-Billie aspect and not giving enough attention to the gangster life itself.  The differing styles between Dillinger and Nelson, forced together by circumstance, could have been a movie all its own. Instead it got a glossing over. 

All that aside, the movie did a good job of following the chain of events without unnecessarily sensationalizing them.  It managed to entertain while telling a story that I already knew. 

I was hoping for a Goodfellas for the 30s and got something a little less. That doesn't mean it wasn't good.  I'd see it again. 


So basically, if you don't know how everything transpired or if you don't know that much about Dillinger, then this would be a really good movie?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 29, 2009, 07:56:04 AM
Baby Mama
I would like to have a relationship with Tina Fey.  She's smart, funny and cute.  I would like to have sex with Amy Poehler repeatedly.  I bet she'd do some funky shoot and have fun doing it. 

Beyond that?  No redeeming value to this movie.  Just a chance to get the losers from SNL who should be flipping burgers and not on my TV some exposure.  Jokes mostly flat, storyline contrived. Steve Martin fails in his role.

Meet Dave
I did not make it past ten minutes of this god awful pile of garbage. 

What the fudge, Eddie Murphy? You were once a comic genius.  How the hell did you get to this point in your career?  shoot movie after shoot movie. Un-fudgeing-watchable.

Beverly Hills Cop 5, please.  No more of this.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 29, 2009, 08:04:01 AM
What the fudge, Eddie Murphy? You were once a comic genius.  How the hell did you get to this point in your career? 



Transvestite.

Hooker.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 29, 2009, 08:28:08 AM
Transvestite.

Hooker.



You fudge with Rick James you get the horns.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 29, 2009, 08:33:46 AM
What's sad about Meet Dave is that Elizabeth Banks -- who I think is adorable -- is in it.  It's the second straight movie I've seen her in that was just completely abysmal. 

Who in their right mind would think she could "fall" for mugging, goofy, ancient Murphy?  Why would she even take this turd-laced role?  I mean she looks like this:

(http://backseatcuddler.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/elizabethbanks0.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 01:03:09 PM
Last House on the Left

Forget the remake, I decided to check out the original 1972 version of this film. It was one of Wes Craven's first films, was banned for 30-something years in Australia and has developed a minor cult following over the years.

Something to remember about movies with cult followings?  They're often shockingly bad.  

This one fits that mold.  How anyone who saw this dreadful film could ever have greenlighted another Craven project is beyond me.

The premise is solid. Girl gets raped/killed, killers end up hanging out with her family who eventually exacts revenge.  

But this film?  Godawful.  The acting was terrible. The camera work was hideous.  The soundtrack was intrusive and perhaps the worst I've ever found in a movie.  Nothing fit.  

Oh, there were some good bits.  In 1972 the concept of showing a blowjob and subsequent toothy removal of the appendage was probably some wacko poop.  Having dad stalk around with a chainsaw might have been mindblowing 37 years ago.  It was hackneyed today.  

When you've got a good story to tell and good actors telling it, you don't have to go for the shock factor. This went all shock and wasted a potentially good scenario.  

I hear the remake is similarly butchered (pardon the pun) and won't waste my time.  Too bad a good setup has been now twice wasted.

Pics below are of the peter gnawing mom and the two girls the killers killed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 01:17:01 PM
Kaos, dont waste your time on Observe and Report. :puke:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 01:49:55 PM
Kaos, dont waste your time on Observe and Report. :puke:

Thanks for the warning.  Not a big Seth Rogen fan anyway. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 01:51:27 PM
Thanks for the warning.  Not a big Seth Rogen fan anyway. 
This movie reminds me of Will Ferrel after Old School.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 04:06:23 PM
Last House on the Left

Forget the remake, I decided to check out the original 1972 version of this film. It was one of Wes Craven's first films, was banned for 30-something years in Australia and has developed a minor cult following over the years.

Something to remember about movies with cult followings?  They're often shockingly bad.  

This one fits that mold.  How anyone who saw this dreadful film could ever have greenlighted another Craven project is beyond me.

The premise is solid. Girl gets raped/killed, killers end up hanging out with her family who eventually exacts revenge.  

But this film?  Godawful.  The acting was terrible. The camera work was hideous.  The soundtrack was intrusive and perhaps the worst I've ever found in a movie.  Nothing fit.  

Oh, there were some good bits.  In 1972 the concept of showing a blowjob and subsequent toothy removal of the appendage was probably some wacko poop.  Having dad stalk around with a chainsaw might have been mindblowing 37 years ago.  It was hackneyed today.  

When you've got a good story to tell and good actors telling it, you don't have to go for the shock factor. This went all shock and wasted a potentially good scenario.  

I hear the remake is similarly butchered (pardon the pun) and won't waste my time.  Too bad a good setup has been now twice wasted.

Pics below are of the peter gnawing mom and the two girls the killers killed.

So they showed the BJ, and getting the ole talley wacker bit off?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 04:29:23 PM
So they showed the BJ, and getting the ole talley wacker bit off?

Not exactly.  But for 1972 it had to be pretty off the wall. 

Showed her getting to her knees, showed him with his head thrown back making the "o" face, then showed him from behind and her ripping her head violently from side to side.  He was fully clothed. 

She ran to the pond gagging and spit something in the water.  It splashed. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 04:38:48 PM
Not exactly.  But for 1972 it had to be pretty off the wall. 

Showed her getting to her knees, showed him with his head thrown back making the "o" face, then showed him from behind and her ripping her head violently from side to side.  He was fully clothed. 

She ran to the pond gagging and spit something in the water.  It splashed. 

I remember as an early teenager, watching that and the end of the movie Blood Sucking Freaks made me leery of women in peril.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 04:39:40 PM
Not exactly.  But for 1972 it had to be pretty off the wall. 

Showed her getting to her knees, showed him with his head thrown back making the "o" face, then showed him from behind and her ripping her head violently from side to side.  He was fully clothed. 

She ran to the pond gagging and spit something in the water.  It splashed. 

Damn.  That would be the exact opposite of a "happy ending".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 07:04:40 PM
Damn.  That would be the exact opposite of a "happy ending".

I'm glad you clarified that, lest I believe that you were in to some wacky S&M shoot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2009, 11:00:12 PM
My Bloody Valentine

Surprisingly good.

Decent storytelling. Good pace. Plenty of gore, some over the top a little bit but the special effects were good. Well acted. The guy playing Axel was a little weak. Didn't buy him as a Sheriff, but other than that the casting was solid.

Hate now I didn't see this one in 3D in the theaters.

Of the three major horror remakes I've seen (Halloween, Friday the 13th and this one) this is tenfold better than the other two combined.  Zombie's Halloween redux was ham-fisted and the 13th resurrection was just lame altogether despite the sexy Pannabaker elf.

If you do horror, do this one.  It's not the kind that will have you terrified, but it does keep you guessing and wondering until the end. 

Well done.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2009, 03:44:37 AM
I enjoyed My Bloody Valentine as well, I thought the storyline was impressive for a horror flick.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 09, 2009, 09:30:08 AM
Pineapple Express

So I'm 3/4 of the way through this movie and I'm thinking what the hell.  It's just two doofy loser white guys smoking tons of weed and getting into ridiculous situations.  Could it possibly be any more stupid?

Then I remember. I used to laugh my ass off at Cheech and Chong which was basically two doofy loser Mexican guys smoking tons of weed and getting into ridiculous situations. It was pretty stupid, too.  Nice Dreams was good, but the rest of the C&C movies were really pretty bad.

Maybe it's just my age, but I didn't get a whole lot out of Pineapple Express.  It wasn't as funny as Cheech and Chong used to be and it just never really went anywhere.  Anything that was remotely funny was shown in the previews.

I hate when somebody tells me "it's the funniest movie ever" and then I don't laugh even once.  It colors my opinion of them.  

Lame. Dull. Boring.  That's about all I saw out of this Express.

Superbad
Not as bad as Pineapple Express.

I did sort of like this movie, but I'm seriously tired of that fat fudgeing whiner kid.  Every time a car hit him I was begging him to stay down.  As in be cinematically dead.   I don't ever want to see him in another movie again. 

Seth Rogen is bad enough.  How that nasally fro-top ever became a movie "star" is beyond me because he doesn't have an ounce of talent, but the grungy whiner roostersucker has even less.   He sucks.

If the cast has "Jonah Hill" listed, I'm not going to watch the fudgeing movie. Ever.  I hate that bastard. 

Don't even try to tell me Emma Stone would be remotely interested in his tubby ass.  fudge that concept completely. 

Not a bad film, but I hate Jonah Hill. 

Here's Emma:

(http://www.youngteenidols.com/modules/gallery/data/media/55/emma_stone030.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 09, 2009, 03:09:04 PM
My Bloody Valentine

Surprisingly good.

Decent storytelling. Good pace. Plenty of gore, some over the top a little bit but the special effects were good. Well acted. The guy playing Axel was a little weak. Didn't buy him as a Sheriff, but other than that the casting was solid.

Hate now I didn't see this one in 3D in the theaters.

Of the three major horror remakes I've seen (Halloween, Friday the 13th and this one) this is tenfold better than the other two combined.  Zombie's Halloween redux was ham-fisted and the 13th resurrection was just lame altogether despite the sexy Pannabaker elf.

If you do horror, do this one.  It's not the kind that will have you terrified, but it does keep you guessing and wondering until the end. 

Well done.
:suicide:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 09, 2009, 03:41:18 PM
:suicide:

I assume you disagree?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 12, 2009, 02:50:33 AM
Knocked Up
Okay, I've seen this before.  I may have even at some point reviewed it.  But I watched again while I was doing some work. 

Couple of things stood out to me. 

Quit calling Judd Apatow a visionary. Quit calling him a superior comedic talent. Quit calling him a director who is worth a tin shoot in a cast iron bucket. 

The premise of this movie (and that of many others he's gotten credit for) is pretty good. But in his juvenile, blundering hands it turns to shoot. 

Here's the thing. This could have been a really sweet, extremely effective and endearing movie. It wasn't because Apatow is immature. It's Beavis and Butthead level, but not as funny or not as clever.

Katherine Heigl was superb. And pretty fudgeing hot.

Rogen -- who I don't really care for -- actually showed me that if he'd get out from under Apatow's butchering direction he might actually be able to do more than schelp around like a dumbass and smoke weed.

The interactions between JHeigl, Rogen, Paul Rudd and whoever the shrew playing his wife was?  They were all good.

Rogen's circle of friends would have been shootloads better off without that retarded Jonah Hill bastard fouling up the screen. I was hoping he'd swallow a ping poing ball and die.

Where Apatow blew it with this movie was the unnecessary insertion of crudity.  We don't have to see Rogen's fat sweaty ass to understand the concept that he drunk-fudgeed Katherine.

The excessive amount of profanity (and shut the fudge up about irony) detracted from the movie. It added nothing and would have been better with a few less fudges, motherfudges and fudgeity-fudge-fudges.

This could have been a really good movie. Apatow turned it into a lumbering, bumbling, fifth-grade "you said poo-poo" level butchery. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 12, 2009, 05:14:48 AM
Kaos, I watched the new The Last House on the Left. The movie was very graphic, gritty similar to the New Halloween/Friday the 13th. Its worth a look. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 12, 2009, 10:44:02 PM
Kaos, I watched the new The Last House on the Left. The movie was very graphic, gritty similar to the New Halloween/Friday the 13th. Its worth a look. 
Uggghhh....My eyes started bleed after I read "Its worth a look".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 16, 2009, 12:09:49 AM
Running With Scissors

Started this movie on Stealth channel a while ago. 

What a fudgeed up deal.  Evan Rachel Wood is hot and reminds me of why I loved the 70s.  There's something about that 70s look that brings wood. 

But the movie has too much gay shoot going on.  I just don't need that.  I wonder if RWS realizes that his name is the name of a gay ass movie about a gay ass guy and his fudgeed up drug-addled mother?

Maybe I'm supposed to see some hidden meaning in this meandering shoot, but it's not getting through.

I still got an hour left and I really don't think I'm going to make it to the end. 

I enjoy dark comedy. I like quirky shoot.  This seems to just be dark shoot, like a lumpy turd.   If I do finish it, which at this point I sort of doubt?  I'll add a final analysis. 

The positive?  Soundtrack is a Super 70s groove. Check it here:

http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/7280172/a/Running+With+Scissors.htm (http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/7280172/a/Running+With+Scissors.htm)

Bennie and the Jets (Elton John's best song)
The Things We Do for Love
Pick Up the Pieces
Blinded By The Light
Year of the Cat

etc.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2009, 11:05:47 AM
Frost Nixon

Ron Howard used to be Opie.  I liked him then. He used to be Richie Cunningham. I liked him then. He used to make fun movies like Splash where I got to see Daryl Hannah all kinds of naked and Cocoon where we got to see Wilford Brimley naked.  I liked him then. 

At some point he decided he had a political statement to make and that statement was liberal. I don't like that. His support Obama film that drew in Fonz and Andy really sort of pissed me off, first because he degraded Griffith by putting him in that garbage, but primarily because I despise so-called celebrities thinking they have any business telling me or you how you should vote. That video put him in the same clueless category as the Dixie Chicks, Barbara Striesand, Dave Matthews and the other idiot roostersmokers who think the ability to sustain a note gives them some moral advantage.  fudge them.  fudge them all. Every last one.  Opie too.

Frost/Nixon was a complex film. Unless you grew up in the time in which Watergate dominated the nation's consciousness, it probably won't resonate. I did and remember paying close attention to everything that went on.  For a number of reasons, one of them being Howard's inability to refrain from taking subtle shots at Nixon, the film failed to capture the moment.

For the record I think Nixon was a good president. He was paranoid, perhaps, and shouldn't have gotten involved in trying to hide the Watergate mess but most of what he did as President was positive. By the same token, I'm a huge George Wallace fan. If all you can see of the man is him standing in the school house door, you miss his true essence and overlook the tremendous good he did for the State of Alabama.

So...

Watergate was a truly pivotal time in American history. Watergate changed the role of media drastically. It significantly altered the way the American public viewed not just Nixon, but the entire presidency -- and for that matter politics in general.  I've heard it characterized as the moment this country lost its innocence and that's a fair assessment. The patriotism and America-first fervor that had existed through the end of World War II and through the 50s was generally being chipped away by the muddled effort in Korea and then the growing disaster in Vietnam. Nixon provided the opening for that sentiment to become a groundswell. 

Had the current media climate existed in the 1940s, we'd all be speaking German and goose-stepping in memory of our dear Fuehrer today. The horrors of a single hour at Iwo Jima or Normandy surpass two years of Iraq.  Nixon made it permissible -- expected even -- to criticize, analyze and cry out against the decisions of political leaders.

But back to the movie.

Howard didn't do a very good job of capturing that part of the story. Unless you already knew why the interview was important, unless you already understood how dramatically Watergate altered the American political landscape you weren't going to get much from this movie.  In that respect, he left a vast audience behind. Even those who were born after 1975 or so and were interested in the event didn't get a sense of its importance from this film. 

Instead Howard spent a lot of time focusing on Frost's efforts to raise money for the interviews, his relationship with Caroline Cushing and the genesis of the interviews.  Again, unless you were there, you really don't care. It wasn't compelling enough to keep you there.

I felt his characterization of Nixon as a doofy, dottering old man who apparently had alcoholic blackouts barely rose above caricature.  I've also never understood why Hollywood types -- which Howard obviously is -- feel the need to take creative liberties with portions of the story.  Why make Caroline Cushing appear as some trollop Frost picked up on a plane when they had actually been dating for a couple of years when the interview happened?  If he's going to fudge around with something minor like that why wouldn't he also just fabricate anything else he wanted to make it fit his "vision"? 

Also, if you watch the actual interviews and compare them to what Howard filmed, there are differences. Not in Frost's questions, but in Langella as Nixon's answers.  Some were markedly different. Others were in the manner of expression.  What is the point of doing it if you're just going to make up what was said or alter the way it was presented to subtly change the meaning? 

Frank Langella did a decent job of portraying Nixon. The guy playing Frost should stick to playing werewolves. 

There was no nudity. About the closest you had was the girl playing Cushing meeting Nixon and not having her shoes on. 

Final analysis?  The movie just didn't resonate. It didn't with me even though I grew up with Watergate because it missed the focus. It won't with anybody who wasn't a child of the 70s because it fails to convey the significance. 

fudge Ron Howard. Go back to making movies where Daryl Hannah is naked and a fish.


(http://www.lahiguera.net/cinemania/actores/rebecca_hall/fotos/6712/rebecca_hall.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 29, 2009, 11:27:23 PM
The Midnight Meat Train

So it's Halloween week.  And you're looking for something violent and gory.  The Midnight Meat Train -- not a porno -- almost gets you there. 

It's got an outstanding cast. 

Brooke Shields is in it.  Bradley Cooper (Hangover) is in it.  Leslie Bibb (below) is in it. 

Basic story is that there's this creepy fudge who is slaughtering people on a weird subway train.  He's got this big ass hammer that does all kinds of shocking damage. 

If you like blood on the floor, eyeballs being popped out with a spoon kind of carnage, this movie has you going for most of the duration. 

Couple of problems.  Plot contrivances that make no sense whatsoever.  Some truly bad overacting by Miss Bibb.  No nudity.  Some of the things just don't make any sense whatsoever and there's really no rational explanation for some of the behaviors -- or some of the utterly unlikely coincidences. Is there only ONE detective in all of New York City?   

The movie hums gorily along until the twist at the end, which I have to say is one of the stupidest things I've ever had the misfortune to witness.  It gets to the denoument and you're sitting there going "seriously? That was the point of all this shoot? No wonder the damn movie went straight to video despite the stellar credentials." 

Based on a Clive Barker book if that gives anything away. 


(http://www.comicsbulletin.com/busted/images/060807/ghlblg046alesliebibb.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 29, 2009, 11:56:14 PM
Blood and Chocolate

Movie had a very Underworld feel in terms of pacing and direction.   Agnes (below) plays Vivian, a werewolf.  She falls for a human, kicking off the whole love-triangle thing. 

The wolves were sort of cool.  The transformations were not.  They turned into glowing fairies flying through the air in slow motion before flipping to wolves.  Not werewolves, but actual wolves. 

Since they appeared to eat chocloate and other foodstuffs, I'm not really sure why the hunting was necessary for them.  Just be regular except for the being immortal part.  They had the ability to control the transformation, so that wasn't an issue. 

Too much love story, not enough bone chewing in the middle third of the film.   Soundtrack is intrusive to a degree, too. 

This was really a cross bewteen Underworld and Twilight.  It was better than Twilight -- which I confess I've unfortunately seen -- but not as good as Underworld.  It leaned more toward the Underworld side, however.

Stars?

Agnes Bruckner

(http://www.etapetki.com.pl/galleries/znane/B/Agnes_Bruckner/Agnes_Bruckner_j2.jpg)

and

Kata Dobo

(http://cdn2.maxim.com/maxim/files/2006/03/31/kata-dobo/gfd_l3.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 30, 2009, 02:13:11 AM
The two girls from above are worth a long look.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 30, 2009, 09:33:07 AM
Ok.

(http://gallery.celebritypro.com/data/media/677/agnes-brucker-james-white-vanity-fair-march-2003-2.jpg)
http://gallery.celebritypro.com/data/media/677/agnes-brucker-james-white-vanity-fair-march-2003-2.jpg (http://gallery.celebritypro.com/data/media/677/agnes-brucker-james-white-vanity-fair-march-2003-2.jpg)


(http://cdn2.maxim.com/maxim/files/2003/02/21/kata-dobo/kata_dobo_l2.jpg)

http://cdn2.maxim.com/maxim/files/2003/02/21/kata-dobo/kata_dobo_l2.jpg (http://cdn2.maxim.com/maxim/files/2003/02/21/kata-dobo/kata_dobo_l2.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 30, 2009, 02:46:19 PM
Kaos have you checked out the new Last House on the Left yet? Some of the scenes were hard to watch, I felt bad for the victims.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 30, 2009, 02:49:57 PM
Anybody seen the new saw movie yet?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 30, 2009, 02:53:43 PM
Anybody seen the new saw movie yet?
I havent yet.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 02, 2009, 08:37:30 PM
I just completed watching all 8 Hellraiser flicks.

I had seen bits and pieces of a few of them (which I now recognize as 3 & 4).

It so awesomely fits into the Horror Movie franchise cliches of being ridiculously horrible by the end of their run, deteriorating bit by bit with each installment.

Here's the breakdown:

Part I: A pretty solid horror movie. Good sci-fi supernatural story that doesn't involve Pinhead much at all. He was no more central of a character than the other three Cenobites (gatekeepers of hell), except he had a couple more lines than the other one that could talk. The Cenobites were not a central part of the story anyway.

Part II: Brought back pretty much all of the central characters. Stuck to the original story, and expanded on it. Went more into explaining things like the Cenobites and the puzzle box. Solid sequel as far as horror sequels go.

Part III: The series begins heading downhill. The characters from the first two movies are abandoned, except Pinhead. It then becomes about him. They contradict the canon of the first two movies to make Pinhead a typical late-80's/early-90's Hollywood movie monster a'la Jason & Freddy who can recruit other Cenobites, which are now just basically zombies with super powers.

Part IV: Takes place in Space 400 years in the future. And partly in the present. And partly 400 years in the past. Only four parts in and it's already this ridiculous.

Part V: A murder mystery thriller with a bit of a supernatural twist. Kind of like a poor man's Se7en. Are you sure this is supposed to be a Hellraiser movie? Quite a departure for the series, but I guess on some level it's kind of cool that they abandoned the blood and guts and made it about Pinhead psychologically torturing someone.

Part VI: Basically the exact same movie as part 5, making it even more predictable. This one was made in 2002. Just enough time for Halloween H20 to come out and have been successful and them to try to steal an element that worked for it. Jamie Lee Curtis came back for that one. The main protagonist teenage girl also returned for the late Nightmare On Elm Street movie, New Nightmare. This must have been why the girl from the first two Hellraiser movies wanted to come back for this one. Clearly her part being the same girl from the first two movies was an element thrown in at the last minute. It is completely unnecessary to the plot.

Part VII: Unbelievably, has even less to do with the Hellraiser series than the last couple of movies. It was clearly written as a movie to stand on its own, and the studio that owns Hellraiser said "Hey, we'll buy it if you put Pinhead in there somehow and call it Hellraiser 7."

Part VIII: Hilariously bad acting. Like worse than most porn. Ridiculous and stupid story. Ridiculous and stupid lines. This tries to be totally hip and deals with online gaming. A bunch of teenagers are obsessed with a Hellraiser based online game, and through the game they get invited to some big party, where guess what, Pinhead kills everyone one by one. All the kids are self-aware of all of the elements from the Hellraiser series, seemingly because of the video game, not the movies. It's so god-awful it's funnybad.

Just thought I'd share. I knew each one would be worse than the one before it, yet I kept watching all 16 hours worth, and frankly, would have been disappointed if one of them had actually been better than the previous one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 02, 2009, 10:19:09 PM
I just completed watching all 8 Hellraiser flicks.

I had seen bits and pieces of a few of them (which I now recognize as 3 & 4).

It so awesomely fits into the Horror Movie franchise cliches of being ridiculously horrible by the end of their run, deteriorating bit by bit with each installment.

Here's the breakdown:

Part I: A pretty solid horror movie. Good sci-fi supernatural story that doesn't involve Pinhead much at all. He was no more central of a character than the other three Cenobites (gatekeepers of hell), except he had a couple more lines than the other one that could talk. The Cenobites were not a central part of the story anyway.

Part II: Brought back pretty much all of the central characters. Stuck to the original story, and expanded on it. Went more into explaining things like the Cenobites and the puzzle box. Solid sequel as far as horror sequels go.

Part III: The series begins heading downhill. The characters from the first two movies are abandoned, except Pinhead. It then becomes about him. They contradict the canon of the first two movies to make Pinhead a typical late-80's/early-90's Hollywood movie monster a'la Jason & Freddy who can recruit other Cenobites, which are now just basically zombies with super powers.

Part IV: Takes place in Space 400 years in the future. And partly in the present. And partly 400 years in the past. Only four parts in and it's already this ridiculous.

Part V: A murder mystery thriller with a bit of a supernatural twist. Kind of like a poor man's Se7en. Are you sure this is supposed to be a Hellraiser movie? Quite a departure for the series, but I guess on some level it's kind of cool that they abandoned the blood and guts and made it about Pinhead psychologically torturing someone.

Part VI: Basically the exact same movie as part 5, making it even more predictable. This one was made in 2002. Just enough time for Halloween H20 to come out and have been successful and them to try to steal an element that worked for it. Jamie Lee Curtis came back for that one. The main protagonist teenage girl also returned for the late Nightmare On Elm Street movie, New Nightmare. This must have been why the girl from the first two Hellraiser movies wanted to come back for this one. Clearly her part being the same girl from the first two movies was an element thrown in at the last minute. It is completely unnecessary to the plot.

Part VII: Unbelievably, has even less to do with the Hellraiser series than the last couple of movies. It was clearly written as a movie to stand on its own, and the studio that owns Hellraiser said "Hey, we'll buy it if you put Pinhead in there somehow and call it Hellraiser 7."

Part VIII: Hilariously bad acting. Like worse than most porn. Ridiculous and stupid story. Ridiculous and stupid lines. This tries to be totally hip and deals with online gaming. A bunch of teenagers are obsessed with a Hellraiser based online game, and through the game they get invited to some big party, where guess what, Pinhead kills everyone one by one. All the kids are self-aware of all of the elements from the Hellraiser series, seemingly because of the video game, not the movies. It's so god-awful it's funnybad.

Just thought I'd share. I knew each one would be worse than the one before it, yet I kept watching all 16 hours worth, and frankly, would have been disappointed if one of them had actually been better than the previous one.

You should be commended for this achievement.  Seriously.  I've always had an interest in watching all the "classic" horror films from the start to end.  This was one series I never paid much attention to.

My favorite horror movies was the "Living dead" series.  Nothing better than sitting amongst friends with a few pizzas, a few beverages, and a black and white version of zombies eating brains.

Damn. Those were some good times.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 02, 2009, 10:24:46 PM
You should be commended for this achievement.  Seriously.  I've always had an interest in watching all the "classic" horror films from the start to end.  This was one series I never paid much attention to.

My favorite horror movies was the "Living dead" series.  Nothing better than sitting amongst friends with a few pizzas, a few beverages, and a black and white version of zombies eating brains.

Damn. Those were some good times.
I own every Friday the 13th, Nightmare On Elm Street, and Child's Play movies. I've seen all of the Halloweens and Puppet Masters too.

Had never seen any of these all the way through. Like I said, the first two are worth checking out. You can call it a day after part 5, for sure though.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 02, 2009, 10:58:28 PM
Another one that I liked as a youngster was pumpkin head.  I'm not even sure how many of those were made, but I need to try to find them.  It's been a long time.  
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 03, 2009, 06:33:30 AM
I own every Friday the 13th

Part III was as good as any of them.

Worth watching just to see the girl on the left wearing a blue bikini.  I do so love a 70s body.

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2181/2279074991_962c98789b.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 03, 2009, 08:59:30 AM
Another one that I liked as a youngster was pumpkin head.  I'm not even sure how many of those were made, but I need to try to find them.  It's been a long time.  
There were actually five of them made.  I don't think anyone has actually watched 3-5 though.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 03, 2009, 01:05:53 PM
Part III was as good as any of them.

Worth watching just to see the girl on the left wearing a blue bikini.  I do so love a 70s body.

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2181/2279074991_962c98789b.jpg)
I have #3 on Blu-Ray cheesy but the 3d extras are cool, Friday the 13th 5 New Beginning was pretty kick ass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 03, 2009, 01:08:25 PM
I have #3 on Blu-Ray cheesy but the 3d extras are cool, Friday the 13th 5 New Beginning was pretty kick ass.

Is the BluRay #3 in 3d?  Because if it is?  I'm adding it to my collection. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 04, 2009, 05:33:46 AM
Is the BluRay #3 in 3d?  Because if it is?  I'm adding it to my collection. 
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2298/friday13thpart3.html (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2298/friday13thpart3.html)

I had to buy, the bonus material is worth the purchase without the movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 07, 2009, 07:36:14 AM
Family Movie Alert.  Family Movie Alert.  Family Movie Alert.

Last night, I took the fam to see A Christmas Carol with Jim Carrey.  It's the 3D animation stuff, which I'm usually not into, but this was very entertaining. Carrey is just an incredibly talented actor.  He's done a lot of stuff that's way out there and some people can't take his over the top style in some of his comedic roles.  But, you can't deny that when he gets in to a certain character, he plays it to the hilt. I remember taking the family to The Grinch several years back and I was worried they would take a guy like Carrey and stray away from the storyline of the original cartoon that Birdman grew up with.  No way.  They couldn't have picked a better actor to play that part and he did the role dead on.

Same with A Christmas Carol.  They stayed perfectly in time with the richardens classic and Carrey did the characters or voices of at least 4 parts, including Scrooge.  The animation and special effects were pretty good but I'm not sure why they wanted it 3D.  That really added nothing to it.  It was Carrey and the way they portrayed that time period that made the film.  Those of you with kids or just like that story, it's worth the time in my opinion.     
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 11, 2009, 01:17:05 AM
I Love You Man

Maybe it's just me. But today's so-called "comedies" are generally slow-paced douche-fests.  I don't really have anything against Paul Rudd, but he's just boring as fudge.  Like Will Ferrell, he plays the same lame ass outsider fudge in every movie he makes.

This movie had a few mildly amusing moments but it dragged and dragged and dragged and dragged. 

Too much homo shoot.

Here's the deal. If the movie were half as entertaining to me as it appeared to be entertaining to them in the outtakes, it would be one hilarious fudgeing movie.  But it wasn't. 

Completely forgettable. 

There wasn't even the redeeming feature of a naked chick or some hot pieces of ass in the movie.

It blew.  Waste of time.  I seriously wish it was one tenth as funny as they apparently tought it was during the making of it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 11, 2009, 08:11:33 AM
We Own the Night

Any movie that opens with Eva Mendes masturbating in a sexy black dress and black stockings is going to get high marks. 

While she's little more than set dressing for this film, Eva adds much.

The rest of the film, after the awesome (and far too short) opening scene is rather formulaic.  I've never been a big fan of Joaquin Phoenix because he always looks like he's about to cry.

Between Phoenix, Mark Wahlberg, Robert Duvall and Tony Musante (who played Toma) the film manages to put together a fairly credible story of the black sheep son who eschews his family's cop heritage, becomes a player on the fringes of the law and then gets sucked back in when the criminal element in his midst unknowingly targets his family.

It's a decent film, not as suspensful or dramatic as it tries to be, but with enough of both to keep it moving.

There are plot holes. Is the force really going to turn a uniform over to a guy just because he's mad -- with the admonishment that he's got to go to the Academy after he's gotten his vengeance? Would veteran cops seriously turn to this newbie for leadership in the field the minute danger presents itself? Would Eva really, seriously do brooding Joaquin?

The opening fingers in the crotch scene set the bar so high, the rest of the film couldn't match it.  Memo to director: Save that for the middle after you've drawn people in with the plot and characters, otherwise 30 minutes have passed and viewers are wondering just what the hell happened because they forgot to pay attention, lost in the moment.

(http://www.sxxxy.org/eva_mendes-We_Own_the_Night-002.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 11, 2009, 09:19:58 AM
We Own the Night

Any movie that opens with Eva Mendes masturbating in a sexy black dress and black stockings is going to get high marks. 

While she's little more than set dressing for this film, Eva adds much.

The rest of the film, after the awesome (and far too short) opening scene is rather formulaic.  I've never been a big fan of Joaquin Phoenix because he always looks like he's about to cry.

Between Phoenix, Mark Wahlberg, Robert Duvall and Tony Musante (who played Toma) the film manages to put together a fairly credible story of the black sheep son who eschews his family's cop heritage, becomes a player on the fringes of the law and then gets sucked back in when the criminal element in his midst unknowingly targets his family.

It's a decent film, not as suspensful or dramatic as it tries to be, but with enough of both to keep it moving.

There are plot holes. Is the force really going to turn a uniform over to a guy just because he's mad -- with the admonishment that he's got to go to the Academy after he's gotten his vengeance? Would veteran cops seriously turn to this newbie for leadership in the field the minute danger presents itself? Would Eva really, seriously do brooding Joaquin?

The opening fingers in the crotch scene set the bar so high, the rest of the film couldn't match it.  Memo to director: Save that for the middle after you've drawn people in with the plot and characters, otherwise 30 minutes have passed and viewers are wondering just what the hell happened because they forgot to pay attention, lost in the moment.

(http://www.sxxxy.org/eva_mendes-We_Own_the_Night-002.jpg)

Chubb alert.....whew - good lawd that lady is smokin.


Ok, anyway.  Anyone heard of this new movie "Pirate Radio"? The plot sounds different and it may have peaked my interest enough to go see it in the theater. I think it comes out this Friday.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 11, 2009, 09:43:09 AM
We Own the Night

Saw it. Like you I only kept watching to see when they would show Eva again. Also, this movie just props up my belief that if you want to play undercover cop, you must first get rid of the stupid chick. The stupid chicks always do something that almost gets you or them killed. Why leave protective custody to go visit your mother, therefore putting her in danger too. But she's hot so she's forgiven. It's decent enough story line. Would not watch it twice.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 11, 2009, 10:29:12 AM
Saw it. Like you I only kept watching to see when they would show Eva again. Also, this movie just props up my belief that if you want to play undercover cop, you must first get rid of the stupid chick. The stupid chicks always do something that almost gets you or them killed. Why leave protective custody to go visit your mother, therefore putting her in danger too. But she's hot so she's forgiven. It's decent enough story line. Would not watch it twice.

See, you laid out the solution to a problem (get rid of the hot chick)...but then fell right back into the problem (she's too hot).
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 11:35:45 AM
I saw Body of Lies the other night with DiCaprio and Russell Crow. Pretty good movie for those that haven't seen it. DiCaprio does a pretty good job and Crow plays a lot different role than he is used to playing and did pretty good as well.

I don't remember any lines from the movie to quote like you dorks, but I can say it was one of the better movies I have seen in a while (although I don't watch a lot of movies)...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 11:42:57 AM
K..2 that you need to see, if you have not...Inglorious Bastards and Burn After Reading.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 12:05:42 PM
K..2 that you need to see, if you have not...Inglorious Bastards and Burn After Reading.

Burn after reading, yes.  IB not yet.

Nothing But the Truth

Is there really any way to fudge up a movie with Kate Beckinsale in a primary role?  Adam Sandler says yes.  So, too, do the directors of Nothing But the Truth. 

How do you fudge up a Beckinsale movie?  First show her married to Ross from Friends. As if that nerdy fudge has a shot in hell.  Then show a sex scene between Kate and nerd-fudge Ross that shows only him on top grunting like a monkey.  Then show Beckinsale in a dreary jail for most of the movie with no makeup and harsh lighting. 

Slow, plodding plot.  Big cast including Alan Alda, Matt Dillon as a cutthroat federal prosecutor (chuckle at his shootty performance) and the nerd dude from ER as a pissed off attorney (another chuckle-worthy performance). 

I didn't even want to fudge Beckinsale after this bore-fest.  What an awful pile of dreck.



and...

Surveillance
Bill Pullman, Julia Ormand and the freaky alien from that John Lithgow TV show.  fudge, John Lithgow, by the way.  I hate him. 

This movie had a great concept and could have easily been a creepy super win at the box office.  Fantastic premise. 

But the execution was so abysmally poor, it absolutely REEKED. 

Pullman, whom I usually like, was just god awful.  He failed on every level to bring authenticity to his role. 

I won't give away the ending since some of you may decide to use this movie as torture should you ever catch some terrorists. 

Nothing aggravates me more than a good premise that fails to deliver.  This ramps fail up to a whole new level.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 12:11:03 PM
I have never heard of either of those.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 01:05:19 PM
K..2 that you need to see, if you have not...Inglorious Bastards and Burn After Reading.
Bastards was a great movie, be prepared to read for 3 hours.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 01:12:24 PM
Bastards was a great movie, be prepared to read for 3 hours.

Could have been 1.5 hours in lieu of 3
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 22, 2009, 01:17:04 PM
Could have been 1.5 hours in lieu of 3
They made every scene dragggg except the end.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 25, 2009, 10:52:37 PM
Went to see Sherlock Holmes but it was sold out. Opted for "Armored" with Matt Dillon and Lawrence Fishburne.  3.5 out of 10.  Plot is an armored car heist attempt through an inside job. Action packed in the second half but VERY predictable.  Dillon and Fishburne play the bad guy role pretty good but overall, it's barely a rental.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 25, 2009, 11:10:06 PM
Just saw Avatar. 

My review -

Visually, it's the greatest movie of all time.  Nothing comes close to the highly detailed, imaginative CGI that went into this film.  It really was remarkable.

Actual movie?  Meh.  I've seen it before.  I usually write off the critics that attempt to call out action flicks with political propaganda.  However, this film was pretty heavy on the "America attacks the innocent" theme. 

Decent movie.  Worth paying to see it in the theaters just to see how pretty it is. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 12:17:49 PM
I just saw it in IMAX 3-D.

I've never seen an IMAX movie before, but seeing that movie that way was freaking amazing.

I highly recommend seeing it this way if you can.

I agree about the playing up America attacking the innocent theme. I was rolling my eyes at a couple of poorly disguised parallells they were trying to draw.

In the same night I saw another movie of note: The Box.

It's Richard Kelley (Donnie Darko) so expect weirdness to the point of confusion.

This was a 70's period piece and it really felt like I was watching a movie from that time. It felt like The Shining with a little bit of Creepshow thrown in for good measure, but with better special effects. Very Stanley Kubrick-esque.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 12:56:44 PM


I agree about the playing up America attacking the innocent theme. I was rolling my eyes at a couple of poorly disguised parallells they were trying to draw.


You mean these quotes:

"It'll be a shock and awe campaign"
Numerous marines shouting "GET YOU SOME!" 
"It just so happens that those primitive people are sitting on top of a gold mine that we want"

and also the multiple tribal tattoos. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 01:07:22 PM
You mean these quotes:

"It'll be a shock and awe campaign"
Numerous marines shouting "GET YOU SOME!" 
"It just so happens that those primitive people are sitting on top of a gold mine that we want"

and also the multiple tribal tattoos. 



The tongue-trill scream that the natives did was only missing a few AK-47 rounds blasted into the sky to complete the Arab stereotype.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 01:23:05 PM
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans

Not a sequel, but a prequel.  Explained the genesis of the war between vampires and werewolves.  No Kate Beckinsale, which was disappointing but Rhona Mitra filled in admirably.  (See below)

The movie wasn't as good as Underworld but wasn't as sprawlingly bad as Underworld: Evolution.  If Underworld never existed, this movie would have done well as a stand-alone.  Because Underworld did exist, however, it suffers from the inevitable comparisons.  It wasn't as gruesome or gory as either of the other two movies and it actually had a much more coherent storyline than either of the other two.

It was a decent movie, but nothing really to elevate it from the routine.  It told a story those who watched Underworld really already knew, but added a little detail here and there.  I'd watch it again.

The guy playing Victor (who also plays Squidward or whatever in the last two Pirates of the Caribbean movies) really grates on me with his funky accent.

(http://tallteacher.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/rhona-mitra01.jpg)
(http://i00.rnhh.de/eu/shared-images/filmdotcom/assets/rn/img/4/0/4/8/25438404-25438408-large.jpg)
(http://www.blazinbeauties.com/pages1/rhona_mitra/rhona_mitra_2.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 06:25:18 PM
The tongue-trill scream that the natives did was only missing a few AK-47 rounds blasted into the sky to complete the Arab stereotype.
Don't forget the General referring to the tribes defending themselves as acts of terror that must be combatted with terror by means of a preemptive strike. :taunt:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 28, 2009, 11:09:50 PM
Sherlock Holmes

Robert Downey Jr.  is pretty amazing.  Perfect marriage of character and actor. 

A very entertaining movie.  Bit of a muddled plot, but really well done overall.  I'd see it again.  And will.   

I wouldn't say run to the theaters to see it, but I'm glad I didn't wait for the DVD.   I go to the theater to be entertained and I totally was. 

Downey might have supplanted Johnny Depp as my favorite actor. He's not as pretty, but he's just as clever.  Ironman, Tropic Thunder and this?  The guy is superb.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 29, 2009, 12:25:34 AM

Downey might have supplanted Johnny Depp as my favorite actor. He's not as pretty, but he's just as clever.  Ironman, Tropic Thunder and this?  The guy is superb.

Agreed. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 29, 2009, 10:34:22 AM
Sherlock Holmes

Robert Downey Jr.  is pretty amazing.  Perfect marriage of character and actor.  

A very entertaining movie.  Bit of a muddled plot, but really well done overall.  I'd see it again.  And will.  

I wouldn't say run to the theaters to see it, but I'm glad I didn't wait for the DVD.   I go to the theater to be entertained and I totally was.  

Downey might have supplanted Johnny Depp as my favorite actor. He's not as pretty, but he's just as clever.  Ironman, Tropic Thunder and this?  The guy is superb.
I agree on all of it.  :p
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 29, 2009, 11:01:01 AM
Sherlock Holmes

Robert Downey Jr.  is pretty amazing.  Perfect marriage of character and actor. 

A very entertaining movie.  Bit of a muddled plot, but really well done overall.  I'd see it again.  And will.   

I wouldn't say run to the theaters to see it, but I'm glad I didn't wait for the DVD.   I go to the theater to be entertained and I totally was. 

Downey might have supplanted Johnny Depp as my favorite actor. He's not as pretty, but he's just as clever.  Ironman, Tropic Thunder and this?  The guy is superb.

Downey's role in Tropic Thunder was masterful.  Will definitely check it out, but it will be at least 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 29, 2009, 02:16:11 PM
Bright Lights, Big City

Don't know how (or if) I missed this during the cocaine 80s, but I stumbled across this movie last night while doing some work and started watching it hoping it had a point. 

Less than Zero (another Downey movie) had a point.  It was a solid portrayal of a binging addict and his obsessions.  It featured then super hot Jami Gertz
 (http://cinematicpassions.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/jamigertzposter002.jpg) but suffered slightly from trying to force the career of Andrew McCarthy.  Would have been better with Rob Lowe or Keifer or Sheen in the lead. 

This?  Well, it did have Phoebe Cates (see below).  Keifer sort of filled in the role James Spader made so creepily effective in Less Than Zero. 

But Michael J. Fox?  The dude can't act.  He was about as convincing as a coke-addled yuppie as the Geico Lizard would be if he attempted to star as Batman.  I didn't remember just what a lousy actor Fox really was.  I know he's got the disease and all and I know his wife is sort of untalented hot, too, (see below) but he just absolutely fails as an actor except in select roles. Zero believable chemistry with Cates, overwrought drama with mom Diane Weist, just a pitiful sludge of a movie. 

Garbage. 

Maybe I didn't miss it in the 80s.  Maybe I just blocked it from my memory.


(http://cjcabalfin.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/phoebecates.jpg)

Phoebe Cates

(http://www4.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Funny+Thing+Happened+Way+Cure+Parkinson+Benefit+3jQx49pHfeZl.jpg)
Tracy Pollan
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 29, 2009, 08:45:58 PM
Just saw Avatar. 

My review -

Actual movie?  Meh.  I've seen it before.  

It followed every cowboy and indian flick ever made, ceptin the injuns was 10 feet tall and blue.

And did that Sigourney Weaver look hot or what as a Navi'??
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 02:21:23 AM
It followed every cowboy and indian flick ever made, ceptin the injuns was 10 feet tall and blue.

And did that Sigourney Weaver look hot or what as a Navi'??
Was I the only one turned on by the main indigenous chick?

Is it weird that a CGI 9 foot tall blue alien with a tail, pointy ears, etc. Did it for me?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 04:15:10 AM
Jennifer's Body is a fudgeed up movie, Megan Fox looks smokin' hot for some of the movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 12:28:02 PM
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 01:36:25 PM
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 01:56:23 PM
Was I the only one turned on by the main indigenous chick?

Is it weird that a CGI 9 foot tall blue alien with a tail, pointy ears, etc. Did it for me?

Yes. You will receive a wedgie next time I see you.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 03:39:53 PM
I'm team Jacob.
I think the perfect solution would be Jacob in the winter time, because his skin is so hot and warm and luscious and... ahem, I mean, he would keep you warm.

And then Edward in the summer time, when it is too hot to sleep unless you can spoon with this drop dead gorgeous guy with an ice cold body... ice, ice, baby...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 03:45:13 PM
I think the perfect solution would be Jacob in the winter time, because his skin is so hot and warm and luscious and... ahem, I mean, he would keep you warm.

And then Edward in the summer time, when it is too hot to sleep unless you can spoon with this drop dead gorgeous guy with an ice cold body... ice, ice, baby...
If I were a teenage girl I would want to wash my clothes on Jacob's stomach.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 30, 2009, 04:31:55 PM
If I were a teenage girl I would want to wash my clothes on Jacob's stomach.

That boy is in dire need of a belt. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 31, 2009, 09:53:50 AM
Okay, so Little Buzz went with my parents to Gatlinburg right after Christmas...so I finally got around to watching several movies over the last few days.

The Blind Side:
Great movie, and I can see why Sandra Bullock is up for actress of the year, or whatever the award is called.  She was great in this movie.  Without giving away too much, the movie will make you laugh, then cry, then laugh and then cry some more.  The only downside was that the bammer sitting two seats over from me yelled out a Ro.. Rrr...Oh hell, I can't even make myself type that.  Anyway, he yelled it out at the top of his lungs as soon as richard Sabban appeared the first time in the movie.  Never mind the fact that he was wearing a purple and gold tie.
Oh...sorry, back on topic.  It was funny to see all the coaches and the lack of acting ability.  Overall though, I would give it 3.5 out of 5 stars.  If I hadn't been sitting in a crowded theater full of crimpsum, I would have probably given it a 4.

The Hangover:
There are really no "unexpected" moments in this movie, especially after you have seen the trailer for it.  However, I still found myself rolling in the floor laughing at a few scenes in this movie.  I know he has played the same type character a hundred times over, but Zach Galifianakis was hilarious in this movie.  I would have to give it  4.25 out of 5 stars on the Buzz scale.

The Rock Star:
I can't believe I haven't seen this movie before, but somehow it escaped me for all these years.  Jennifer Aniston in her hottest years IMO.  The movie blew huge chunks, but there were some great scenes with Aniston and Dagmara Dominczyk, who played the band's PR person.
(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTIzOTMzMTg5NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwODIzMDEz._V1._SX320_SY400_.jpg)

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 01, 2010, 08:33:11 PM
If I were a teenage girl I would want to wash my clothes on Jacob's stomach.
To hell with laundry.  I want to eat ice cream off his stomach.  Or at least start there...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 02, 2010, 01:19:12 AM
To hell with laundry.  I want to eat ice cream off his stomach.  Or at least start there...
He's so hot you'd be drinking the ice cream.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 07, 2010, 05:28:51 PM
The Hangover
Booo.  I got a hangover from watching this movie.  Just wasn't funny to me.  It had a few moments, but was hardly the fudgeing laugh parade I had been led to expect.  I really hate when somebody says "funniest movie ever, you'll laugh till you puke" and I skip over the laughing part and just go straight for the puking. 

The fudge with the beard? Spare me.  I don't ever want to see him (or that fudgeing Jonah Hill schlub) in another movie, but I see he's being pushed everywhere. 

Nothing redeeming at all in this movie for me.  I'd already seen Heather Graham's tits and there wasn't a baby attached to them when I did.

Inglorious Basterds

I like Tarantino. Reservoir Dogs is awesome.  Dusk Til Dawn is a fun movie.  Pulp Fiction is among my favorites. Both Kill Bills are way up there on my list. 

But this?  Sorry, it just didn't do it for me.  I enjoyed Brad Pitt's performance, it was awesome.  But the story was really just stupid.  I was right with it until the almost end.  What the fudge was that?  I understand creative license, but come the fudge on.  What's pathetic is that 20 years from now, kids who watch that movie will be confused thinking that's the way things really went down. 

Could have followed the same plot without the complete trashing of history near the end. 

For that reason  I just can't give it a positive review.  I'm glad I waited on the DVD.

Noticed that Tarantino found a way to get his feet obsession on the screen with the Cinderella scene.

Two decent looking women in the film.  Neither have any skin moments.

(http://usemycomputer.com/indeximages/2004/September/Diane%20Kruger.jpg)

(http://coedmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/melanie-laurent.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 07, 2010, 05:52:07 PM
Kaos you should join Ebert, because your reviews are about as worthless.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 07, 2010, 06:11:10 PM
Kaos you should join Ebert, because your reviews are about as worthless.
I chortled
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 07, 2010, 07:03:38 PM
Kaos you should join Ebert, because your reviews are about as worthless.


At  least they are original and my own opinion.

As opposed to being recycled and regurgitated info from ESPN and other message boards that I try to pass off as "skreets"

I'll eventually review some films with which you can relate. Do you still have the Earnest Goes to... Collection on DVD?

BTW?  Your brain joined Siskel years ago.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 07, 2010, 07:35:43 PM

At  least they are original and my own opinion.

As opposed to being recycled and regurgitated info from ESPN and other message boards that I try to pass off as "skreets"

I'll eventually review some films with which you can relate. Do you still have the Earnest Goes to... Collection on DVD?

BTW?  Your brain joined Siskel years ago.

(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ROKRllJwaazvuM:http://image63.webshots.com/63/2/6/95/470320695BaSExx_ph.jpg)

Keep watching those movies.  Here's a smart choice for you, just stick to this, eventhough your views are just about worthless, it seems that aleast you know what you're looking at...again, eventhough it's wrong most of the time.  Let me guess, you've produced movies and written some too...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 11:26:55 AM
Charlie Bartlett
Expected a movie about a teen aged pill dispensing faux-psychiatrist to be a lot more fun than this was.  While I realized it couldn't live up to the smug cool of Ferris Buehler I hoped it would at least reach the same playing field.  It didn't.  The biggest problem was the movie's main star.  They (they being the Hollywood moguls) have tried to force feed us Anton Yelchin in several films.  I'm not buying it.  He just doesn't have any presence. Female lead played by Kat Dennings (below) in an unconvincing, weak performance.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
Positive reviews led me to this film. It was not as good as I was led to believe.  It tried too hard to be smart, hip and cool. Addressing the camera and stopping in places to back up and tell other parts of the story were supposed to be clever and instead were just annoying.  Val Kilmer at a gum snapping gay detective was, I'm sure, supposed to be crazy hilarious, but he just looked fat. Reedeeming feature was a lot of Michelle Monoaghan. Couple of brief nude shots.  Her I like. 

So why profile the two films together?  Because both featured Robert Downey, Jr.  In Bartlett he played Kat's dad and the high school principal.  In KKBB he played Michelle's love interest and a ruffian loser type.

What I learned from these two films is that Downey plays basically the same guy in every film, just with varying degrees of wealth/success. Tony Stark is Sherlock Holmes is principal whatever is loser whoever.  He's not the chameleon Johnny Depp is.  So I want to back up and elevate Depp again.


Kat Dennings
(http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/kat-Dennings.jpg)

Michelle Monoaghan
(http://www.best.celebity-foto.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/michelle-monaghan-picture-03.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 11:59:28 AM
District 9

Just saw this the other night.  Amazing movie.  I highly recommend adding it to your Netflix list.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 12:07:05 PM
District 9

Just saw this the other night.  Amazing movie.  I highly recommend adding it to your Netflix list.
What would you rate it on the Buzz Scale?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 12:33:12 PM
What would you rate it on the Buzz Scale?

Not sure what the Buzz Scale is, but I'll go with out of ten with ten being the best score.

9/10. 

It would be 10/10, but there were some inconsistencies in the storyline. 

District 9 is one of the best sci-fi movies I've ever seen.  It's not an adventure/action movie like Independence Day, War or the Worlds, or Aliens. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 01:49:41 PM
Not sure what the Buzz Scale is, but I'll go with out of ten with ten being the best score.

9/10. 

It would be 10/10, but there were some inconsistencies in the storyline. 

District 9 is one of the best sci-fi movies I've ever seen.  It's not an adventure/action movie like Independence Day, War or the Worlds, or Aliens. 
The Buzz Scale is out of 5 Stars....So, you'd give it 4.75 Stars?  I shall definitely see this movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 04:53:41 PM
The Buzz Scale is out of 5 Stars....So, you'd give it 4.75 Stars?  I shall definitely see this movie.

Seriously? Really?

5th grade math can be a bitch...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 17, 2010, 04:55:35 PM
Seriously? Really?

5th grade math can be a bitch...

Ain't it though?

(http://www.uttyler.edu/news/2006/aug21/gifs/foxworthy.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 12:30:04 PM
Not sure what the Buzz Scale is, but I'll go with out of ten with ten being the best score.

9/10. 

It would be 10/10, but there were some inconsistencies in the storyline. 

District 9 is one of the best sci-fi movies I've ever seen.  It's not an adventure/action movie like Independence Day, War or the Worlds, or Aliens. 

You know, I really enjoyed this movie as well.  I enjoyed the way the entire movie was shot (cinematography), I enjoyed the transition from joy to anguish of the lead character, I enjoyed the way they portrayed the main alien, and I thought that the special effects were top notch.  The movie also introduced a fairly novel concept of alien isolation and "civilization" in today's society, which Peter Jackson really ran with.  Also, the shock of the gore during the action scenes throughout the movie was extremely entertaining.

THS, what inconsistencies in the storyline were you referring to?  Just interested to hear your take.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 12:57:07 PM
I just saw Gran Torino last night.

How that was so universally hated by members of this board, I'll never understand.

Awesome flick. Clint Eastwood plays basically an aged Dirty Harry. But he's still a bad ass.

And all his casual racial epithets had me rolling, especially the scene where he pulls up on the three black guys harassing the Asian girl while her punk-ass wigger boyfriend watched. I was crying, I laughed so hard.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 01:02:42 PM
How that was so universally hated by members of this board, I'll never understand.

Was it?  I thought it was pretty well heralded by this board?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 01:47:44 PM
Was it?  I thought it was pretty well heralded by this board?

As bad a movie as Gran Torino was written, produced, directed, and horrible acting, Clint Eastwood redeemed himself in directing Changeling! This was a great movie! Not only was the movie very accurate on the true story (based on what I have read) but it fudgeing sucked what this lady went through!  If you have not seen this movie, you need to rent it...very entertaining.  The best movie I have seen in a while! 

Not to Hijack... but Gran Torino was HORRIABLE!!  Worst acting I've seen in a long time! The movie had a great story line, but could have been soooo much better!  Every word, line was predictable!

My review was similar.  Just not a good movie.  Stereotypes galore.

Well, I guess it was just two people now that I look back.

Anyway, I liked it a lot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 01:50:02 PM
I thought it was one of the best movies that I stole last year.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 02:01:46 PM
You know, I really enjoyed this movie as well.  I enjoyed the way the entire movie was shot (cinematography), I enjoyed the transition from joy to anguish of the lead character, I enjoyed the way they portrayed the main alien, and I thought that the special effects were top notch.  The movie also introduced a fairly novel concept of alien isolation and "civilization" in today's society, which Peter Jackson really ran with.  Also, the shock of the gore during the action scenes throughout the movie was extremely entertaining.

THS, what inconsistencies in the storyline were you referring to?  Just interested to hear your take.

Well, I'll try to do this spoiler free.  But just in case I don't do a good enough job:

 SPOILER ALERT
- The stuff the main alien needed that sprayed into the guy's face.  If it took 20 years to get the needed amount, how did the accidental spraying not cost them five year's worth of work? 
- Why in the hell would they let the aliens live where they did?  I don't want to give too much away, but just think about the main alien and what he was doing. 

I don't think I gave any spoilers away, so if you read that on accident, don't worry.  Really some trivial stuff to worry about, but a movie can't be a 10/10 if it's not perfect.  I can't really say any movie is a 10/10, so that may be a testament to District 9. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 10:34:42 PM
K..2 that you need to see, if you have not...Inglorious Bastards .

Not what I expected. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 18, 2010, 11:56:37 PM
Not what I expected. 
No way to drink and read all the lines on the bottom of the screen.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 12:02:08 AM
No way to drink and read all the lines on the bottom of the screen.

It wasn't really the reading so much as I damn near forgot what the movie was about halfway through it.  Seriously, it should have been called "Inglorious Bastards and the Jungle Fever".  It came together at the end, but the lone gunman bullpoop grew very tiresome.  

Although I admit, someone getting their balls blown off was a nice touch.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 08:27:37 AM
It wasn't really the reading so much as I damn near forgot what the movie was about halfway through it.  Seriously, it should have been called "Inglorious Bastards and the Jungle Fever".  It came together at the end, but the lone gunman bullpoop grew very tiresome.  

Although I admit, someone getting their balls blown off was a nice touch.

Yeah I liked it but came to the conclusion that it was about an hour too long.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 09:33:10 AM
I just saw Gran Torino last night.

How that was so universally hated by members of this board, I'll never understand.

Awesome flick. Clint Eastwood plays basically an aged Dirty Harry. But he's still a bad ass.

And all his casual racial epithets had me rolling, especially the scene where he pulls up on the three black guys harassing the Asian girl while her punk-ass wigger boyfriend watched. I was crying, I laughed so hard.

I couldn't even finish this movie...awful!!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 09:53:31 AM
The Hangover
Booo.  I got a hangover from watching this movie.  Just wasn't funny to me.  It had a few moments, but was hardly the fudgeing laugh parade I had been led to expect.  I really hate when somebody says "funniest movie ever, you'll laugh till you puke" and I skip over the laughing part and just go straight for the puking.  

The fudge with the beard? Spare me.  I don't ever want to see him (or that fudgeing Jonah Hill schlub) in another movie, but I see he's being pushed everywhere.  

Nothing redeeming at all in this movie for me.  I'd already seen Heather Graham's tits and there wasn't a baby attached to them when I did.

Inglorious Basterds

I like Tarantino. Reservoir Dogs is awesome.  Dusk Til Dawn is a fun movie.  Pulp Fiction is among my favorites. Both Kill Bills are way up there on my list.  

But this?  Sorry, it just didn't do it for me.  I enjoyed Brad Pitt's performance, it was awesome.  But the story was really just stupid.  I was right with it until the almost end.  What the fudge was that?  I understand creative license, but come the fudge on.  What's pathetic is that 20 years from now, kids who watch that movie will be confused thinking that's the way things really went down.  

Could have followed the same plot without the complete trashing of history near the end.  

For that reason  I just can't give it a positive review.  I'm glad I waited on the DVD.

Noticed that Tarantino found a way to get his feet obsession on the screen with the Cinderella scene.

Two decent looking women in the film.  Neither have any skin moments.

(http://usemycomputer.com/indeximages/2004/September/Diane%20Kruger.jpg)

(http://coedmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/melanie-laurent.jpg)


I will have to strongly disagree with your reviews on both of these movies, especially Inglorious Basterds.  It was  the best flick I've seen in a long time.  The whole story line just reeled me in.  I was obsessed with what was going to happen next.  The ending... yeah it did get a little silly, but i think that was done purposely.  Also, you are correct, if you have not seen the movie, go into it knowing that it is not historically accurate, except for the hatred the Nazis had for the Jews.  I loved it and I HIGHLY recommend this movie!!

Oh and BTW, the main character does have some nuddies on the net...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 10:06:35 AM
Creative license? Yes. Complete revision? No.

I wouldn't like a movie where Robert E Lee shot Grant in the face or where Jesus rampaged on the Roman soldiers.

It was just too far.

The movie was fair at best and I was a huge QT fan.

 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 10:23:09 AM
I wouldn't like a movie where Robert E Lee shot Grant in the face or where Jesus rampaged on the Roman soldiers.
Sounds like blockbuster material to me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 10:33:56 AM
Sounds like blockbuster material to me.

yep. Straight to DVD.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 11:25:41 AM
Creative license? Yes. Complete revision? No.

I wouldn't like a movie where Robert E Lee shot Grant in the face or where Jesus rampaged on the Roman soldiers.

It was just too far.

The movie was fair at best and I was a huge QT fan.

 

That is the whole point of Creative or Artistic License.  It doesn't have to be historically accurate, and doesn't make a movie bad... come on, this isn't the History channel.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 03:41:44 PM
That is the whole point of Creative or Artistic License.  It doesn't have to be historically accurate, and doesn't make a movie bad... come on, this isn't the History channel.

It would have been the same movie without slaughtering history.  That's the point. 

You liked it.  I was just meh.  Pitt's performance was awesome in its stupidity, but beyond that it didn't do a lot for me. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 19, 2010, 04:00:34 PM
SPOILER!!!

It would have been the same movie without slaughtering history.  That's the point. 
Not sure about that...

The ending of that movie was the badest assed part of the whole film. The climax. The vindication.

I guess you could have just had a bunch of other Nazis in that theater besides Hitler, but it wouldn't have been as satisfying. Let alone, that wouldn't be historically accurate either since that never went down.

It's a work of fiction. I think most people recognize it as such.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 24, 2010, 05:30:41 PM
Orphan

Why did I waste my time with this shoot?  Not a single redeeming thing about it.  I've yet to figure out why no-figure, horse-faced, titless, shootty actress Vera Farmiga is a "star."   She looks like Marilyn Manson and Sarah Jessica Parker had a child and then abused it (see below).  And she's the best-looking thing in this movie.  Unless you count the whored up ten-year old, that is, and I don't.

SPOILER: Getting that poor ten year old to dress up like a whore and then showing glimpses of her "unwrapping" herself bordered on kiddie porn and whoever is responsible for this movie should be ashamed, if not arrested.

Not sure what I really expected from this film, but it just didn't work. 

(http://images.askmen.com/galleries/actress/vera-farmiga/pictures/vera-farmiga-picture-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 29, 2010, 12:32:04 PM
I have never even heard of that film.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 29, 2010, 04:07:14 PM
Orphan

Why did I waste my time with this shoot?  Not a single redeeming thing about it.  I've yet to figure out why no-figure, horse-faced, titless, shootty actress Vera Farmiga is a "star."   She looks like Marilyn Manson and Sarah Jessica Parker had a child and then abused it (see below).  And she's the best-looking thing in this movie.  Unless you count the whored up ten-year old, that is, and I don't.

SPOILER: Getting that poor ten year old to dress up like a whore and then showing glimpses of her "unwrapping" herself bordered on kiddie porn and whoever is responsible for this movie should be ashamed, if not arrested.

Not sure what I really expected from this film, but it just didn't work. 

(http://images.askmen.com/galleries/actress/vera-farmiga/pictures/vera-farmiga-picture-1.jpg)

Very disturbing movie!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 29, 2010, 04:10:30 PM
I thought Vera looked pretty good in The Departed.

Nice ass, anyway. ;)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 29, 2010, 04:20:45 PM
I thought Vera looked pretty good in The Departed.

Nice ass, anyway. ;)

I've seen better.  On a horse.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 29, 2010, 06:17:37 PM
I thought Vera looked pretty good in The Departed.

Nice ass, anyway. ;)
Damn that's hot!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 11:52:53 AM
The Proposal

Okay so it's allegedly a chick flick.  Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.  As chick flicks go, this was relatively harmless.  It was trite, it was contrived, it was predictable.  The key to making a story work when everybody in the world knows what the outcome is going to be is to somehow make the characters endearing enough that the viewer wants to see the inevitable resolution. 

For the most part, this movie pulled that off.  Ryan Reynolds probably won't ever win an Academy Award.  But he was just goofily sappy enough to sort of make his role tolerable. Craig T. Nelson was wasted. So was Mary Steenburgen for the most part.  Sandra Bullock (below) was okay in the role.  Her body, what you could see of it, fit the part but her face looked really, realy haggard and pinched.  No way does this young guy seriously fall for that.  Would have been better if they'd cast Julia Roberts, Kate Beckinsale, Jennifer Aniston maybe Jennifer Garner or somebody else in there.  Her squinched face kept distracting me and she looked older than Steenburgen a couple of times. 

Oscar (from The Office) was not as funny as the director thought he was. 

And then there's Betty White.  That battle scarred old bitch is what kept the movie from veering into the intolerable realm.  She wasn't hilarious, but she was loony enough to add life to what might otherwise have been a lifeless film -- let's face it, both Reynolds and Bullock both have the screen presence of a cardboard box.

All in all, a relatively sweet movie. Not going to learn any of life's great truths, but your inner woman will enjoy it and you won't turn off the DVD needing a vomit bag. 



(http://pjensi.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/sandra_bullock_81.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 12:04:32 PM
American Gangster

Denzel Washington might be the best actor in film.  He was brilliant in Training Day.  Playing black mafia kingpin Frank Lucas in this film, he turns in another outstanding performance.

The movie was well done, perfectly captured the gritty New York 70s and featured solid performances from a large cast. 

The problem?  Stupid ass Russell Crowe.  Why the fudge does director Ridley Scott think this douche clown has the first ounce of acting ability?  He put Crowe in Gladiator. He stuck him in Body of Lies. He jammed him into a (bound to be shootty) Robin Hood remake.  His worthless actilng nearly ruined what was an otherwise outstanding film.  Even the guy who played the killer in Silence of the Lambs (and who also played Leland Stottlemeyer on Monk) was more credibile than Crowe. 

I love gangster movies.  Donnie Brasco (Johnny Depp's best work), Godfather, Casino, Goodfellas, Once Upon a Time, etc. are among my favorites.  This should be there.  And it almost could, but it just misses by a little bit. 

Crowe is a big part of that.  He sucks.  He absolutely fudgeing sucks as an actor. 

No woman to post, but lots of naked unnamed black chicks.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 12:13:03 PM
The Proposal



No. 

Good lord.  That was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.  It was predictable.  The storyline was beyond ridiculous.  And then there was the scene of Betty White in full Native American garb along with Bullock dancing around while rapping "To the window, to the wall."  That was without a shadow of a doubt the least funny scene in movie history. 

And Bullock did look awful in the movie.  Her body was good, but I kept wishing Reynolds would get with his old chick who was actually pretty cute.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 12:24:43 PM
No. 

Good lord.  That was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.  It was predictable.  The storyline was beyond ridiculous.  And then there was the scene of Betty White in full Native American garb along with Bullock dancing around while rapping "To the window, to the wall."  That was without a shadow of a doubt the least funny scene in movie history. 

And Bullock did look awful in the movie.  Her body was good, but I kept wishing Reynolds would get with his old chick who was actually pretty cute.

Yeah.  There was that.  I didn't like the face on the old GF either, though.  Her nose looked surgerized.

The movie was stupid, no doubt.  But in comparison to other "chick movies" I've been forced to view -- say, How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days or The Notebook -- this was fairly innocuous.  Didn't hurt anybody, the little white dog was cute, it didn't try to preach any kind of overarching message.  You knew what was going to happen but you didn't -- or at least I didn't -- spend half of the movie looking for a barf bag from the overly cloying sentiment.


The dancing eskimo scene seriously sucked and Bullock danced like she'd been stuck with a cattle prod, but I think that was designed to display her "awkward charm."  I was glad when that part was over.

It also had a few plot holes.  Like what happened to the obstruction charge against Reynolds?  Just walked away from that? 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 12:26:16 PM
Quote
Could have followed the same plot without the complete trashing of history near the end.  

For that reason  I just can't give it a positive review.  I'm glad I waited on the DVD.

Again, it's not the fudgein' History Channel, dumbass.  I suggest you rewatch it, over watching "The Notebook".  Watch it...realizing that it's just a fudgein' movie, that it's not trying to be Historically correct, watch it for what it is...Entertainment.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-2Z_aHjTo&feature=related# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-2Z_aHjTo&feature=related#)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 12:30:12 PM
Again, it's not the fudgein' History Channel, dumbass.  I suggest you rewatch it, over watching "The Notebook".  Watch it...realizing that it's just a fudgein' movie, that it's not trying to be Historically correct, watch it for what it is...Entertainment.


You're retarded.  Go back to watching Barney the Purple Dinosaur. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 01:11:57 PM
You're retarded.  Go back to watching Barney the Purple Dinosaur. 
No....I'm entirely correct and you just can't stand that.  So, keep watching your girl movies....fag
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 06:14:34 PM
Book of Eli

fudge a bunch of blue weirdos.  Go see this movie instead. 

Go see it.  Just go.

That is all I have to say.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 06:42:08 PM
Book of Eli

fudge a bunch of blue weirdos.  Go see this movie instead. 

Go see it.  Just go.

That is all I have to say.
(http://bp3.blogger.com/_VZaVT03Q2G0/SBEIH0RdbmI/AAAAAAAABpo/aR3kCjo4kSA/s400/temper-tantrum.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on January 30, 2010, 09:09:16 PM
stupid ass unrelated picture

Of all the idiotic responses you've ever posted, this one may be the dumbest of the lot.  

After some thought let me delve a little deeper into The Book of Eli

The Book of Eli

Denzel Washington gives another outstanding performance in this post-apocalyptic film.  While it trades on the Mad Max dirt and grunge just a bit, it doesn't stoop to the campiness of that Mel Gibson film.  Washington has calm menace down to an art and delivers the same "don't fudge with me" charm he displayed in Training Day, American Gangster and other films.  

The story is well-told, the actor's motivations are generally clear and the film manages to paint both a horrifying and hopeful portrait of the world after we blow it up.   It's rare in a Hollywood film to praise Christianity or to offer the opinion that there just might be hope and power in the words of The Bible.

This film does that, too.  

Gary Oldman provides a somewhat credibile anti-hero but his performance is the only one in the film that seems a little over the top.  He could have scaled it back just a bit and I think that the understatement would have probably made a stronger statement.  Jennifer Beals was okay in her role, but nothing to write home about.

When I saw Mila Kunis in the cast I was afraid the director/producers had shortchanged themselves by casting a lightweight in a role that required a stronger character, but Kunis surprised me.  She handled the dramatic role well. Her performance here might be enough to break her from that ditzy comedy stereotype she was in danger of being trapped in.  Don't know that she's ready to step into "action chick" boots, but she's definitely capable of more than dumb slut roles.

I'm hard to please when it comes to movies.  There is always something that could have been done better, could have been added or could have been cut out.   There are only about a dozen "perfect" movies (Godfather, Goodfellas, Cool Hand Luke etc.).  This isn't a perfect movie, but it's not significantly flawed either.  

The writing, the timing, the pace were all excellent.  The "reveals" were very well done.

It's not the kind of thing you'll go to see over and over again (like Godfather), but it's most definitely good enough to spend your money on.   I'll definitely get it when it comes out on DVD, especially now that I know what I'm looking for.  

I highly recommend this movie.


(http://www.wildbluffmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mila_kunis_01_header.jpg)

Followup:  Apparently most reviewers disagree with my perception of the film.  It scored poorly with RottenTomatoes.com (44%) and had some harsh reviews.  That makes me happy because I rarely agree with the dipshoots there.  Ratatoullie, for instance, which I found insipid and asinine, is one of its highest rated films. 
 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 01, 2010, 11:57:58 AM
Saw this one on Starz a few weeks ago. K, you may have seen this one since you watch a ton of movies.

Across the Universe.  Wow - this was about the most 'different' movie I've seen this side of Deliverance and The Crying Game.

For one - its a musical. Second - it is set in the 60's during the anti-war movement. The acting is sub par but it makes up for it with the music scenes and how everything ties together. The kicker in this movie? The entire plot - every single scene - is set to a Beatles song performed by the cast in the scene spontaneously. It took a little getting used to, but after about 30 mins I was enjoying it and couldn't turn the channel.  The characters have a lot of Beatles' song names - Jude, Prudence, etc....

All in all - I'd say it was a good watch. Long at 2.5 hours.  I usually don't like musicals but this one was "ok".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 01, 2010, 12:46:47 PM
Saw this one on Starz a few weeks ago. K, you may have seen this one since you watch a ton of movies.

Across the Universe.  Wow - this was about the most 'different' movie I've seen this side of Deliverance and The Crying Game.

For one - its a musical. Second - it is set in the 60's during the anti-war movement. The acting is sub par but it makes up for it with the music scenes and how everything ties together. The kicker in this movie? The entire plot - every single scene - is set to a Beatles song performed by the cast in the scene spontaneously. It took a little getting used to, but after about 30 mins I was enjoying it and couldn't turn the channel.  The characters have a lot of Beatles' song names - Jude, Prudence, etc....

All in all - I'd say it was a good watch. Long at 2.5 hours.  I usually don't like musicals but this one was ok.

I thought your kind referred to these as "show tunes"?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 05, 2010, 03:59:48 PM
I thought your kind referred to these as "show tunes"?

My "kind"? Straight and well hung?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 05, 2010, 04:03:24 PM
Saw this one on Starz a few weeks ago. K, you may have seen this one since you watch a ton of movies.

Across the Universe.  Wow - this was about the most 'different' movie I've seen this side of Deliverance and The Crying Game.

For one - its a musical. Second - it is set in the 60's during the anti-war movement. The acting is sub par but it makes up for it with the music scenes and how everything ties together. The kicker in this movie? The entire plot - every single scene - is set to a Beatles song performed by the cast in the scene spontaneously. It took a little getting used to, but after about 30 mins I was enjoying it and couldn't turn the channel.  The characters have a lot of Beatles' song names - Jude, Prudence, etc....

All in all - I'd say it was a good watch. Long at 2.5 hours.  I usually don't like musicals but this one was ok.
Oh no you di'int
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 05, 2010, 04:38:58 PM
Oh no you di'int

Take out the Beatles and it was rubbish.....

Kind of like putting Tom Hanks in a shootty movie - it at least makes it watchable.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 05, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
I actually wasn't commenting about your movie...never seen it. I was just commenting on the fact you reviewed a movie in Kaos's thread.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 06, 2010, 12:21:27 PM
I make allowances.  I've mellowed.

But if he ever reviews a movie in my presence? I will fudge up his face. The internets are serious.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 09:44:44 AM

But if he ever reviews a movie in my presence? I will phuk up his face. The internets are serious.

You sound like xaff now.....


and oh yeah - sue me....   :fu:

Have others not put reviews in this thread before?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 10:00:50 AM
You sound like xaff now.....


and oh yeah - sue me....   :fu:

Have others not put reviews in this thread before?
I keed...your cool. Review away.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 10:15:08 AM
I keed...your cool. Review away.

I wasn't kidding.  He tells me about a movie to my face?   I got something for him.  He won't tell me about my movie to my face. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 12:18:34 PM
I wasn't kidding.  He tells me about a movie to my face?   I got something for him.  He won't tell me about my movie to my face. 

I tell ya what - I will review 10 movies that YOU LOVE - and I will tell you they all suck while pissing on an autographed picture of KISS and Tony Soprano and you will be smiling about it sipping the last of your Cosmo drink.

That better?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 01:02:01 PM
I tell ya what - I will review 10 movies that YOU LOVE - and I will tell you they all suck while pissing on an autographed picture of KISS and Tony Soprano and you will be smiling about it sipping the last of your Cosmo drink.

That better?

Who wears the chaps?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 08, 2010, 01:25:49 PM
Who wears the chaps?

Depends - Ralph Lauren Chaps  or  Texas Longhorn Cheerleader Chaps  :vn:?

At least you are consistent. You haven't changed much eh?   I'm still reading through these reviews that date back to last year. I think you've saved me about 75 bucks worth of tickets so far......
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2010, 11:03:47 AM
The Book of Eli

Denzel Washington gives another outstanding performance in this post-apocalyptic film.  While it trades on the Mad Max dirt and grunge just a bit, it doesn't stoop to the campiness of that Mel Gibson film.  Washington has calm menace down to an art and delivers the same "don't fudge with me" charm he displayed in Training Day, American Gangster and other films. 

The story is well-told, the actor's motivations are generally clear and the film manages to paint both a horrifying and hopeful portrait of the world after we blow it up.   It's rare in a Hollywood film to praise Christianity or to offer the opinion that there just might be hope and power in the words of The Bible.

This film does that, too. 

Gary Oldman provides a somewhat credibile anti-hero but his performance is the only one in the film that seems a little over the top.  He could have scaled it back just a bit and I think that the understatement would have probably made a stronger statement.  Jennifer Beals was okay in her role, but nothing to write home about.

When I saw Mila Kunis in the cast I was afraid the director/producers had shortchanged themselves by casting a lightweight in a role that required a stronger character, but Kunis surprised me.  She handled the dramatic role well. Her performance here might be enough to break her from that ditzy comedy stereotype she was in danger of being trapped in.  Don't know that she's ready to step into "action chick" boots, but she's definitely capable of more than dumb slut roles.

I'm hard to please when it comes to movies.  There is always something that could have been done better, could have been added or could have been cut out.   There are only about a dozen "perfect" movies (Godfather, Goodfellas, Cool Hand Luke etc.).  This isn't a perfect movie, but it's not significantly flawed either. 

The writing, the timing, the pace were all excellent.  The "reveals" were very well done.

It's not the kind of thing you'll go to see over and over again (like Godfather), but it's most definitely good enough to spend your money on.   I'll definitely get it when it comes out on DVD, especially now that I know what I'm looking for. 

I highly recommend this movie.


(http://www.wildbluffmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mila_kunis_01_header.jpg)

Followup:  Apparently most reviewers disagree with my perception of the film.  It scored poorly with RottenTomatoes.com (44%) and had some harsh reviews.  That makes me happy because I rarely agree with the dipshoots there.  Ratatoullie, for instance, which I found insipid and asinine, is one of its highest rated films. 
 

Watched it last night...holy shoot you and I agree on a movie.  After listening to all the critics and then your review I would have thought for sure it sucked.  I really liked it, especially the reveal at the end, makes all the little reveals during stand out.   Good flick!  :thumsup: :thumsup:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2010, 11:55:01 AM
Watched Up in the Air last night, pretty good flick, worth a look.  Not a typical ending which was good.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2010, 01:01:38 PM
Watched it last night...holy poop you and I agree on a movie.  After listening to all the critics and then your review I would have thought for sure it sucked.  I really liked it, especially the reveal at the end, makes all the little reveals during stand out.   Good flick!  :thumsup: :thumsup:

Im sorry - did you write a review? I couldnt get past the picture.....
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2010, 01:40:22 PM
District 9

Based on a couple of good reviews here I expected more. 

I went to sleep on this movie twice.  Tried to watch it last night and dozed about 30 minutes in.  Wrote that off to being tired, so I tried it again when I woke up at 4:30.  Went back to sleep on it. 

Finally watched it when I got up for good at 7. 

Disappointing.  I don't have to know everything to enjoy a movie, but I need to know something.  Not enough exposition, not enough conclusion. Just left too many questions unanswered. 

Guy issues a shoot to kill on sight order and after much slaughter, then decides to gloat instead of shoot?  Out of character.

There was only one intelligent prawn?  Only one prawn child?   Just too many holes. 

It was a meh movie.  It didn't make the cut as an action flick and it fell short of the goal in science fiction. Glad I didn't waste any $$ at the theaters. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2010, 02:09:05 PM
District 9

Based on a couple of good reviews here I expected more. 

I went to sleep on this movie twice.  Tried to watch it last night and dozed about 30 minutes in.  Wrote that off to being tired, so I tried it again when I woke up at 4:30.  Went back to sleep on it. 

Finally watched it when I got up for good at 7. 

Disappointing.  I don't have to know everything to enjoy a movie, but I need to know something.  Not enough exposition, not enough conclusion. Just left too many questions unanswered. 

Guy issues a shoot to kill on sight order and after much slaughter, then decides to gloat instead of shoot?  Out of character.

There was only one intelligent prawn?  Only one prawn child?   Just too many holes. 

It was a meh movie.  It didn't make the cut as an action flick and it fell short of the goal in science fiction. Glad I didn't waste any $$ at the theaters. 
I thought this movie had the potential to be really good, but it failed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2010, 07:17:45 PM
I thought this movie had the potential to be really good, but it failed.
wait 'till you watch District 10....It's going to be the tits.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2010, 09:03:51 PM
Into the Wild

Anyone seen this or know the story? 

Some dude decided to take Emerson, Thoreau, and Tolstoy WAY too seriously and took off to live in the woods by himself.  He had a pretty kick ass journey to Alaska while living like a total hippy. 

It was very entertaining and intriguing considering it's a true story.  I skimmed through the book at Barnes and Noble, and the movie was right along with the original story.

I strongly suggest checking it out. 

The chicks were a bit meh:

Catherine Keener
(http://images.askmen.com/galleries/actress/catherine-keener/pictures/catherine-keener-picture-3.jpg)

Kristen Stewart (Chick from Twilight)
(http://twilight-review.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/kristen-stewart.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2010, 10:49:44 PM
Into the Wild

Anyone seen this or know the story? 

Some dude decided to take Emerson, Thoreau, and Tolstoy WAY too seriously and took off to live in the woods by himself.  He had a pretty kick ass journey to Alaska while living like a total hippy. 

The stupid motherhumper STARVED TO DEATH.  Yeah, just wander off into the wilds of Alaska with no planning, no preparation, no knowledge of survival techniques and hang out for a while... pick a few wild shrooms, get sick as hell and die because you are stupid.  Genetic selection. 

Hippy dippy moron.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2010, 11:15:24 PM
The stupid motherhumper STARVED TO DEATH.  Yeah, just wander off into the wilds of Alaska with no planning, no preparation, no knowledge of survival techniques and hang out for a while... pick a few wild shrooms, get sick as hell and die because you are stupid.  Genetic selection. 

Hippy dippy moron.

^^Spoiler Alert^^

But yeah, kid was a total moron.  I want to show this movie to my students next year when we study American romanticism. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 15, 2010, 12:56:50 AM
Don't know about this, but I showed my eighth graders the black and white 1939 version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame when we were studying the Middle Ages and the influence of the church. 

After they got through bitching and moaning about the movie being black and white and giggling over the acting quite a few of them got something out of it.  I saw tears in the eyes of several of the tough ass boys when Quasi got ditched at the end.  I think when you're an eighth grader you spend more time than you'd care to admit wondering if you're Quasi yourself.

When we did American history and got to Vietnam, I let them watch a couple of episodes of Tour of Duty.  It was cheesy and trite, but it did a good job exploring some of the shoot those guys endured. 

I guess in a couple of years some dumbass will show Inglorious Basterds and have his class thinking Hitler was murdered by a Jew theater chick, a black dude and a couple of oafs. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 15, 2010, 11:39:30 PM
GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra

My cobra did not rise.  It did not stir.  It remained dormant throughout this colossal dud of a movie.  

A wooden fence post could have done a better job than Dennis Quaid.  His performance was laughable.

Dude I can only think of as Simon Adabesi from the HBO series Oz was forced into a hideous British accent. He is usually decent, but was horrible in this awful film.  

Wayans? fudgeing please.  He's about as convincing in his "I'm the goofy black guy" role as either of the insipid Zack and Cody twins would have been.

The so-called French guy looked like a Mexican with a bad hairdo.

Rachel Nichols was passable but such a shootty actress I didn't really care that she had boobs  -- not that she showed much.  

Channing Tatum is a pathetic excuse for an actor. He had about as much chemistry with Sienna Miller as a pair of cardboard wildebeest.  

There was so much wrong with this movie that there's no point in even attempting to go through it point by point. The action scenes were asinine, the carnage was absurd, the CGI was obvious and incredibly poorly done.  

It set up for a sequel, but I hope people have better sense than to a) make another one of these turd bombs and b) spend money to see it.  

God, what an awful movie.  It was so fudgetacularly bad, that they should have played it as a spoof and made a joke out of it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2010, 09:56:14 AM
GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra

My cobra did not rise.  It did not stir.  It remained dormant throughout this colossal dud of a movie. 

A wooden fence post could have done a better job than Dennis Quaid.  His performance was laughable.

Dude I can only think of as Simon Adabesi from the HBO series Oz was forced into a hideous British accent. He is usually decent, but was horrible in this awful film. 

Wayans? fudgeing please.  He's about as convincing in his "I'm the goofy black guy" role as either of the insipid Zack and Cody twins would have been.

The so-called French guy looked like a Mexican with a bad hairdo.

Rachel Nichols was passable but such a shootty actress I didn't really care that she had boobs  -- not that she showed much. 

Channing Tatum is a pathetic excuse for an actor. He had about as much chemistry with Sienna Miller as a pair of cardboard wildebeest. 

There was so much wrong with this movie that there's no point in even attempting to go through it point by point. The action scenes were asinine, the carnage was absurd, the CGI was obvious and incredibly poorly done. 

It set up for a sequel, but I hope people have better sense than to a) make another one of these turd bombs and b) spend money to see it. 

God, what an awful movie.  It was so fudgetacularly bad, that they should have played it as a spoof and made a joke out of it. 
As a huge fan of GI Joe as a kid this movie is a travesty and all copies should be burned!  Don't even get me started!!!   It jumped the shark when Snake-Eyes had a mouth on his costume, and they decided to make the back story of Snake-eyes and Storm Shadow when they were 10 years old.   :puke: :puke: The only redeeming quality of this movie was at least the babes were hot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2010, 09:39:10 AM
Zombieland

Not exactly what I expected, but a fun movie.  It was no Raising Arizona, but it had a few funny moments and didn't take itself seriously at all.  It's not laugh out loud comedy, it's not scare the shoot out of you horror, but just a nice easy blend of fear and bemusement. 

No angst over the crazy situation, no underlying social commentary, no deeper hidden meaning.  Just four misfits (well, five for a while) making the best they can out of a really bad situation. 

Yeah there are crazy plot holes.  For instance how come the power is still on everywhere?  And don't they ever run out of gas?  Or bullets?  But that really doesn't matter all that much because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. 

Woody Harrellson dominates the film.  He's good enough that you'd almost like to see him in a serious zombie killing movie, but then you remember he'd have to do pathos and pass on the idea.  No, he fits better here. 

The nerdy, nebbish guy is interchangeable with any of the other hundred or so nerdy nebbish guys who populate thousands of other teen films.  I'm just glad they didn't get the Superbad guy (Cera) in this role because I'm a little tired of him. 

Emma Stone confuses me.  She's either hot or not and I lean to not. 

It's not a movie you'll buy and put on your shelf to treasure for years to come, but on a throwaway afternoon it would be pretty fun. 

Worth watching.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2010, 08:43:30 PM
Zombieland

Not exactly what I expected, but a fun movie.  It was no Raising Arizona, but it had a few funny moments and didn't take itself seriously at all.  It's not laugh out loud comedy, it's not scare the shoot out of you horror, but just a nice easy blend of fear and bemusement. 

No angst over the crazy situation, no underlying social commentary, no deeper hidden meaning.  Just four misfits (well, five for a while) making the best they can out of a really bad situation. 

Yeah there are crazy plot holes.  For instance how come the power is still on everywhere?  And don't they ever run out of gas?  Or bullets?  But that really doesn't matter all that much because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. 

Woody Harrellson dominates the film.  He's good enough that you'd almost like to see him in a serious zombie killing movie, but then you remember he'd have to do pathos and pass on the idea.  No, he fits better here. 

The nerdy, nebbish guy is interchangeable with any of the other hundred or so nerdy nebbish guys who populate thousands of other teen films.  I'm just glad they didn't get the Superbad guy (Cera) in this role because I'm a little tired of him. 

Emma Stone confuses me.  She's either hot or not and I lean to not. 

It's not a movie you'll buy and put on your shelf to treasure for years to come, but on a throwaway afternoon it would be pretty fun. 

Worth watching.
I'm sensing you're a bit of a bitch.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2010, 09:05:09 PM
Quote
I guess in a couple of years some dumbass will show Inglorious Basterds and have his class thinking Hitler was murdered by a Jew theater chick, a black dude and a couple of oafs.
I didn't know Prowler was working on his teachers certification.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2010, 09:13:54 PM
I'm sensing you're a bit of a bitch.
a bit????   :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2010, 11:00:30 PM
Zombieland

Not exactly what I expected, but a fun movie.  It was no Raising Arizona, but it had a few funny moments and didn't take itself seriously at all.  It's not laugh out loud comedy, it's not scare the shoot out of you horror, but just a nice easy blend of fear and bemusement. 

No angst over the crazy situation, no underlying social commentary, no deeper hidden meaning.  Just four misfits (well, five for a while) making the best they can out of a really bad situation. 

Yeah there are crazy plot holes.  For instance how come the power is still on everywhere?  And don't they ever run out of gas?  Or bullets?  But that really doesn't matter all that much because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. 

Woody Harrellson dominates the film.  He's good enough that you'd almost like to see him in a serious zombie killing movie, but then you remember he'd have to do pathos and pass on the idea.  No, he fits better here. 

The nerdy, nebbish guy is interchangeable with any of the other hundred or so nerdy nebbish guys who populate thousands of other teen films.  I'm just glad they didn't get the Superbad guy (Cera) in this role because I'm a little tired of him. 

Emma Stone confuses me.  She's either hot or not and I lean to not. 

It's not a movie you'll buy and put on your shelf to treasure for years to come, but on a throwaway afternoon it would be pretty fun. 

Worth watching.

I loved the fact that it didn't take itself seriously. 

Woody Harrelson is one of my favorites and played his part perfectly. 

Emma Stone is hot.  Something about the ghostbusters scene where she was playing Janine did it for me. 

I didn't care much for the nerd or the little girl, but there was a Sancho reference in the scene where the four first met in the grocery store. 

And the twinkie plot was perfect for a movie that seriously had no agenda other than killing zombies.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2010, 05:16:47 PM
a bit????   :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
It's from the movie
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2010, 05:32:13 PM
It's from the movie

Yeah, it is you little spit fudge. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2010, 08:44:31 PM
Yeah, it is you little spit fudge. 


I'm thinking more like "a lot of a bitch"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2010, 11:04:45 PM
I'm thinking more like "a lot of a bitch"

And I'm thinking you continue to confirm your dumbass. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2010, 11:10:57 PM
Law Abiding Citizen

Gerard Butler cannot act.  If Russell Crowe, Nick Cage and John Travolta had a baby it would be a better actor than Gerard Butler. 

I thought his affected speech in 300 was just a gimmick, but it's obvious he struggles to maintain an "American" accent and drifts off into gobbeldy-gook (Craig Ferguson mumblety jumbo) from time to time.  And on top of that he's just a shootty actor. 

He's completely unbelievable in a role that was made for Mel Gibson or Charles Bronson (if this was 1970). 

Plenty of star power in the movie with Jamie Foxx and the chick from Talladega Nights and a few people you'd recognize.  But in Butler's clumsy hands (he was the producer of this floating turd) it simply rang hollow. 

Foxx was a real lightweight in his attempt to be a convincing DA.  Didn't work.  Neither did Leslie Bibb as his co counsel. 

We've seen this movie before and we've seen it done much better than this.  It was a waste. 

Ship Gerard back to where ever he came from and let him make infomercials there or something.  I've seen enough of him.  Won't watch anything else in which he "stars"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 19, 2010, 07:35:36 AM
The Hurt Locker

The Iraq war is helpless and hopeless.  Beyond that we get absolutely nothing from this movie. 

It got such high critical acclaim I was hoping for something better.

The performances were all solid.  Can't complain about any of the actors involved.  But their motivations were muddled, the interplay hackneyed at times.  You wanted to care, but for the most part I was apathetic.

Kathryn Bigelow, the director, didn't have the gravitas or experience to pull off this movie.  Where it should have had depth, it grounded in the shallows. When it had a chance to humanize the characters it fell back on cliche.  In more capable hands, this could have been a powerful and moving film.  In Bigelow's lightweight command it missed the mark. It failed to dig deep enough into the characters to give you a reason to really care.  Their reasons and rationale were not plumbed. 

I can see why Hollywood types loved it, because it makes the American presence in the Middle East seem like an utterly hopeless proposition.  It did so without demeaning the soldiers themselves so I'm sure the groovy "can't we all just get along, here's a nice daisy" crowd is patting itself on the back for managing to express disdain for the war effort without making the soldiers look like monsters -- which was their failed direction in movies like Platoon and Casualties of War. 

It wasn't a bad movie, it was just flat and two dimensional.  It wasn't as silly and over dramatized as some other war films, so it gets points for no frills realism but all in all it was just lacking. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 20, 2010, 12:37:08 AM
Three reviews today.  Short and to the point.

Drag Me to Hell
By all means drag me to hell. Just don't try to drag me back to the theater to see this poop fest.  It's a PG-13 horror movie which should have indicated the suckage immediately, but I ignored the warning.  The girl was sort of hot and her choice of shoes was good, but that's where the quality ended here.  The best actor in the whole thing was a damn fly. 

 


Rented this, hated the way it ended.  Maybe I always want goodness to win.  Alison Lohman was the girl from Matchstick men and she was in Big Fish, it was pretty bad acting.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 01, 2010, 06:04:48 PM
Couple's Retreat
Given the abysmal reviews I'd seen from others, I wasn't expecting much.  And that's exactly what I got.  Not much. 

Kristin Davis, Kristen Bell and Malin Akerman all looked pretty good in their underwear.  Akerman especially (see below). She just sort of did it for me. 

The location was outstanding.  Makes me want to visit that place some day.  Maybe spring break. 

But the movie itself was just sort of flat.  I really wish Vince Vaughn was as funny as he clearly thinks he is.  This movie had so much potential and it didn't even collect the low-hanging fruit. 

First, I'm not buying Davis married to Jon Favreau.  About as mismatched as you could possibly be.  Not buying Bell being married to Bateman who is 12-years her senior but looked about 32 years older. 

There were so many plot holes that the plot itself was basically a hole. 

I distracted myself by taking in the scenery -- both the women and the locale -- and just let this piece of fluff movie drift on by.  I'd have been pissed if I'd paid to see it in the theater, but since it was a Netflix mailbox bonus, it was just a piece of somewhat unfulfilling candy.



(http://www.plunderguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Malin-Akerman-8.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 01, 2010, 06:17:36 PM
Jennifer's Body

I've found Megan Fox's dramatic range.  She can either sashay away from the camera showing her reasonably tight ass and legs or she can pout seductively in the general direction of the camera while showing some cleavage.  Ask her to perform a speaking part and everything grinds to a halt. 

That said, I've seen worse in the teen "possessed by a demon" genre. Fox managed the role reasonably well (see below).  She wasn't great, but she wasn't atrocious like some that I've run across over the years.  On the other hand, I've always been impressed by Amanda Seyfried. This wasn't her best work, but she did elevate the film just by being in it. 

The movie sort of meandered through the story. You had a pretty good idea of how it was going to end up -- and then you probably missed figuring some of that part of that out, anyway. 

Best line of the movie?  "Let's play boyfriend-girlfriend like we used to."   I wouldn't go so far to say it was worth watching just for that, but it was there.

It's not something I'd have the friends over to watch. It's not something I need to see over and over (*with one caveat) but it went down easy and was a decent waste of 90 minutes in the middle of the night.

(http://www.meganfoxsource.com/wp-content/uploads/megan-fox-jennifers-body.jpg)

(http://choogal.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/amanda-seyfried.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2010, 11:10:11 AM
Couple's Retreat
Given the abysmal reviews I'd seen from others, I wasn't expecting much.  And that's exactly what I got.  Not much.  

Kristin Davis, Kristen Bell and Malin Akerman all looked pretty good in their underwear.  Akerman especially (see below). She just sort of did it for me.  

The location was outstanding.  Makes me want to visit that place some day.  Maybe spring break.  

But the movie itself was just sort of flat.  I really wish Vince Vaughn was as funny as he clearly thinks he is.  This movie had so much potential and it didn't even collect the low-hanging fruit.  

First, I'm not buying Davis married to Jon Favreau.  About as mismatched as you could possibly be.  Not buying Bell being married to Bateman who is 12-years her senior but looked about 32 years older.  

There were so many plot holes that the plot itself was basically a hole.  

I distracted myself by taking in the scenery -- both the women and the locale -- and just let this piece of fluff movie drift on by.  I'd have been pissed if I'd paid to see it in the theater, but since it was a Netflix mailbox bonus, it was just a piece of somewhat unfulfilling candy.

I looked up that place after we watched the movie (St Regis Bora Bora).   The rooms they stayed in were about $1200 a night.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2010, 11:13:14 AM
fudge that.  For 1200 a night it had best come with hookers and blow.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2010, 11:15:08 AM
fudge that.  For 1200 a night it had best come with hookers and blow.
It is all inclusive, maybe that is included...I didn't read the fine print.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2010, 01:36:24 PM
I looked up that place after we watched the movie (St Regis Bora Bora).   The rooms they stayed in were about $1200 a night.

No way any of them could have afforded it. That was the biggest of all plot holes.  If you thought about that much, it chewed the rest of the film away.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2010, 02:45:09 PM
No way any of them could have afforded it. That was the biggest of all plot holes.  If you thought about that much, it chewed the rest of the film away.

Yes and no didn't they cover this in the beginning.  It was a special deal that is why all of them needed to go.  Plus if I remember correctly, the rate was cheaper because they had a cancellation thus allowing their group to go.  Finally they had to go to the couples side of the island.

However if we are being that analytical of a fictional movie... no ...none of them probably would have been able to afford that place.  Of course I didn't see their budgets or cash flow analysis in the end credits so I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 06, 2010, 10:04:04 PM
Kaos, do you have any plans to see Shutter Island?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 07, 2010, 08:37:33 AM
Alice in Wonderland

Holy hell, what a terrible movie.  I went into this with low expectations as I knew this was just being made for blockbuster money, but this was simply awful.  The story was uneventful.  The plot was rushed.  Besides Johnny Depp's typical quirkiness, the acting was stilted.  What kind of a 17 year old girl enters a realm of evaporating cats, rabbits that talk, a queen with a gigantic head who cuts off other people's heads, and walking cards with spears and doesn't ONCE show any signs of being afraid, surprised, or nervous? 

Oh wait (spoiler alert), she thinks it's a dream until the very end when she realizes it's not a dream.  She keeps saying she wants to wake up.  She hates the dream.  Yet, she keeps going along with the nonsense.  I kept waiting for her to jump off a cliff and attempt to fly, since, she continually reminded me she was only in a dream. 

Also, the ending is completely worthless.  I won't, um I guess, spoil it for you, but trust me when I say that the end to Alice in Wonderland involves a business deal with China. 

And the talent level is sub par.  Anne Hathaway is the only attractive girl in the movie, but she flings her hands around like a child with severe mental retardation (not trying to be mean or funny; that's just how she looked).  Also, she was caked with dark colored make up.  Looked like someone smeared poo all over her. 

Zero stars out of ten. 

Inglourious Basterds

I know most have already seen this movie, but I just saw it and thought it was great.  Not Tarentino's best.  But it was entertaining and had a good story. 

Also, I'm in love:

(http://zookzy.com/wp-content/media//2009/08/MelanieLaurent_01.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 07, 2010, 10:37:49 PM
Defiance

Jews survive in the woods.  Ok.  It's a good story, but -- no offense to the Jews -- how many more Jews suffered during WWII movies can there really be? 

The only thing that sets this apart is that it was a somewhat true story. 

Reasonably well acted if maybe a little over-emoted.  And a little long.  And a little lacking in the wrapup. 

Just meh overall. 

State of Play

Ben Affleck is a super powerful Senator?  Russell Crowe is a schlumpy, stringy-haired reporter? Rachel McAdams -- who is cute, but a complete acting lightweight -- is interested somewhat in Crowe? 

Just a waste.  It wasn't offensive, but it just didn't reach anywhere.  It was the film equivalent of lukewarm tapioca. 

Boo.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 08, 2010, 10:47:12 AM
Alice in Wonderland

Holy hell, what a terrible movie.  I went into this with low expectations as I knew this was just being made for blockbuster money, but this was simply awful.  The story was uneventful.  The plot was rushed.  Besides Johnny Depp's typical quirkiness, the acting was stilted.  What kind of a 17 year old girl enters a realm of evaporating cats, rabbits that talk, a queen with a gigantic head who cuts off other people's heads, and walking cards with spears and doesn't ONCE show any signs of being afraid, surprised, or nervous? 

Oh wait (spoiler alert), she thinks it's a dream until the very end when she realizes it's not a dream.  She keeps saying she wants to wake up.  She hates the dream.  Yet, she keeps going along with the nonsense.  I kept waiting for her to jump off a cliff and attempt to fly, since, she continually reminded me she was only in a dream. 

Also, the ending is completely worthless.  I won't, um I guess, spoil it for you, but trust me when I say that the end to Alice in Wonderland involves a business deal with China. 

And the talent level is sub par.  Anne Hathaway is the only attractive girl in the movie, but she flings her hands around like a child with severe mental retardation (not trying to be mean or funny; that's just how she looked).  Also, she was caked with dark colored make up.  Looked like someone smeared poo all over her. 

Zero stars out of ten. 

My wife and I thought about seeing this the other night, but had heard that either you love it or hate it. Alot of folks said pretty much the same as you. We decided to see Shutter Island instead, which was a great movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 08, 2010, 11:13:11 AM
Oscars said Hurt Locker was a great movie. 

I wasn't moved.  I really think the accolades for the film are more for the subtle way it made the US look overwhelmed and incompetent in a war that's essentially unwinnable (in Hollywood estimation, because as one of our own on this board once said, 'violence is never the answer')  than they are for the fact that the movie was really that good.  The Oscar glory was as much about agenda as it was about film. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 08, 2010, 05:42:27 PM
My wife and I thought about seeing this the other night, but had heard that either you love it or hate it. Alot of folks said pretty much the same as you.

I love Burton, Depp and Carter.  I will be seeing this.

I don't use K's movie reviews for much but entertainment value.  Our tastes are very different.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 08, 2010, 05:59:06 PM

I don't use K's movie reviews for much but entertainment value.  Our tastes are very different.

Just an fyi...that was townhall's review.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 08, 2010, 07:49:30 PM
I love Burton, Depp and Carter.  I will be seeing this.

I don't use K's movie reviews for much but entertainment value.  Our tastes are very different.

I love them all as well. 

Depp and Carter I can forgive.  Carter seemed to be directed to be like the villain in a kid's movie.  Depp saved the show.

Burton?  The man rushed the script and spent more time evaluating the CGI instead of evaluating the lead role's acting.  That was the main problem.  Alice sucked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 10:32:59 AM
Just an fyi...that was townhall's review.

Ah...my mistake.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 01:12:46 PM
I love them all as well. 

Depp and Carter I can forgive.  Carter seemed to be directed to be like the villain in a kid's movie.  Depp saved the show.

Burton?  The man rushed the script and spent more time evaluating the CGI instead of evaluating the lead role's acting.  That was the main problem.  Alice sucked.

It's X-rated?  :gig:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 01:45:02 PM
It's X-rated?  :gig:

No...that would be this version...which I do have a copy of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 01:52:26 PM
Screw ya'll.  This is all you need.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0JvF9vpqx8&feature=fvst# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0JvF9vpqx8&feature=fvst#)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 02:26:40 PM
No...that would be this version...which I do have a copy of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws)

Kristine De Bell. Yummy.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 10:08:30 PM
No...that would be this version...which I do have a copy of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8fDfZPN-6Y#ws)

I imagine it sits right next to your copy of Deep Throat? 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 10:11:18 PM
I imagine it sits right next to your copy of Deep Throat Debbie Does Dallas? 
FTFY Why yes it does.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2010, 10:12:34 PM
FTFY Why yes it does.

I actually had that initially.  FML
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 11:26:43 AM
I love them all as well. 

Depp and Carter I can forgive.  Carter seemed to be directed to be like the villain in a kid's movie.  Depp saved the show.

Burton?  The man rushed the script and spent more time evaluating the CGI instead of evaluating the lead role's acting.  That was the main problem.  Alice sucked.

Wow, I'm here to say that I was wrong.  Awful movie.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much Disney and not nearly enough Burton.  Carter was great.  Depp was uncharacteristically unimpressive. 

I would like to see Burton take a mulligan on this one without being handcuffed by the fudgeing mouse.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:10:34 PM
The Hurt Locker

Gotta disagree with our resident Ebert here.  While not what I would typically think the Academy would pick as Movie of the year. Frankly, because I usually have no interest in the Movie of the Year.  I thought hurt locker told a great story, and something that does probably ring true with some of our younger service men and women.  That being the adrenaline from battle and then the subsequent return home to the mundane existence.  I really didn't notice any anti war propaganda from our usually liberal Hollywood.  I recommend!

Did you Hear about the Morgans

Ok first off chick flick...which I knew going in, but sometimes you gotta bite the bullet.  I actually usually like the bumbling comedic routine of Hugh Grant who pretty much plays the same character in every romantic comedy, however this one was atrocious.  Sarah Jessica Parker....blah or should I say naaaaaah.  Premise...The Morgans a separated couple, due to Grant's infidelity, are very successful New Yorkers.  When they both witness a murder they must be put in protective custody in Ray, Wyoming (a one stoplight town).  Hilarity ensues or actually it doesn't, im sure you can pretty much figure the plot out from here.   Their custody Marshall's played by Sam Elliot (oh Sam WTF are you doing in this turd) and Mary Steenburgen along twith the town help the Marshall's to reconcile while in protective custody.
The only bright spot in this entire movie is Wilford Brimley who plays a grumpy redneck cafe owner.  Avoid!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:24:23 PM
The Hurt Locker

Gotta disagree with our resident Ebert here.  While not what I would typically think the Academy would pick as Movie of the year. Frankly, because I usually have no interest in the Movie of the Year.  I thought hurt locker told a great story, and something that does probably ring true with some of our younger service men and women.  That being the adrenaline from battle and then the subsequent return home to the mundane existence.  I really didn't notice any anti war propaganda from our usually liberal Hollywood.  I recommend!

Agreed.

Quote


Did you Hear about the Morgans

Ok first off chick flick...which I knew going in, but sometimes you gotta bite the bullet.  I actually usually like the bumbling comedic routine of Hugh Grant who pretty much plays the same character in every romantic comedy, however this one was atrocious.  Sarah Jessica Parker....blah or should I say naaaaaah.  Premise...The Morgans a separated couple, due to Grant's infidelity, are very successful New Yorkers.  When they both witness a murder they must be put in protective custody in Ray, Wyoming (a one stoplight town).  Hilarity ensues or actually it doesn't, im sure you can pretty much figure the plot out from here.   Their custody Marshall's played by Sam Elliot (oh Sam WTF are you doing in this turd) and Mary Steenburgen along twith the town help the Marshall's to reconcile while in protective custody.
The only bright spot in this entire movie is Wilford Brimley who plays a grumpy redneck cafe owner.  Avoid!


You're officially a pussy.  You like Hugh Grant?  I fudgeing loooooooooooooathe that asshole.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:38:00 PM
You're officially a pussy.  You like Hugh Grant?  I fudgeing loooooooooooooathe that asshole.

Says the guy who went to see Where the Wild Things Are on opening night.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:39:52 PM

You're officially a pussy.  You like Hugh Grant?  I fudgeing loooooooooooooathe that asshole.

You mean, you don't, you know, well, jolly me, by, you, what I mean, oh what was I saying, oh yes, the question, quite right, yes, um, you don't, like the way, he, the actor, uh, um, Hugh Grant, like the way, he, um, studders, um, throughout, a, uh, film?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:42:36 PM
You mean, you don't, you know, well, jolly me, by, you, what I mean, oh what was I saying, oh yes, the question, quite right, yes, um, you don't, like the way, he, the actor, uh, um, Hugh Grant, like the way, he, um, studders, um, throughout, a, uh, film?

Nailed it.  Hate, hate, hate that dude.  To top it off: he left Hurley at home to chase hookers.  I love hookers, but I love Hurley more.

Says the guy who went to see Where the Wild Things Are on opening night.



fudgeing right I did. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:51:01 PM
Nailed it.  Hate, hate, hate that dude.  To top it off: he left Hurley at home to chase hookers.  I love hookers, but I love Hurley more.

fudgeing right I did. 
I'm not in love with the dude, I just liked some of the movies he was in.  Did I not say he plays a bumbling dope through out every movie.  I am sure he cares that you hate him...he probably cries all the way to the bank.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:53:14 PM
I'm not in love with the dude, I just liked some of the movies he was in.  Did I not say he plays a bumbling dope through out every movie.  I am sure he cares that you hate him...he probably cries all the way to the bank.

Nice and defensive....just the way I like you.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 12:55:56 PM
Nice and defensive....just the way I like you.
I miss your touch
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 01:05:39 PM
Final Destination 4, 3D

I hope that was the final destination.  Probably the worst overall movie I've seen in a while.  The acting was atrocious, the plot even more asinine than the previous FD movies (the first two of which were good for what they were) and the contrivances simply ludicrous.  I'd give this movie a 0 on a scale of 10 to 20.

Retire the franchise.  

Plenty of extras on the BluRay version, but who gives a shoot?  The "alternate endings" were even worse than the official one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 01:31:49 PM
Final Destination 4, 3D

I hope that was the final destination.  Probably the worst overall movie I've seen in a while.  The acting was atrocious, the plot even more asinine than the previous FD movies (the first two of which were good for what they were) and the contrivances simply ludicrous.  I'd give this movie a 0 on a scale of 10 to 20.

Retire the franchise.  

Plenty of extras on the BluRay version, but who gives a shoot?  The "alternate endings" were even worse than the official one.
I got you beat...Observe and Report...worst piece of shoot I have ever witnessed.  I want the 1:45 it stole from my life.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 01:40:59 PM
Has anyone seen The Box yet.  If so, can somebody please explain to me what the fudge it was about???  
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 01:54:29 PM
I got you beat...Observe and Report...worst piece of shoot I have ever witnessed.  I want the 1:45 it stole from my life.
Completely disagree here.

That movie was funny as fudge if you like dark comedies.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 01:57:26 PM
Has anyone seen The Box yet.  If so, can somebody please explain to me what the fudge it was about??? 

In the same night I saw another movie of note: The Box.

It's Richard Kelley (Donnie Darko) so expect weirdness to the point of confusion.

This was a 70's period piece and it really felt like I was watching a movie from that time. It felt like The Shining with a little bit of Creepshow thrown in for good measure, but with better special effects. Very Stanley Kubrick-esque.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:16:08 PM
Completely disagree here.

That movie was funny as fudge if you like dark comedies.
FAIL

I like dark comedies. Insert the Big Lebowski, Clerks, Fargo, Raising Arizona.

I liked Pineapple Express (quasi Dark)..I got it... it was funny...not necessarily Rogen, but I laughed a lot.   

This is a Fail of not funny proportions.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:25:51 PM
Completely disagree here.


No joke, you are the only person I've every heard say Observe and Report was anything other than buzzard shoot. 

When it was out a bunch of my daughter's friends were at the house and went to the theater to see it.  College age, the type who try to tell me Kat Williams is the funniest guy who ever lived, who think The Hangover (what a dud) is high comedy and Superbad is the Fast Times at Ridgemont High of their generation.  To a man they declared Observe and Report the worst movie ever. 

When you can't sway a gaggle of mush-headed college frosh and sophomores?  F.A.I.L. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:26:43 PM
FAIL

I like dark comedies. Insert the Big Lebowski, Clerks, Fargo, Raising Arizona.

I liked Pineapple Express (quasi Dark)..I got it... it was funny...not necessarily Rogen, but I laughed a lot.   

This is a Fail of not funny proportions.
Anna Farris passed out drunk and puking on herself as he fudgeed her anyway, and then commanding that he "Don't stop mothafudgea" was dark comedy gold, IMO.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:26:55 PM
FAIL

I like dark comedies. Insert the Big Lebowski, Clerks, Fargo, Raising Arizona.

I liked Pineapple Express (quasi Dark)..I got it... it was funny...not necessarily Rogen, but I laughed a lot.   


Those aren't dark.  Particularly not Pineapple Express.

For dark comedy see:  Very Bad Things.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:28:22 PM
No joke, you are the only person I've every heard say Observe and Report was anything other than buzzard shoot.  

When it was out a bunch of my daughter's friends were at the house and went to the theater to see it.  College age, the type who try to tell me Kat Williams is the funniest guy who ever lived, who think The Hangover (what a dud) is high comedy and Superbad is the Fast Times at Ridgemont High of their generation.  To a man they declared Observe and Report the worst movie ever.  

When you can't sway a gaggle of mush-headed college frosh and sophomores?  F.A.I.L.  
You're saying yourself that their sense of comedy is out of whack.

If you're looking for Dane Cook, Hugh Grant, or Katt Williams comedy, this is not your bag.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:30:18 PM
You're saying yourself that their sense of comedy is out of whack.

If you're looking for Dane Cook, Hugh Grant, or Katt Williams comedy, this is not your bag.

I'm saying myself that they are the audience this movie was geared toward and they rejected it out of hand as schlock.  

You are the only person I've ever, ever, ever heard give this movie any positive comment at all and that spans multi-generations.

From my perspective, I expected nothing less than absolute suckage.  I'm not a Seth Rogen fan.  His movies are rarely funny to me. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:33:18 PM
I'm saying myself that they are the audience this movie was geared toward and they rejected it out of hand as schlock.  

You are the only person I've ever, ever, ever heard give this movie any positive comment at all and that spans multi-generations.

From my perspective, I expected nothing less than absolute suckage.  I'm not a Seth Rogen fan.  His movies are rarely funny to me.  
Except it's not. I'm not surprised at all they wouldn't like it. Maybe it was mis-marketed to try to appeal to fans of other Rogan flicks like Knocked Up and Superbad, but it's far from one of those types of movies.

Jody Hill, who does East Bound & Down, and last directed Foot Fist Way (a must see dark comedy) pays a comedic homage to Taxi Driver. It's not for everyone.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:45:38 PM
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:52:52 PM
Wow, I'm here to say that I was wrong.  Awful movie.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much Disney and not nearly enough Burton.  Carter was great.  Depp was uncharacteristically unimpressive. 

I would like to see Burton take a mulligan on this one without being handcuffed by the fudgeing mouse.

i saw this over the weekend with my son.  i agree with wes and townhall...awful movie; however, i have to ask wes about "way" to much disney.  please explain a bit further.



i was raped by regal cinema.  matinee $10.50 per person...regardless of age.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 02:58:57 PM
Based on that dudes review, this is what I agree with him about.

Bad Santa...Very Funny

Burn After Reading...In my top 30 of favorite comedies...great!

Observe and Report is a steaming pile of turds that should not be uttered in the same story.  It was not funny.



Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 03:03:48 PM


Observe and Report is a steaming pile of turds that should not be uttered in the same story.  It was not funny.



Better watch out.  Disagreeing with Chad means you're less erudite and unable to logically process.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 03:15:09 PM
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 03:25:23 PM
Better watch out.  Disagreeing with Chad means you're less erudite and unable to logically process.
Brian tends to like broad comedies. Actually, I can't think of another comedy he didn't enjoy.

You though...I'm genuinely curious. Can you name me one comedy that you actually enjoyed?

I'm guessing you'll probably name something slapstickish from the 70's like Airplane and Blazing Saddles, which I love as well, but I'm guessing you dislike more recent films with similar humor because you apply a "good ol' days" filter to the former.

Can you name a single comedy from the past decade that gets the Kaos seal of approval?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 03:37:34 PM
Those aren't dark.  Particularly not Pineapple Express.

For dark comedy see:  Very Bad Things. Bad Santa.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 04:25:08 PM
Brian tends to like broad comedies. Actually, I can't think of another comedy he didn't enjoy.

You though...I'm genuinely curious. Can you name me one comedy that you actually enjoyed?

I'm guessing you'll probably name something slapstickish from the 70's like Airplane and Blazing Saddles, which I love as well, but I'm guessing you dislike more recent films with similar humor because you apply a "good ol' days" filter to the former.

Can you name a single comedy from the past decade that gets the Kaos seal of approval?

Past decade...  

Well, Raising Arizona is one of the classics.  What decade is that from?  (I liked Airplane, hated Blazing Saddles).  

Office Space.  What decade was that from?
I found Naopleon Dynamite sad and amusing.
Dazed and Confused (again, what decade?)
Tropic Thunder was elevated by Robert Downey Jr.'s performance.
Animal House/Ghostbusters/Trading Places/Caddyshack -- that was like 30 years ago?
I liked Little Miss Sunshine, but it was still somewhat lacking.
O Brother Where Art Thou had some quality, particularly in Clooney's self-deprecating performance.
Thought Timothy Olyphant was good in The Girl Next Door.

Funny is not, at least in my opinion, predicated on how many times you can show your ass in baggy underwear or say the word fudge. Comedy isn't derived from crudity.  I like comedy that's got intelligence.  It's hard to tell a good joke or make people laugh with wit.  It's easy to fart and get people to laugh.  I don't like farters.  I do think farts are funny, but a constant stream of farts just begins to smell.  That's all most new comedies have.  

The crop of SNL veterans since Ackroyd, Chase, Murray, Murphy, etc.  -- Rob Schneider, David Spade, Adam Sandler, Ferrel etc. -- suck and suck hard.  Sandler is singluarly untalented although he did have one decent film.  Same for Ferrell. One good film (Elf).  They pander to the lowest common denominator because they know a nation of Beavis and Buttheads will flock to their fart and fudge fests on the opening weekend and make them money.  
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 04:52:18 PM
Observe and Report was fudgeing awful
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 05:14:33 PM
Past decade...  

Well, Raising Arizona is one of the classics.  What decade is that from?  (I liked Airplane, hated Blazing Saddles).  

Office Space.  What decade was that from?
I found Naopleon Dynamite sad and amusing.
Dazed and Confused (again, what decade?)
Tropic Thunder was elevated by Robert Downey Jr.'s performance.
Animal House/Ghostbusters/Trading Places/Caddyshack -- that was like 30 years ago?
I liked Little Miss Sunshine, but it was still somewhat lacking.
O Brother Where Art Thou had some quality, particularly in Clooney's self-deprecating performance.
Thought Timothy Olyphant was good in The Girl Next Door.

Funny is not, at least in my opinion, predicated on how many times you can show your ass in baggy underwear or say the word fudge. Comedy isn't derived from crudity.  I like comedy that's got intelligence.  It's hard to tell a good joke or make people laugh with wit.  It's easy to fart and get people to laugh.  I don't like farters.  I do think farts are funny, but a constant stream of farts just begins to smell.  That's all most new comedies have.  

The crop of SNL veterans since Ackroyd, Chase, Murray, Murphy, etc.  -- Rob Schneider, David Spade, Adam Sandler, Ferrel etc. -- suck and suck hard.  Sandler is singluarly untalented although he did have one decent film.  Same for Ferrell. One good film (Elf).  They pander to the lowest common denominator because they know a nation of Beavis and Buttheads will flock to their fart and fudge fests on the opening weekend and make them money.  


So of the past decade (read: this century), you enjoyed one comedy for being sad & amusing, two (very broad comedies) for one actor's performance per film (Tropic Thunder was particularly overrated, IMO), and another that you found "still lacking". I'll be generous and count the one you found had "some quality", although it was released just barely over a decade ago.

So in your estimation there has been one tolerable comedy film released every other year over the past decade.

No good ones.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 05:29:30 PM
So of the past decade (read: this century), you enjoyed one comedy for being sad & amusing, two (very broad comedies) for one actor's performance per film (Tropic Thunder was particularly overrated, IMO), and another that you found "still lacking". I'll be generous and count the one you found had "some quality", although it was released just barely over a decade ago.

So in your estimation there has been one tolerable comedy film released every other year over the past decade.

No good ones.

I was going off the top of my head.  I don't know.  I don't have a list of all comedy movies released in the last decade sitting next to my computer.

Comedy is definitely hard.  The number of awful attempts always outnumbers the good.  Comedy is also more subjective than other forms.  What's funny to you is (clearly) not funny to me.  Or to anybody else.  What's funny to me probably won't resonate with you. Or anybody else.

Tropic Thunder WAS stupid and lame, but Downey's performance overcame the dreadful, awful, pathetic, ridiculous, craptastic effort of the massively untalented Ben Stiller and the equally inane non-addition of the hugely overrated and unfunny Jack Black. 

If you want to list movies, I'll tell you which ones I thought were good. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 06:05:55 PM
Jack Black's role in Tropical Thunder was hard to watch.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 09:52:15 PM
I was going off the top of my head.  I don't know.  I don't have a list of all comedy movies released in the last decade sitting next to my computer.

Comedy is definitely hard.  The number of awful attempts always outnumbers the good.  Comedy is also more subjective than other forms.  What's funny to you is (clearly) not funny to me.  Or to anybody else.  What's funny to me probably won't resonate with you. Or anybody else.

Tropic Thunder WAS stupid and lame, but Downey's performance overcame the dreadful, awful, pathetic, ridiculous, craptastic effort of the massively untalented Ben Stiller and the equally inane non-addition of the hugely overrated and unfunny Jack Black. 

If you want to list movies, I'll tell you which ones I thought were good. 

I don't believe the movie Dumb and Dumber is subjective.  It is objectively funny.  If you disagree, kill yourself.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2010, 09:54:00 PM
Jack Black's role in Tropical Thunder was hard to watch.

But not as bad as his last line in King Kong.  Most awkward movie line of all time.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 12:09:16 AM
But not as bad as his last line in King Kong.  Most awkward movie line of all time.
I never watched King Kong because he was in it. Be kind Rewind could be the worst movie ever made.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 01:12:06 AM
I never watched King Kong because he was in it. Be kind Rewind could be the worst movie ever made.

my favorite jack black movie...the jackal.  the jackal (bruce willis) brutally ends his life.  cheers.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 04:40:16 AM
my favorite jack black movie...the jackal.  the jackal (bruce willis) brutally ends his life.  cheers.
:clap:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 09:50:17 AM
9

Not a bad little flick.  It's strange in a Tim Burton kind of way.  The plot is that after a long war with machines (More Matrix-like than Terminator), a small group of animatronic dolls try to survive in a world devoid of humans.  The visual effects are phenomenal and worth the price of the rental.  Also, it's only an hour and fifteen minutes, so if you need a quick movie to enjoy, this would be a good choice. 

My only beef with the movie is that the ending (don't want to give any spoilers away) is lackluster and has too many holes. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 10:15:33 AM
I never watched King Kong because he was in it. Be kind Rewind could be the worst movie ever made.
2nd worst I still contend that What's Eating Gilbert Grape is the worst movie of all time. 

BTW in solid 3rd place is Caddyshack 2
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 10:28:53 AM
2nd worst I still contend that What's Eating Gilbert Grape is the worst movie of all time. 

Is it wrong that I liked Gilbert Grape as well?

Also, I generally like Jack Black. The only times he doesn't work for me are generic broad comedies i.e. Shallow Hal.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 10:35:15 AM
Is it wrong that I liked Gilbert Grape as well?

Also, I generally like Jack Black. The only times he doesn't work for me are generic broad comedies i.e. Shallow Hal.
It's like I don't even know who you are anymore.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2010, 12:35:36 PM
2nd worst I still contend that What's Eating Gilbert Grape is the worst movie of all time. 

BTW in solid 3rd place is Caddyshack 2
Quit dragging my heart around.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 18, 2010, 02:30:07 AM
The Crazies is worth a rent when it comes out on Blu-Ray. It's more of a thriller than horror movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 18, 2010, 11:43:22 AM
The Crazies is worth a rent when it comes out on Blu-Ray. It's more of a thriller than horror movie.

Agreed.  If it's still in a theater near you, it's even worth the price of admission.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2010, 12:23:18 PM
Up In The Air

Clooney = Good. Vera's ass = Nice. Vera's face = chopped horse.  The movie = meh. 

It was a decent movie but like so many it left a lot on the table.  Could have been better. It was just sort of there.

My biggest problem with it was that I could see what was coming a mile away.  I knew what was going to happen with his singular quest the moment he got his sister's standup picture.  I knew that the achievement of his solitary goal would be less spectacular than he'd planned.  I knew what was going to happen when horse face opened the door.  All of that was basically telegraphed.  I knew that Pixie's techno-solution wouldn't hold in the end.

The movie held no surprises, provided no lessons and basically spoke to nothing.  It was okay, but that's about all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2010, 02:17:05 PM
Speaking of Clooney

I'm interested (and maybe Wench too) to hear what your review of O Brother Where Art Thou would be..Care to humor me? I will hold my opinion until after you are done....
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2010, 02:42:39 PM
I thought Clooney was outstanding in that role. It really changed my perception of him.

The movie itself is an acquired taste. Didn't like it nearly as much the first time I saw it as I did the third or fourth.

Come to appreciate it as one of the better comedies of the last several years. Not Raising Arizona but in the ballpark.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2010, 02:48:55 PM
O Brother was Jeenyus.  I agree in that the first time I watched it, I thought it was funny enough but just a little different, weird...I couldn't put my finger on it.  Clooney cracked me up throughout.  I think part of the reason for enjoying it more each time is the number of lines that people continue to quote from it.  It's a little like Caddyshack wherein you hear a line and instantly know where it came from.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2010, 03:41:07 PM
I thought Clooney was outstanding in that role. It really changed my perception of him.

The movie itself is an acquired taste. Didn't like it nearly as much the first time I saw it as I did the third or fourth.

Come to appreciate it as one of the better comedies of the last several years. Not Raising Arizona but in the ballpark.

OBWAT is one of those rare movies that Ive seen 50 times and everytime I watch it I pick up something new. It was very peculiar and deeper than most think.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 20, 2010, 09:58:17 AM
The Ugly Truth

The ugly truth about this movie is that Katherine and that 300 clown have about as much chemistry as Whoopi Goldberg and Ted Danson.  Actually, Whoop and Sam might have more. 

The truth about this movie is that it was just ugly. 

Gerard Butler is one of the worst actors in movie history. He's creeping up into Nick Cage and John Travolta territory. At least Cage's goofy ass over the top mugging and Travolta's persistent Vinnie Barbarino impersonation (even when playing military officers and lawyers) shows a little ability. Butler's stroke face has no range, no personality, nothing to offer.

It was blatantly obvious that this movie was written by women who thought they understood how the male mind works when, in fact, they are probably bull dyke lesbians and have no clue what men are thinking. 

It wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen -- Final Destination 3 was worse -- but this "romantic comedy" was neither comedy nor romance. You're certainly not going to leave the theater (or the couch) with your significant other and have an increased opportunity to get laid.  No, you're more likely to be heading to the medicine cabinet for some maalox.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 20, 2010, 10:01:52 AM
Brief Interviews with Hideous Men

I have no idea what this was about.  People speaking in other's bodies, something about a haircut and a parade of NBC stars from the red-headed chick on Law & Order: CI to Elliot Stabler from L&O: SVU to Jim from The Office and a boat load of angst.  

I'm sure it was meant to be deep and insightful.  It was recommended to me by someone who apparently drew some meaning from it.  

I got nothing.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 09:18:30 AM
Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

Maybe I should have watched Boondock Saints  first. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 09:24:27 AM
The Great Buck Howard

Meandering film produced by Tom Hanks in order to give his kid something to do.  His kid is like Tom, but blander and less compelling.

John Malkovich was good as the titular Buck Howard -- who was actually playing Kreskin.  Why they couldn't have just named the movie The Amazing Kreskin, I really don't know. At the end they even acknowledged that the film was inspired by Kreskin.  I'm probably the only person on this board who saw Kreskin perform so I can at least say that Buck Howard got the smarmy patter pretty close to right. 

In a film like this you're looking for some redemption and there really was none.  Not for Buck -- well maybe a little. Not for the ineffectual Hanks kid. Not for the appealing Emily Blunt who was sort of wasted here. 

The movie told a story, but didn't give me quite enough to care what happened to any of the participants.

I would like to know how he does the final effect, but that's all I was left with.   

(http://www.celebritywonder.com/picture/Emily_Blunt/EmilyBlunt_A__Wyman_13945657.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 09:46:26 AM
Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

Maybe I should have watched Boondock Saints  first. 

Almost a pre-req in order to get the best out of II. The first one kicked major ass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 10:50:58 AM
Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

Maybe I should have watched Boondock Saints  first. 
You should have only watched Boondock Saints.

I started this turd of a movie, and it's one of the very few I just had to turn off after about 30 minutes.

The first was a bit campy and corny, but it worked. It does not work at all in the sequel.

I'm amazed that it was actually written and directed by the same guy and got a theatrical release. It was the Caddy Shack II of its time.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 01:15:53 PM
You should have only watched Boondock Saints.

I started this turd of a movie, and it's one of the very few I just had to turn off after about 30 minutes.

The first was a bit campy and corny, but it worked. It does not work at all in the sequel.

I'm amazed that it was actually written and directed by the same guy and got a theatrical release. It was the Caddy Shack II of its time.
That hurts.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 01:31:06 PM
The Blind Side

Bullock deserved the Oscar, Jesse James should be bitched slapped and have his balls stuffed into his mouth for cheating on her.   I think most everyone knows the story of Michael Oher, so no surprises.  Just a great feel good story, I don't know how much of it was "hollywoodized" but in my humble opinion it is a must rent, and unlike the Ugly Truth will probably get you laid.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 02:41:32 PM
You should have only watched Boondock Saints.

I started this turd of a movie, and it's one of the very few I just had to turn off after about 30 minutes.

The first was a bit campy and corny, but it worked. It does not work at all in the sequel.

I'm amazed that it was actually written and directed by the same guy and got a theatrical release. It was the Caddy Shack II of its time.

I have it in my queue but decided not to watch it after watching II.  I can reconsider.   

I picked this one first mainly because Rita (from Dexter) was in it, but even she was terrible. 

As for The Blind Side?  I'm going to pass on that one for eternity.  I'll never watch it.  I don't find Sandra Bullock all that attractive to begin with and from what I can tell the story is so goozled up to paint that damn Rebel family as saints that I have no interest. 

It's telling to me that the Oher kid hasn't watched it, has stated he has no intention of watching it and is (seemingly) estranged from the Dippy family since the film started production. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 03:46:08 PM
I don't find Sandra Bullock all that attractive to begin with 

Your taste in women can only be described as bizarre.

(http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/27/2773/1GLTD00Z.jpg)

(http://www.realbollywood.com/news/up_images/11112635.jpg)

(http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/pv/Sandra%20Bullock-19.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 03:55:56 PM
Your taste in women can only be described as bizarre.

(http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/27/2773/1GLTD00Z.jpg)

(http://www.realbollywood.com/news/up_images/11112635.jpg)

(http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/pv/Sandra%20Bullock-19.jpg)

It just moved.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 03:57:06 PM
It's telling to me that the Oher kid hasn't watched it, has stated he has no intention of watching it and is (seemingly) estranged from the Dippy family since the film started production. 
You know all this from?

a. Your relationship with Oher
b. Your relationship with the Toohey's
c. Your supreme knowledge of everything?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 04:14:04 PM
You know all this from?

a. Your relationship with Oher
b. Your relationship with the Toohey's
c. Your supreme knowledge of everything?

None of the above.

From two separate interviews I read. One was in the Baltimore Sun. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 04:15:19 PM
None of the above.

From two separate interviews I read. One was in the Baltimore Sun. 
I am actually curious do you have a link...I tried to look it up and I couldn't find anything about what you were saying.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 04:51:43 PM
I am actually curious do you have a link...I tried to look it up and I couldn't find anything about what you were saying.

This isn't it. But it references him not watching it.

http://www.examiner.com/x-31097-Book-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m11d28-Michael-Oher-hasnt-and-wont-read-The-Blind-Side (http://www.examiner.com/x-31097-Book-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m11d28-Michael-Oher-hasnt-and-wont-read-The-Blind-Side)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 05:07:29 PM
I am actually curious do you have a link...I tried to look it up and I couldn't find anything about what you were saying.

perhaps...kaos' phone intercepted a text from "da skreets" to prowler.  you know those phone companies and their towers. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 05:34:35 PM
This isn't it. But it references him not watching it.

http://www.examiner.com/x-31097-Book-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m11d28-Michael-Oher-hasnt-and-wont-read-The-Blind-Side (http://www.examiner.com/x-31097-Book-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m11d28-Michael-Oher-hasnt-and-wont-read-The-Blind-Side)
I read both that story and the SI story it mentions, I take his not wanting to see the movie or read the book as the following:

a. he mentions that he does not want to revisit that time in his life.
b. he also is very widely reported to be an genuinely shy person, he is not interested in promoting himself, he just wants to be a star in the NFL.

Still was a good movie, I have read some of the other real life comparisons, most say that the true story's premise was not that far off from the real thing. Like I said before I am sure it was "hollywoodized".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 22, 2010, 05:42:48 PM
I heard he hated Tim McGraw and wanted Vanilla Ice to play Mr Toohey.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2010, 07:36:36 AM
I heard he hated Tim McGraw and wanted Vanilla Ice to play Mr Toohey.

That's true but only because he wanted to watch Sandra while she gets railed.  She love's chocolate town.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2010, 10:38:17 AM
Sandra used to look good, but her face was so chopped up looking in The Proposal she just turned me off.  Best I could say is that she's moderately attractive now.

On to other...

Gone Baby Gone

Couple of things.  Ben Affleck is a better director than he is an actor.  His brother is a better actor than he is, but that's not saying much.  A cigar store Indian is better than Ben.

Ben's not good at naming films, though, because this film might have done better had he dropped the name of the novel that provided the story and changed it to something that would resonate.  I didn't watch it at first because I figured it was a sequel to Gone in 60 seconds or one of those damn doofy ass racing movies with Sisquo.  

(For reference, the film earned about $20M.  It fared better than the insipid Walk Hard, but didn't score as well as The Last Mimzy, Mr. Woodrooster, an IMAX movie about sea monsters or 107 other films released that year).

The story was good. Didn't have it completely figured out until the very end.  In fact, I thought it was over twice before it got to the end.  

Baby Affleck just didn't cut it for me.  Everybody else in the film -- including the uptight cop from Beverly Hills Cop -- was suited to the role.  Shrimpy Affleck was a fail.  This would have been so much better with Sean Penn, Mark Walhberg, James McAvoy or somebody else in the lead role.  

Not a great film, very depressing and the motives/motivations of Affleck's character just don't make sense but it kept you involved.  

Michelle Monaghan looked good despite a complete lack of displayed skin.  Her character didn't have a lot to do, but she did it well.  

Amy Ryan (Holly from The Office) was excellent as a crack whore. I think she might have even gotten an Oscar nomination for her role.

It was a good directing debut for the bigger Affleck.  Gives me hope that he'll actually contribute something to society.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2010, 10:41:40 AM
I read both that story and the SI story it mentions, I take his not wanting to see the movie or read the book as the following:

a. he mentions that he does not want to revisit that time in his life.
b. he also is very widely reported to be an genuinely shy person, he is not interested in promoting himself, he just wants to be a star in the NFL.

Still was a good movie, I have read some of the other real life comparisons, most say that the true story's premise was not that far off from the real thing. Like I said before I am sure it was "hollywoodized".

At least one of the things I read was in the Baltimore Sun.  I might have read it online or during a layover in the airport there.  From that I got the sense that he wasn't down with the attention the Dippys got and wasn't happy with being portrayed as little more than a pile of clay that they lovingly sculpted (all my words). 

It's entirely possible that I read into it more than there was.  It's also entirely possible that he doesn't plan to read the book because he went to Ole Miss and can't read. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2010, 11:51:22 AM
 It's also entirely possible that he doesn't plan to read the book because he went to Ole Miss and can't read.  

Yeah, but he can sure bang the shoot out of them white bitches.  
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2010, 12:53:39 PM
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

A sweet piece of fluffy nothing, this meandering film follows the exploits of a pack of NY/NJ high schoolers who apparently have no parents and roam the streets of the city until the sun comes up. 

Nothing new, nothing ground breaking, just Michael Cera bumbling through another relationship. 

Andy Samberg (sp) and Seth Myers of SNL are wasted in lame cameos.

This is the second movie I've seen in the past couple of months where Kat Dennings breaks some guy in.  The other was Charlie Bartlett (another nerdy doof getting the benefit of Kat's enormosity).

None of the nerdy doofs I knew ever got broken in by a busty, lusty tigress like Kat.  She's not what you'd call classically beautiful, she's not svelte and minx-like.  But I really, really like her. She reminds me a bit of the quirky Joan Cusack (who was always attractive to me, too) but with a much bigger rack and better acting skills.

The movie was decent, a little predictable in places. It was no Fast Times or Breakfast Club, but it passes for what I guess is the current genre of teen movies.  It allowed Cera to do the only thing he's apparently capable of doing on film -- be a lovable little nerd. 



(http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/kat-Dennings.jpg)

(http://benaxelrad.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/kat-crack_a-lack.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2010, 01:52:31 PM
 Can u say MOTORBOAT!!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2010, 03:21:42 PM
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

A sweet piece of fluffy nothing, this meandering film follows the exploits of a pack of NY/NJ high schoolers who apparently have no parents and roam the streets of the city until the sun comes up. 

Nothing new, nothing ground breaking, just Michael Cera bumbling through another relationship. 

Andy Samberg (sp) and Seth Myers of SNL are wasted in lame cameos.

This is the second movie I've seen in the past couple of months where Kat Dennings breaks some guy in.  The other was Charlie Bartlett (another nerdy doof getting the benefit of Kat's enormosity).

None of the nerdy doofs I knew ever got broken in by a busty, lusty tigress like Kat.  She's not what you'd call classically beautiful, she's not svelte and minx-like.  But I really, really like her. She reminds me a bit of the quirky Joan Cusack (who was always attractive to me, too) but with a much bigger rack and better acting skills.

The movie was decent, a little predictable in places. It was no Fast Times or Breakfast Club, but it passes for what I guess is the current genre of teen movies.  It allowed Cera to do the only thing he's apparently capable of doing on film -- be a lovable little nerd. 



(http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/kat-Dennings.jpg)

(http://benaxelrad.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/kat-crack_a-lack.jpg)
:idhitit: Run away, little canary
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2010, 03:28:44 PM
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

A sweet piece of fluffy nothing, this meandering film follows the exploits of a pack of NY/NJ high schoolers who apparently have no parents and roam the streets of the city until the sun comes up. 

Nothing new, nothing ground breaking, just Michael Cera bumbling through another relationship. 

Andy Samberg (sp) and Seth Myers of SNL are wasted in lame cameos.

This is the second movie I've seen in the past couple of months where Kat Dennings breaks some guy in.  The other was Charlie Bartlett (another nerdy doof getting the benefit of Kat's enormosity).

None of the nerdy doofs I knew ever got broken in by a busty, lusty tigress like Kat.  She's not what you'd call classically beautiful, she's not svelte and minx-like.  But I really, really like her. She reminds me a bit of the quirky Joan Cusack (who was always attractive to me, too) but with a much bigger rack and better acting skills.

The movie was decent, a little predictable in places. It was no Fast Times or Breakfast Club, but it passes for what I guess is the current genre of teen movies.  It allowed Cera to do the only thing he's apparently capable of doing on film -- be a lovable little nerd. 



(http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/kat-Dennings.jpg)

(http://benaxelrad.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/kat-crack_a-lack.jpg)



(http://i582.photobucket.com/albums/ss267/Temptationbucket/3d9f79d2.jpg) (http://s582.photobucket.com/albums/ss267/Temptationbucket/?action=view&current=3d9f79d2.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2010, 11:31:17 PM
Kaos, have you ever seen and reviewed the movie Snatch? It's one of my all time favorites! I'd be curious to see what you think...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 01:18:55 PM
Kaos, have you ever seen and reviewed the movie Snatch? It's one of my all time favorites! I'd be curious to see what you think...

Nope.  I got Extract from Netflix today.  I'll add Snatch to the list.  Is it a porno?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 01:20:45 PM
Nope.  I got Extract from Netflix today.  I'll add Snatch to the list.  Is it a porno?

I've got Extract on the way.  Solid cast and you can't usually go wrong with Mike Judge.

I'll predict that you don't like Snatch.  Mostly because it is awesome and you are the only person that I know who is bound and determined to hate all things awesome.  Great cast, great dialogue, engaging story...all the makings for a Kaos pan.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 01:25:12 PM
I've got Extract on the way.  Solid cast and you can't usually go wrong with Mike Judge.

I'll predict that you don't like Snatch.  Mostly because it is awesome and you are the only person that I know who is bound and determined to hate all things awesome.  Great cast, great dialogue, engaging story...all the makings for a Kaos pan.

I love all things awesome.  I just have high expectations. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 03:17:29 PM
if we're doing review requests...anyone seen body of lies?  the skirt has it on the dvr for movie night this weekend.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 03:23:11 PM
if we're doing review requests...anyone seen body of lies?  the skirt has it on the dvr for movie night this weekend.

DiCaprio and Crowe.  

It's on my Netflix list, but I keep moving it further and further down. (and based on the edit below, will remove it entirely).   

Crowe and Gerard Butler need to go back to where ever they came from.  Neither can act.

**Edit**

I have seen this.  I may have actually reviewed it in a separate thread before I started this one.  It wasn't bad. It wasn't great.  It was long. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 03:45:15 PM
I've got Extract on the way.  Solid cast and you can't usually go wrong with Mike Judge.

I'll predict that you don't like Snatch.  Mostly because it is awesome and you are the only person that I know who is bound and determined to hate all things awesome.  Great cast, great dialogue, engaging story...all the makings for a Kaos pan.
I just added Extract to my que, I forgot about that one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 25, 2010, 10:32:52 PM
I don't watch a lot of movies but Snatch I think is in my top 5 favorite. I think it's freaking great and hilarious.

Also, I actually liked Body of Lies. I thought it was a pretty good flick...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 26, 2010, 09:30:25 AM
Extract

Mike Judge is known for skewering social commentary.  Beavis and Butthead helped create an entirely new way of looking at the world (and at comedy).   Office Space is amazing in its ability to capture the pointlessness, frustration and dullness of the corporate world.  King of the Hill -- even though I didn't much care for it -- skillfully carved up mundane suburbia in a less vulgar and disturbing way than the crude Family Guy.

In Extract, though, he moved away from what he does best. There was no social commentary. He didn't shine a light on a particular way of life and expose its banality.  Instead he attempted to tell a relatively tame story of personal discovery and redemption.  

It wasn't his best work, but it wasn't horrible.  It was just a little flat and two-dimensional.  

Jason Bateman was adequate.  Much better in this role than he was in Couple's Retreat.  

Ben Affleck is a significantly better supporting actor than he is a leading man. He was good here although he was essentially channeling Lawrence (Diedrich Bader's role in Office Space).  

JK Simmons (one of my favorite actors since his turn as Schillinger the Nazi in Oz) was essentially wasted in a minor role.

Mila Kunis upped her worth with a good performance even though her role didn't really require her to do much beyond look super hot.  Having seen her in Book of Eli and knowing that she's capable of more, that made her understated performance here even more appreciated. And did I mention she was super hot to look at?

Kristen Wiig, who I don't care for at all on SNL, actually looked pretty hot in this movie.  Sexy even.  That was a pleasant surprise.  

Gene Simmons, well... Gene needs to stick to singing. He was over the top and should have taken a little more time to learn his lines.  For somebody who's in front of thousands on a nightly basis, you'd think he would understand a little better how to play a role.  

Overall not a bad movie.  I just expected a little more depth, particularly since Judge was at the helm.  I expected it to have a little more to say.  

Wiig

(http://themoviebanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Kristen-Wiig-kristen-wiig-323096_600_674.jpg)

Kunis

(http://enciklopediabg.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/mila-kunis-picture.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2010, 11:09:21 PM
The Bank Job
Serviceable movie.   Whoever did the direction should have left off the "It was always you, Terry" garbage.  

Jason Statham tried really hard to demonstrate his emotional range.  He should stick to just punching people.  

Lots of odd british references and comments that were a little difficult to follow.  

The story itself was good, however.  "Based on a true story" makes me wonder how much was true.

Wish it had been set in America so I could assess the authenticity of what was supposed to be a 70s backdrop.

Cashback

This is one of those movies I saw the trailer for and thought it might be interesting.  Then I just forgot about it.  As far as I know it never did anything at the box office. Saw it come up again on one of those trailer TV shows and rescued it to my queue.

Guy breaks up with his girlfriend, develops insomnia (for weeks at a time) and as his senses withdraw he discovers he has the ability to freeze time around him.  Whether he's just doing it in his imagination or not, you really can't say.  To pass the boredom of the extra eight hours, he gets a job at a supermarket working the nightshift.  

I wish I knew where this supermarket was because it was filled with remarkably attractive women.  As part of his frozen in time meanderings, the hero removes their clothes.  (See below) He's an art student, so he draws them.  

From there, though, the movie bogs down into a formulaic "boy gets girl, girl misunderstands something she sees, boy tries to get girl back" story.  

Many random British humor and references.

The movie couldn't decide what it wanted to be.  Was it a love story? A comedy? An Office Space style riff on the supermarket industry? A twisted look at a world flash frozen? A story of discovery and redemption?  In trying to be all those things, it ended up really being not enough of any.  

The store manager and the two doobs who work there aren't as funny as meant to be.  The chemistry between the clerk and the insomniac is believable enough and rings true.  The chemistry between Mr. Insomnia and the girlfriend with whom he breaks up is zero.  That throws things off from the start.  

A quirky movie.  You'll know how it's going to work from the first 30 minutes, but it's a decent journey to get there.  Lots of introspection if you're into that.

http://desourcesure.com/uploadv3/cashback_3.jpg(NSFW) (http://desourcesure.com/uploadv3/cashback_3.jpg(NSFW))
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2010, 11:29:21 PM
"Snatch" is freaking awesome.  Girl I worked with dated a dope smoking hippie that I coined him the name Pikey in reverence to that movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 12:47:55 AM
The Men Who Stare at Goats

Marketing was a real problem for this movie.  The trailers portrayed it as a broad comedy in the O Brother/Raising Arizona style when it really wasn't. 

It suffered from critical rejection when people went expecting to see one thing and got something else entirely. 

I enjoyed the movie.  Clooney is outstanding playing a wacko.  That's his niche, I guess. The rest of the cast was also sharp. 

It would have been easy to cast judgement on the people profiled in the film, but while it told a story that was at least (incredibly) partially true it left judging the validty of the entire enterprise largely to the viewer.  Could Clooney's character really "disperse clouds" with his mind?  Maybe. Maybe not.  The fact that he thought he could and was able to convince a relatively sane acquaintance to accept that he might actually have the capacity is the real story.

If you saw this film in theaters, you didn't get the featurette on the DVD where some of the real participants in the actual First Earth Battalion.  Seeing them and listening to their earnestness, it's easy to see why the film wasn't played strictly for laughs.

First Earth:  http://www.firstearthbattalion.org/ (http://www.firstearthbattalion.org/)

It wasn't the greatest movie I've ever seen and it had a hard time figuring out how seriously to take itself but I found it a lot more enjoyable than the average critic.  Interesting, even. 

No chicks at all in the movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 02:31:32 PM
K,
What do you think about "The Foot Fist Way" and "Garden State". Both indie and just saw them in the last few days. Curious as to what you thought if you've seen em.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 03:02:11 PM
K,
What do you think about "The Foot Fist Way" and "Garden State". Both indie and just saw them in the last few days. Curious as to what you thought if you've seen em.

Never seen (or heard of) either. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 03:06:11 PM
Never seen (or heard of) either. 
I own both on DVD.

Garden State is ok, but Foot Fist Way is one of my favorites.

I doubt Kaos would like it.

It's where Danny McBride got his start. Will Ferrell picked it so that it got a wider distribution, and the director Jody Hill went on to direct East Bound & Down, and the movie everyone but me here apparently hated, Observe & Report.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 03:08:01 PM
I own both on DVD.

Garden State is ok, but Foot Fist Way is one of my favorites.

I doubt Kaos would like it.

It's where Danny McBride got his start. Will Ferrell picked it so that it got a wider distribution, and the director Jody Hill went on to direct East Bound & Down, and the movie everyone but me here apparently hated, Observe & Report.

Yeah, sounds like a bowl full of fail in my estimation.  I can only take McBride in miniscule doses.  He was on the screen too much in Tropic Thunder, for instance. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 31, 2010, 04:14:54 PM
Yeah, sounds like a bowl full of fail in my estimation.  I can only take McBride in miniscule doses.  He was on the screen too much in Tropic Thunder, for instance. 
Mother Nature just pissed her pants suit.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 07:22:00 AM
K you should add this one to your list....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113613/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113613/)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 10:05:38 AM
I own both on DVD.

Garden State is ok, but Foot Fist Way is one of my favorites.

I doubt Kaos would like it.

It's where Danny McBride got his start. Will Ferrell picked it so that it got a wider distribution, and the director Jody Hill went on to direct East Bound & Down, and the movie everyone but me here apparently hated, Observe & Report.

I thought both were pretty good. Maybe its because I wasnt expecting much so they both exceeded what I thought they would be. Two totally different movies - Garden State was like Elizabethtown on drugs - depressing to me for the most part but very good.

Foot Fist was one of those that I dont think everyone will like. It has that Napoleon Dynamite/Dumb and Dumber slapstick quirky humor in it. McBride was hilarious to me. His character was like Rex Kwon Do meets Uncle Rico - dude is seriously delusional. The Chuck "The Truck" Wallace subplot was very funny as well.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 10:43:21 AM
I thought both were pretty good. Maybe its because I wasnt expecting much so they both exceeded what I thought they would be. Two totally different movies - Garden State was like Elizabethtown on drugs - depressing to me for the most part but very good.

Foot Fist was one of those that I dont think everyone will like. It has that Napoleon Dynamite/Dumb and Dumber slapstick quirky humor in it. McBride was hilarious to me. His character was like Rex Kwon Do meets Uncle Rico - dude is seriously delusional. The Chuck "The Truck" Wallace subplot was very funny as well.
Dentistry? I can't even believe that's something that's real.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 03:32:30 PM
The Informant

I started thinking a bit before I watched this movie.  I'm quick to credit Johnny Depp as the best actor of our time and I think that's probably deserved.  If you compare Donnie Brasco to Captain Jack to John Dillinger you'll see that the guy has some incredible range.  I've noticed that Robert Downey, Jr. (who I think is a good actor) seems to play basically the same guy in every film.  That led me to thinking about Matt Damon who stars here.  He did serious in Bourne.  He did ridiculous in Stuck on You. He did quirky and neurotic in Oceans. He did corrupt in The Departed.  And dammit, he did all of them pretty well. 

So as I watched the movie I was thinking that he could really slide up there into Depp-land in terms of diversity if he was able to pull off the unhinged character at the center of The Informant.  He came close.  He came really close.  In the end, though, you could almost see him holding back just a little, afraid to take that last little step over into crazy where Mark Whitacre probably lived.

The film was decent enough.  I think it could have done a better job of establishing Whitacre's credentials and given a tighter explanation of what was going down.  It left you not really knowing who to believe and wondering if Whitacre was a deranged nutcase or a white knight who was mowed down by an international conglomerate (probably closer to the truth). 

It tried to play it for laughs, but when you remember that this was essentially the guy's true story it's not quite as funny to consider the weight of billions of dollars and mountains of political favors pouring down to crush Whitacre and destroy his family. 

Was he crazy?  Well in my book a guy making $400k a year who's getting millions in untraceable kickbacks has to be just a little unbalanced to get trapped by a Nigerian money scam.  My grandmother wasn't even that unschooled.  He's also got to be just a little goofy to volunteer to slaughter the golden goose for no apparent reason (or at least one that was never satisfactorially explained).  He definitely should have worked out a better deal for himself in advance, that's for sure.  Our (corrupt) DOJ reamed his ass out. 

Interesting movie, but it could have told the story in a much better way and been far more compelling. The direction kept Damon fettered.  It might not have been his fault that he never quite reached the full potential.  Movie was backed by Clooney. The whole time I was watching it I thought how much better he would have been in that role.  When he makes the crazy face, you believe it. 

The BluRay was utterly devoid of additional material.  No extra clips, no documentary on the real Mark, no exposition, no upcoming features, no nothing.  All kinds of boo on that. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 05:13:28 PM
Dentistry? I can't even believe that's something that's real.

LOL - When he said that at the dinner table, I honestly thought she looked like a dude (Rex Kw 
on Do's Starla).

Then by the end of the movie- ie - when she was riding out on Chuck the Truck - she was ok.

"If you were in prison, you'd be raped because you exude feminine qualities. You're also a big ole fat piece of ass."
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2010, 05:15:15 PM
The Informant

I started thinking a bit before I watched this movie.  I'm quick to credit Johnny Depp as the best actor of our time and I think that's probably deserved.  If you compare Donnie Brasco to Captain Jack to John Dillinger you'll see that the guy has some incredible range.  I've noticed that Robert Downey, Jr. (who I think is a good actor) seems to play basically the same guy in every film.  That led me to thinking about Matt Damon who stars here.  He did serious in Bourne.  He did ridiculous in Stuck on You. He did quirky and neurotic in Oceans. He did corrupt in The Departed.  And dammit, he did all of them pretty well. 

So as I watched the movie I was thinking that he could really slide up there into Depp-land in terms of diversity if he was able to pull off the unhinged character at the center of The Informant.  He came close.  He came really close.  In the end, though, you could almost see him holding back just a little, afraid to take that last little step over into crazy where Mark Whitacre probably lived.

The film was decent enough.  I think it could have done a better job of establishing Whitacre's credentials and given a tighter explanation of what was going down.  It left you not really knowing who to believe and wondering if Whitacre was a deranged nutcase or a white knight who was mowed down by an international conglomerate (probably closer to the truth). 

It tried to play it for laughs, but when you remember that this was essentially the guy's true story it's not quite as funny to consider the weight of billions of dollars and mountains of political favors pouring down to crush Whitacre and destroy his family. 

Was he crazy?  Well in my book a guy making $400k a year who's getting millions in untraceable kickbacks has to be just a little unbalanced to get trapped by a Nigerian money scam.  My grandmother wasn't even that unschooled.  He's also got to be just a little goofy to volunteer to slaughter the golden goose for no apparent reason (or at least one that was never satisfactorially explained).  He definitely should have worked out a better deal for himself in advance, that's for sure.  Our (corrupt) DOJ reamed his ass out. 

Interesting movie, but it could have told the story in a much better way and been far more compelling. The direction kept Damon fettered.  It might not have been his fault that he never quite reached the full potential.  Movie was backed by Clooney. The whole time I was watching it I thought how much better he would have been in that role.  When he makes the crazy face, you believe it. 

The BluRay was utterly devoid of additional material.  No extra clips, no documentary on the real Mark, no exposition, no upcoming features, no nothing.  All kinds of boo on that. 

Agree on Depp - dude is seriously talented.

Downey as well.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 12, 2010, 02:27:09 PM
The Blind Side

Bullock deserved the Oscar, Jesse James should be bitched slapped and have his balls stuffed into his mouth for cheating on her.   I think most everyone knows the story of Michael Oher, so no surprises.  Just a great feel good story, I don't know how much of it was "hollywoodized" but in my humble opinion it is a must rent, and unlike the Ugly Truth will probably get you laid.

Seriously??? I was forced to watch that piece of shoot move last night and I'm going to have to disagree with you. Every Oher line in the movie is a cliche quote and the little kid in the movie is fudgeing annoying. I would have to say that Kaos is making a smart move by avoiding this one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 13, 2010, 11:46:20 PM
Seriously??? I was forced to watch that piece of shoot move last night and I'm going to have to disagree with you. Every Oher line in the movie is a cliche quote and the little kid in the movie is fudgeing annoying. I would have to say that Kaos is making a smart move by avoiding this one.

Agreed.  Awful movie.  It had a terrible script.  That was the main problem.  The writers and director introduced a super sad story and then let it play itself out. 

Also, it was 100% unbelievable.  I get it.  They helped the kid out.  But the movie portrayed Leanne Tuohy as super-badass woman who wouldn't take shoot from anybody. 

You tell me if this is realistic: super hot blond woman wearing a skirt that wraps perfectly around her ass goes into the projects alone and talks shoot to the hardest looking guys there AND lives without getting fondled or raped. 

Or how about this: goofball coach in the opening game of the season answers his cell phone in the middle of the game and listens to Leanne Tuohy give advice on what plays to call. 

Or:  a seven year old teaches a gigantic black kid who can't read the details of playing offensive football using spice cans and salt shakers. 

Or:  The Tuohy's encouraged Oher to go to Tennessee because they wanted the best opportunity for him. 

None of that shoot happened and it was laughable that the movie even tried. 

On another note, I saw Up in the Air tonight.  Not bad.  Kind of boring and had a lackluster ending.  I don't know why, but I'd absolutely destroy the girl playing Natalie.  I noticed her in the first Twilight movie.  Something about her that's just flat out cute.

(http://twilightmovies.org/ruth/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/jessica-stanley-anna-kendrick.jpg)

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 09:35:39 AM
Agreed.  Awful movie.  It had a terrible script.  That was the main problem.  The writers and director introduced a super sad story and then let it play itself out. 

Also, it was 100% unbelievable.  I get it.  They helped the kid out.  But the movie portrayed Leanne Tuohy as super-badass woman who wouldn't take poop from anybody. 

You tell me if this is realistic: super hot blond woman wearing a skirt that wraps perfectly around her ass goes into the projects alone and talks poop to the hardest looking guys there AND lives without getting fondled or raped. 

Or how about this: goofball coach in the opening game of the season answers his cell phone in the middle of the game and listens to Leanne Tuohy give advice on what plays to call. 

Or:  a seven year old teaches a gigantic black kid who can't read the details of playing offensive football using spice cans and salt shakers. 

Or:  The Tuohy's encouraged Oher to go to Tennessee because they wanted the best opportunity for him. 

None of that poop happened and it was laughable that the movie even tried. 

On another note, I saw Up in the Air tonight.  Not bad.  Kind of boring and had a lackluster ending.  I don't know why, but I'd absolutely destroy the girl playing Natalie.  I noticed her in the first Twilight movie.  Something about her that's just flat out cute.

(http://twilightmovies.org/ruth/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/jessica-stanley-anna-kendrick.jpg)



This wasnt the true story. It was a Hollywood movie BASED on the true story. If every movie based on the true story went totally by what actually happened 100%, most would be boring. There do have to be certain liberties taken in the movies by the hollywood folks. Very few can tell the real story line by line and still make for a good movie - the opening scene to Saving Pvt Ryan comes to mind.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 11:44:10 AM
Saw The Promotion last night.

It's that type of really dry, dark comedy that I love, and apparently no one else here appreciates.

If you hated Observe & Report or Foot Fist Way, chances are you'll hate this too.

I loved it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 12:12:20 PM
Saw The Promotion last night.

It's that type of really dry, dark comedy that I love, and apparently no one else here appreciates.

If you hated Observe & Report or Foot Fist Way, chances are you'll hate this too.

I loved it.

I enjoyed both.  Observe & Report was a damn good movie. I'll check into the promotion.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 01:08:16 PM
I enjoyed both.  Observe & Report was a damn good movie. I'll check into the promotion.
Where were you for all of Page 19 of this thread? I needed some backup.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 01:23:59 PM
Where were you for all of Page 19 of this thread? I needed some backup.

Sorry.  Didn't open the thread for a few weeks.  I'm shocked that more people didn't like the movie.  It was MUCH funnier than Paul Blart, which was completely lame IMO.  The psych interview is one of the best scenes I've seen in a movie in quite a while.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 03:13:05 PM
Where were you for all of Page 19 of this thread? I needed some backup.
Waaaaaaaah.....so nobody liked one movie that you liked.  Well you got the bammer to rely on, so you got that going for ya.  You don't see me telling everybody to fudge OFF for trashing the fact that I liked a feel good movie The Blindside or fudge all of you supposed movie critics and your theatrical blah blah and realism pish posh...sometimes a movie is just a movie and I don't want to have to think about it.

I like movies with boobies. Sigh...I miss Sweets.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 03:27:26 PM
Waaaaaaaah.....so nobody liked one movie that you liked.  Well you got the bammer to rely on, so you got that going for ya.  You don't see me telling everybody to phuk OFF for trashing the fact that I liked a feel good movie The Blindside or phuk all of you supposed movie critics and your theatrical blah blah and realism pish posh...sometimes a movie is just a movie and I don't want to have to think about it.

I like movies with boobies. Sigh...I miss Sweets.

And just what the fudge is wrong with having me in agreement? 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 03:31:03 PM
Waaaaaaaah.....so nobody liked one movie that you liked.  Well you got the bammer to rely on, so you got that going for ya.  You don't see me telling everybody to fudge OFF for trashing the fact that I liked a feel good movie The Blindside or fudge all of you supposed movie critics and your theatrical blah blah and realism pish posh...sometimes a movie is just a movie and I don't want to have to think about it.

I like movies with boobies. Sigh...I miss Sweets.
You don't see me telling anyone to fudge off either.

I was told earlier that I was the only person in the world that enjoyed this movie.

I knew it couldn't be true.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 03:31:50 PM
You don't see me telling anyone to fudge off either.

I was told earlier that I was the only person in the world that enjoyed this movie.

I knew it couldn't be true.
Exactly a bammer
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 14, 2010, 03:35:20 PM
You don't see me telling anyone to fudge off either.
shoot I forgot the seal

(http://www.arjanwrites.com/arjanwrites/images/2007/09/22/arjanwrites_seal2.jpg)

no not that one.



this one:
 :sarcasm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 03:06:19 AM
What do you think about "The Foot Fist Way" and "Garden State". Both indie and just saw them in the last few days.
I liked Garden State.  It was funnier than I thought it was going to be.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 03:12:27 AM
Agreed.  If it's still in a theater near you, it's even worth the price of admission.

It is one of my Top Movies for 2010.
The Crazies
Feb 26th
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy8ceorXhmA&NR=1# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy8ceorXhmA&NR=1#)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 03:14:33 AM
The Final Cut

I don't know how I missed this movie when it came out.  Robin Williams plays a "cutter", basically somebody who removes a microchip from people's heads after they die and distills their entire lives into a short sentimental film played at their funeral.  GODAWFUL movie.  One of the worst I've ever seen.  It's got Mia Sorvino but she never takes off anything but a sweater.  

The concept here had some promise.  But Williams is so horrible in his role it just has zero chance of working. He's supposedly the best in the world at what he does, but when they show a "re-memory" he supposedly did it's so fudgeing stupid and inane I can't imagine any human being sitting through it.

There are a hundred opportunities for the movie to have some semblance of meaning -- the implication that his high profile client abused his daughter, the potential for espionage if everything a person says or sees is recorded, the possibility that people could be killed for their memories, the distasteful task of "cleaning up" a person's secret life, etc.. -- but those are all largely wasted in a horrifically bad performance by Williams, a laughable effort by Jim Caviezel's fake beard, a stupid ass back story about some childhood memory in William's past, the ridiculous pairing of Williams and Sorvino (who have less chemistry than Wilford Brimley and Richard Simmons would), an ignorant death scene and an utterly absurd side story about tattooed "anti-memory" clans.  

GODAWFUL.  Horrible movie. Utter shoot.  

Where the Wild Things Are

I would have preferred Spike Jonze simply film himself taking Maurice Sendak's book, ripping each page out and wiping his ass with it for two hours over this overstuffed, angst-ridden, bloated piece of crap that defiled a book I had a great affinity for as a child.  

This movie took the simple meaning of Sendak's book, buried it in an avalanche of psycho-pop babble and then took a masssive shoot on it.  

The movie certainly wasn't for kids because it provides ABSOLUTELY no lesson or opportunity to grow. On top of that, the story is so slathered in morose adult moping (and he drops a few damn's and hell's in there to prove just how adult Spike really is) that no child would be willing to sit through the dreck.  It was BORING.

Was it for adults?  Nope.  Boring again.  

There was no meaning to the mayhem.  At least out of Sendak's book I drew some meaning.   In dealing with the monsters (all of which were essentially inside him), Max discovered a way to cope. He learned that being "king" really isn't all that great.  

Maybe the movie attempted to convey that same sentiment, but it failed in a spectacular manner to do so.

I loved the book and was really looking forward to this movie.  When I saw the initial returns (and watched a preview I considered to be shockingly badly done) I waited for the DVD.  I wish now I'd skipped even that.  

Piss poor effort.  I don't think Jonze (why doesn't the bastard spell his name right) understood what the book was actually about.  
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 07:41:59 PM
Where the Wild Things Are

I would have preferred Spike Jonze simply film himself taking Maurice Sendak's book, ripping each page out and wiping his ass with it for two hours over this overstuffed, angst-ridden, bloated piece of crap that defiled a book I had a great affinity for as a child.  

This movie took the simple meaning of Sendak's book, buried it in an avalanche of psycho-pop babble and then took a masssive shoot on it.  

The movie certainly wasn't for kids because it provides ABSOLUTELY no lesson or opportunity to grow. On top of that, the story is so slathered in morose adult moping (and he drops a few damn's and hell's in there to prove just how adult Spike really is) that no child would be willing to sit through the dreck.  It was BORING.

Was it for adults?  Nope.  Boring again.  

There was no meaning to the mayhem.  At least out of Sendak's book I drew some meaning.   In dealing with the monsters (all of which were essentially inside him), Max discovered a way to cope. He learned that being "king" really isn't all that great.  

Maybe the movie attempted to convey that same sentiment, but it failed in a spectacular manner to do so.

I loved the book and was really looking forward to this movie.  When I saw the initial returns (and watched a preview I considered to be shockingly badly done) I waited for the DVD.  I wish now I'd skipped even that.  

Piss poor effort.  I don't think Jonze (why doesn't the bastard spell his name right) understood what the book was actually about.  

To each his own.  I enjoyed this adaptation.  Watched a short on the making of and Sendak had nothing but praise for Jonez and the final product.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 07:57:54 PM
To each his own.  I enjoyed this adaptation.  Watched a short on the making of and Sendak had nothing but praise for Jonez and the final product.

He's old and drinks a lot apparently.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 08:05:48 PM
He's old and drinks a lot apparently.

Clearly. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 10:14:27 PM
So explain it to me.  I'd really like to know what I missed. Here are the objections.

The book had meaning on two levels. For kids it was a silly fantasy about a boy who becomes king of the monsters before finally realizing that home was where he needed to be. Although the monsters were at first scary they became fun. Colorful, wild, free. All the things the boy thought he wanted to be. 

 For adults the book explored the efforts of a child to grapple with all the new and scary emotins bubbling in the boys mind. Each monster represented an emotion or urge that needed to be controlled. In doing so the boy learned not to fear what was inside but  conquer it. By conquering the beasts as we all must Max discovers he can exist in civilization even if the beasts still howl.

My opinion: the movie failed to express that.

By making the monsters drab and dingy it missed the mark if it intended to draw a child's attention. Where was the color?

By making the monsters kvetching pseudo hippies who wrestled with complex adult themes beyond the realm of the average seven year old, the film failed to sufficently illustrate that each represented a part of Max. What part of Max was a jealous Jewish shrew supposed to reflect?

Where was the realization that mayhem for mayhem's sake grows tiresome?

The decision to return home was devoid of reason and logic. There was no moment of clarity or discernablr impetus other than the need to keep the film under three hours.

I guess my biggest question is where was the fun?  The book was alive and vibrant. The book was fun. This movie was not fun. It was not alive. It was not vibrant.  It just didn't ring true.

I'd like to know what you saw differently. I will try again if you make a valid argument. I hated Pulp Fiction the first time. It's a favorite now. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 18, 2010, 11:54:18 PM
Extract

Mike Judge is known for skewering social commentary.  Beavis and Butthead helped create an entirely new way of looking at the world (and at comedy).   Office Space is amazing in its ability to capture the pointlessness, frustration and dullness of the corporate world.  King of the Hill -- even though I didn't much care for it -- skillfully carved up mundane suburbia in a less vulgar and disturbing way than the crude Family Guy.

In Extract, though, he moved away from what he does best. There was no social commentary. He didn't shine a light on a particular way of life and expose its banality.  Instead he attempted to tell a relatively tame story of personal discovery and redemption.  

It wasn't his best work, but it wasn't horrible.  It was just a little flat and two-dimensional.  

Jason Bateman was adequate.  Much better in this role than he was in Couple's Retreat.  

Ben Affleck is a significantly better supporting actor than he is a leading man. He was good here although he was essentially channeling Lawrence (Diedrich Bader's role in Office Space).  

JK Simmons (one of my favorite actors since his turn as Schillinger the Nazi in Oz) was essentially wasted in a minor role.

Mila Kunis upped her worth with a good performance even though her role didn't really require her to do much beyond look super hot.  Having seen her in Book of Eli and knowing that she's capable of more, that made her understated performance here even more appreciated. And did I mention she was super hot to look at?

Kristen Wiig, who I don't care for at all on SNL, actually looked pretty hot in this movie.  Sexy even.  That was a pleasant surprise.  

Gene Simmons, well... Gene needs to stick to singing. He was over the top and should have taken a little more time to learn his lines.  For somebody who's in front of thousands on a nightly basis, you'd think he would understand a little better how to play a role.  

Overall not a bad movie.  I just expected a little more depth, particularly since Judge was at the helm.  I expected it to have a little more to say.  

Wiig

(http://themoviebanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Kristen-Wiig-kristen-wiig-323096_600_674.jpg)

Kunis

(http://enciklopediabg.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/mila-kunis-picture.jpg)
I just watched this tonight. I thought I remembered your review more scathing, so I was going to disagree.

I liked it a lot. You forgot Idiocracy, which was Judge's biggest departure (although I liked it a lot as well). I recommend this movie for sure.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 19, 2010, 10:48:35 AM
So explain it to me.  I'd really like to know what I missed. Here are the objections.

The book had meaning on two levels. For kids it was a silly fantasy about a boy who becomes king of the monsters before finally realizing that home was where he needed to be. Although the monsters were at first scary they became fun. Colorful, wild, free. All the things the boy thought he wanted to be. 

 For adults the book explored the efforts of a child to grapple with all the new and scary emotins bubbling in the boys mind. Each monster represented an emotion or urge that needed to be controlled. In doing so the boy learned not to fear what was inside but  conquer it. By conquering the beasts as we all must Max discovers he can exist in civilization even if the beasts still howl.

My opinion: the movie failed to express that.

By making the monsters drab and dingy it missed the mark if it intended to draw a child's attention. Where was the color?

By making the monsters kvetching pseudo hippies who wrestled with complex adult themes beyond the realm of the average seven year old, the film failed to sufficently illustrate that each represented a part of Max. What part of Max was a jealous Jewish shrew supposed to reflect?

Where was the realization that mayhem for mayhem's sake grows tiresome?

The decision to return home was devoid of reason and logic. There was no moment of clarity or discernablr impetus other than the need to keep the film under three hours.

I guess my biggest question is where was the fun?  The book was alive and vibrant. The book was fun. This movie was not fun. It was not alive. It was not vibrant.  It just didn't ring true.

I'd like to know what you saw differently. I will try again if you make a valid argument. I hated Pulp Fiction the first time. It's a favorite now. 

I'm not going to try and convince you to like the movie.  Either you do or you don't...for entirely personal reasons.  I was merely noting that, despite your railing about its failure to grasp the story/meaning, the book's author was very pleased with both director and movie.  Presumably that means that Sendak doesn't think Jonez "didn't get it" or missed the themes.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 19, 2010, 01:01:21 PM
I'm not going to try and convince you to like the movie.  Either you do or you don't...for entirely personal reasons.  I was merely noting that, despite your railing about its failure to grasp the story/meaning, the book's author was very pleased with both director and movie.  Presumably that means that Sendak doesn't think Jonez "didn't get it" or missed the themes.

So we're back to the fact that he's old and apparently intoxicated or sedated. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 19, 2010, 01:03:17 PM
So we're back to the fact that he's old and apparently intoxicated or sedated. 

Clearly.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 26, 2010, 12:48:47 PM
Extract

Mike Judge is known for skewering social commentary.  Beavis and Butthead helped create an entirely new way of looking at the world (and at comedy).   Office Space is amazing in its ability to capture the pointlessness, frustration and dullness of the corporate world.  King of the Hill -- even though I didn't much care for it -- skillfully carved up mundane suburbia in a less vulgar and disturbing way than the crude Family Guy.

In Extract, though, he moved away from what he does best. There was no social commentary. He didn't shine a light on a particular way of life and expose its banality.  Instead he attempted to tell a relatively tame story of personal discovery and redemption.  

It wasn't his best work, but it wasn't horrible.  It was just a little flat and two-dimensional.  

Jason Bateman was adequate.  Much better in this role than he was in Couple's Retreat.  

Ben Affleck is a significantly better supporting actor than he is a leading man. He was good here although he was essentially channeling Lawrence (Diedrich Bader's role in Office Space).  

JK Simmons (one of my favorite actors since his turn as Schillinger the Nazi in Oz) was essentially wasted in a minor role.

Mila Kunis upped her worth with a good performance even though her role didn't really require her to do much beyond look super hot.  Having seen her in Book of Eli and knowing that she's capable of more, that made her understated performance here even more appreciated. And did I mention she was super hot to look at?

Kristen Wiig, who I don't care for at all on SNL, actually looked pretty hot in this movie.  Sexy even.  That was a pleasant surprise.  

Gene Simmons, well... Gene needs to stick to singing. He was over the top and should have taken a little more time to learn his lines.  For somebody who's in front of thousands on a nightly basis, you'd think he would understand a little better how to play a role.  

Overall not a bad movie.  I just expected a little more depth, particularly since Judge was at the helm.  I expected it to have a little more to say.  

Wiig

(http://themoviebanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Kristen-Wiig-kristen-wiig-323096_600_674.jpg)

Kunis

(http://enciklopediabg.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/mila-kunis-picture.jpg)

Watched this over the weekend.  I have to agree with this review in its entirety.  Decent flick, but I expect more of Judge.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2010, 10:09:43 PM
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Holy hell, how did I go through 25 years of life without seeing this movie?  I always thought those old Clint Eastwood Westerns were just another generation of John Wayne movies. 

Complete in almost every way possible except for the lack of naked chicks, but I think that would have detracted from the story a bit. 

I now have Fistful of Dollars and Once Upon a Time in the West in queue on Netflix.  Can't wait.

Also, Ecstasy of Gold is one of the most epic movie songs of all time. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKhQ8ObQ7E# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKhQ8ObQ7E#)

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 12:24:44 AM
Watched Harry Brown today.

Basically the British version of Gran Torino. Good shoot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 06:58:41 AM
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Holy hell, how did I go through 25 years of life without seeing this movie?  I always thought those old Clint Eastwood Westerns were just another generation of John Wayne movies. 

Complete in almost every way possible except for the lack of naked chicks, but I think that would have detracted from the story a bit. 

I now have Fistful of Dollars and Once Upon a Time in the West in queue on Netflix.  Can't wait.

Also, Ecstasy of Gold is one of the most epic movie songs of all time. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKhQ8ObQ7E# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKhQ8ObQ7E#)



Have you watched "The Outlaw Josey Wales?"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 09:14:29 AM
The lovely bones is quite possibly the worst movie that I have ever seen in my life.  I'm not sure how I managed to watch the entire movie, but it was a complete failure. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 09:15:11 AM
Have you watched "The Outlaw Josey Wales?"

One of my all time favorites. 

Worms gotta eat, too.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 09:30:53 AM
Puss in Boots

So it's early in the morning and nothing's on.  Well, except for perhaps the hottest assortment of news and traffic morning reporters in human history on WEAR TV3.  I'm wasting time, looking for something to make background noise while I check emails and arrange a couple of meetings for next week.  And what do I find?

Puss in Boots.  Starring Christopher Walken as Puss.  That was, in itself, enough to cause me to stop and give it a try. 

Walken was absolutely ridiculous playing the titular cat with a slight sashay, some tortured singing and a few earnestly muddled lines about taking care of Master. 

But it was obvious that he was having a ball just being silly.  It was almost like what a dad does when he goes overboard telling his kid a bedtime story. 

Oh, the movie is dreadful.  The interjection of abysmal singing portions adds a further layer of absurdity. Haven't looked, but I guess nobody in the movie can or has ever acted in anything else again except Walken -- they were that bad.  Or at least they shouldn't have been in anything else.  But Walken?  You could believe he was a cat. 

There's one scene in the film that I found interesting.  When the miller's son is "rescued" by the king and brought to the castle they have a dance.  Of course he knows no dances so he reverts back to some corny moves he knew as a kid.  And everybody in the room follows suit and learns it.  I've seen that before (and done better) in A Knight's Tale with Heath Ledger. Since Puss came out three years prior to Knight's Tale, perhaps that scene was lifted from this film?

The movie was 96 minutes long.  No way in hell I could sit through the entire thing.  So I filpped between WEAR TV news (see below) and Puss.  I'd watch Walken gleefully skip through a scene and then go back to the news.   I'd never suggest that anyone buy or rent this film, but if you see it pop up on the menu, watch a couple of minutes of Walken's kitty.


WEAR TV NEWS

Pictures do no justice here...

(http://www.newsradio1620.com/Images/jamiee.jpg) (http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/ecnagy.jpg)(http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/hgilchrist.jpg)(http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/bsison.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 09:35:20 AM
Puss in Boots

So it's early in the morning and nothing's on.  Well, except for perhaps the hottest assortment of news and traffic morning reporters in human history on WEAR TV3.  I'm wasting time, looking for something to make background noise while I check emails and arrange a couple of meetings for next week.  And what do I find?

Puss in Boots.  Starring Christopher Walken as Puss.  That was, in itself, enough to cause me to stop and give it a try. 

Walken was absolutely ridiculous playing the titular cat with a slight sashay, some tortured singing and a few earnestly muddled lines about taking care of Master. 

But it was obvious that he was having a ball just being silly.  It was almost like what a dad does when he goes overboard telling his kid a bedtime story. 

Oh, the movie is dreadful.  The interjection of abysmal singing portions adds a further layer of absurdity. Haven't looked, but I guess nobody in the movie can or has ever acted in anything else again except Walken -- they were that bad.  Or at least they shouldn't have been in anything else.  But Walken?  You could believe he was a cat. 

There's one scene in the film that I found interesting.  When the miller's son is "rescued" by the king and brought to the castle they have a dance.  Of course he knows no dances so he reverts back to some corny moves he knew as a kid.  And everybody in the room follows suit and learns it.  I've seen that before (and done better) in A Knight's Tale with Heath Ledger. Since Puss came out three years prior to Knight's Tale, perhaps that scene was lifted from this film?

The movie was 96 minutes long.  No way in hell I could sit through the entire thing.  So I filpped between WEAR TV news (see below) and Puss.  I'd watch Walken gleefully skip through a scene and then go back to the news.   I'd never suggest that anyone buy or rent this film, but if you see it pop up on the menu, watch a couple of minutes of Walken's kitty.


WEAR TV NEWS

Pictures do no justice here...

(http://www.newsradio1620.com/Images/jamiee.jpg) (http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/ecnagy.jpg)(http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/hgilchrist.jpg)(http://www.weartv.com/sections/station/news_team/talent/images/bsison.jpg)

No - the pics are just fine. Id hit it... :vn:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 28, 2010, 11:08:43 AM
One of my all time favorites. 

Worms gotta eat, too.

"Whooped'em again didn't we Josie"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 29, 2010, 06:14:04 PM
Have you watched "The Outlaw Josey Wales?"
Not yet.  But it's been recommended by many.  It's going in the queue folder in five minutes.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 02, 2010, 06:22:11 PM
Zombieland

Not exactly what I expected, but a fun movie.  It was no Raising Arizona, but it had a few funny moments and didn't take itself seriously at all.  It's not laugh out loud comedy, it's not scare the shoot out of you horror, but just a nice easy blend of fear and bemusement. 

No angst over the crazy situation, no underlying social commentary, no deeper hidden meaning.  Just four misfits (well, five for a while) making the best they can out of a really bad situation. 

Yeah there are crazy plot holes.  For instance how come the power is still on everywhere?  And don't they ever run out of gas?  Or bullets?  But that really doesn't matter all that much because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. 

Woody Harrellson dominates the film.  He's good enough that you'd almost like to see him in a serious zombie killing movie, but then you remember he'd have to do pathos and pass on the idea.  No, he fits better here. 

The nerdy, nebbish guy is interchangeable with any of the other hundred or so nerdy nebbish guys who populate thousands of other teen films.  I'm just glad they didn't get the Superbad guy (Cera) in this role because I'm a little tired of him. 

Emma Stone confuses me.  She's either hot or not and I lean to not. 

It's not a movie you'll buy and put on your shelf to treasure for years to come, but on a throwaway afternoon it would be pretty fun. 

Worth watching.

i can't disagree.

watched it last night in efforts to appease my normal tv viewing after the kids are sent to bed.  network tv blows monkey testicles and does nothing to fulfill my entertainment needs.

     
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 09:18:30 PM
Easy A

Emma Stone is great.  She plays basically the same role in every film, but it's a good role.  She's the very best thing about this movie.  She's good enough that she almost elevates it.  But not quite.  A surprisingly weak supporting cast is an albatross. Beyond that, the movie tries so hard to recreate the charm and allure of the John Hughes teen movies of the 80s that it forgets to be itself.  The movie features some B list and sliding stars including Phoebe from Friends, Lowell from Wings and a completely wasted Dr. Loomis from the Halloween reboot.  Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson steal the act of the Valley Girl's parents but add a drop of the parents from Pretty in Pink. 

Emma Stone is great.  Unfortunately she was surrounded by fading Disney/Nick stars who couldn't carry her weight.  Ally of Ally and AJ fame and Amanda Bynes of the Amanda Show fill major roles.  Both looked puffy faced and waxy.  Neither could act.  The film did give the underappreciated Lalaine, who once played Lizzie McGuire's best friend, a brief moment of screen time.   The male leads were dreadful. The woodchuck channeled Mark Ruffalo on prozac and had zero magnetism and less chemistry with Emma.

As with so many films, a good premise bogged down by poor acting and an undernourished plot.

Not a bad beginning as the primary lead, but Emma is capable of more.  Interested to see her take on Mary Jane in the upcoming Spiderman reboot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 09:24:14 PM
We rented it over the weekend and only made it through about 30 minutes.  Worst.  Movie.  Ever.

This movie made The Other Guys and Dinner For Schmucks look like Academy Award winners.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 09:37:03 PM
The Town
Good film.  Affleck is a better director than he is an actor.  A little unbelivable in the relationship with the female lead, but it was a movie after all.  Worth watching. 

The Expendables
Ugh. Should have been called The Unwatchables.  It should have been a fun romp through exploding scenery. Instead in Stallone's morose hands it morphed into a bleary overwrought unfunny mess.  Brooding? No thanks. Blow things up.

The Other Guys
Somebody shoot Will Ferrell.  Shoot him now.  Before he makes another dud.  Please.

Predators
Had so much promise.  Could have been so, so great.  But Adrien fudgeing Brody?  Are you shootting me? When the biggest thing on your body is your fudgeing nose you have no business trying to play an action lead -- unless your name is Karl Malden.  And Topher Grace?  Whoever was in charge of casting this movie should be dropped on an island full of blood-hungry aliens.  Even with the dreadful casting the movie could have delivered.  The effects were good, the Predators amazing.  And then it got to the end and you went... what?  Just die already. 

The Prince of Persia
Utterly fudgeing rotten.  Jake's british accent was pathetic.  The plot was stupid. The girl wasn't nearly hot enough to make it work.  Should have gone straight to DVD.  Want to see this move done 100000x better?  Watch The Scorpion King. 

Inception
Expected too much, I suppose.  Was just meh. Wasn't awed in the least.  Closer to yawn than awe.   

Valley Girl
A very underappreciated movie.  The soundtrack is fantastic. Nick Cage turns in one of his two career performances that are tolerable. Julie is, like, totally awesome.  There are no great life lessons to be learned and some of it is formulaic, but Valley Girll remains one of the best of the 80s teen comedy genre.  VG, Fast Times at Ridgement High, The Last American Virgin (another underappreciated movie) and The Breakfast Club should be mandatory viewing.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 09:39:08 PM
We rented it over the weekend and only made it through about 30 minutes.  Worst.  Movie.  Ever.

This movie made The Other Guys and Dinner For Schmucks look like Academy Award winners.

You clearly don't appreciate Emma. 

I've seen way, way, way worse movies than this one. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 10:50:35 PM
Quote
The Town
Good film.  Affleck is a better director than he is an actor.  A little unbelivable in the relationship with the female lead, but it was a movie after all.  Worth watching. 

Agree that Affleck is better behind the camera than in front.  I think that the guy from the Hurt Locker should get some credit, though.  He's doing tortured male lead better than anyone else lately.

Quote
The Other Guys
Somebody shoot Will Ferrell.  Shoot him now.  Before he makes another dud.  Please.

I enjoyed this more than I thought I would.  I was burned out on the Ferrell character a while ago, but he is actually...wait for it...restrained in this movie.  Mark Wahlberg is actually the guy reaching for laughs....to great effect.  I thought this movie was underrated.  Not going to win any academy awards, and not the basis for a night of serious movie watching, but a fun time-passer.

Quote

Predators
Had so much promise.  Could have been so, so great.  But Adrien fudgeing Brody?  Are you shootting me? When the biggest thing on your body is your fudgeing nose you have no business trying to play an action lead -- unless your name is Karl Malden.  And Topher Grace?  Whoever was in charge of casting this movie should be dropped on an island full of blood-hungry aliens.  Even with the dreadful casting the movie could have delivered.  The effects were good, the Predators amazing.  And then it got to the end and you went... what?  Just die already. 

Agree that Brody is not an action hero.  The supporting cast made it fun for me, though.  Walton Goggins ("Shane" from The Shield, and "Boyd Crowder" from Justified)...that guy is awesome.  It was a mindless popcorn movie...enjoy it for that.

Quote
The Prince of Persia
Utterly fudgeing rotten.  Jake's british accent was pathetic.  The plot was stupid. The girl wasn't nearly hot enough to make it work.  Should have gone straight to DVD.  Want to see this move done 100000x better?  Watch The Scorpion King. 


Didn't see it...don't know why you would with any expectations.  The video game was lame and I would expect the movie to be as well.

Quote
Inception
Expected too much, I suppose.  Was just meh. Wasn't awed in the least.  Closer to yawn than awe.   

Have to really disagree with you here.  I enjoyed this movie on a superficial level: the acting was top-notch from DiCaprio to Page to Gordon-Leavitt to Caine.  And I also enjoyed it on an intellectual level.

The plot was layered and nuanced.  Nolan has a knack for keeping the audience guessing.  Whether it was Memento, The Dark Knight  or Inception, you can watch the movie for its surface story/meaning, or you can walk away wondering about the untold story for days.  Did Cobb end up in the States, absolved of his alleged crimes, or did he end up succumbing to the allure of the dream state?  Was his totem the spinning top he took from Mol's safe or was his another, that we never got to see?  Fun movie to watch and unpack.


Quote
Valley Girl
A very underappreciated movie.  The soundtrack is fantastic. Nick Cage turns in one of his two career performances that are tolerable. Julie is, like, totally awesome.  There are no great life lessons to be learned and some of it is formulaic, but Valley Girll remains one of the best of the 80s teen comedy genre.  VG, Fast Times at Ridgement High, The Last American Virgin (another underappreciated movie) and The Breakfast Club should be mandatory viewing.

fudge's sake.  You're going to bag on Inception and then positively review Valley Girl?  Yeah, fun movie, but not in the same zip code as Nolan's movies. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 11:16:39 PM
Agree that Affleck is better behind the camera than in front.  I think that the guy from the Hurt Locker should get some credit, though.  He's doing tortured male lead better than anyone else lately.

I enjoyed this more than I thought I would.  I was burned out on the Ferrell character a while ago, but he is actually...wait for it...restrained in this movie.  Mark Wahlberg is actually the guy reaching for laughs....to great effect.  I thought this movie was underrated.  Not going to win any academy awards, and not the basis for a night of serious movie watching, but a fun time-passer.

Agree that Brody is not an action hero.  The supporting cast made it fun for me, though.  Walton Goggins ("Shane" from The Shield, and "Boyd Crowder" from Justified)...that guy is awesome.  It was a mindless popcorn movie...enjoy it for that.

Didn't see it...don't know why you would with any expectations.  The video game was lame and I would expect the movie to be as well.

Have to really disagree with you here.  I enjoyed this movie on a superficial level: the acting was top-notch from DiCaprio to Page to Gordon-Leavitt to Caine.  And I also enjoyed it on an intellectual level.

The plot was layered and nuanced.  Nolan has a knack for keeping the audience guessing.  Whether it was Memento, The Dark Knight  or Inception, you can watch the movie for its surface story/meaning, or you can walk away wondering about the untold story for days.  Did Cobb end up in the States, absolved of his alleged crimes, or did he end up succumbing to the allure of the dream state?  Was his totem the spinning top he took from Mol's safe or was his another, that we never got to see?  Fun movie to watch and unpack.


fudge's sake.  You're going to bag on Inception and then positively review Valley Girl?  Yeah, fun movie, but not in the same zip code as Nolan's movies.

I enjoy Three Musketeers. 

I enjoy prime rib. 

When I get a Three Musketeers (Valley Girl) that's what I expect.  Candy. I value it as such. 

When I order Prime Rib (Inception) I expect a litttle more.  I don't compare it to candy.  It's not the same thing.

Inception was beautifully shot.  The acting was good.  I like the Juno chick.  At the end of the day, though, I just didn't care where he ended up.  Don't care if he was dreaming or awake. Part of the problem I had with it was everybody in the world telling me it was the greatest movie ever, it was so thought provoking, blah, blah, blah.  It didn't do it for me.  Sorry.  Plus, just like with the huge supposed "twist" in Shutter Island, I'd figured out the deal way, way, way before the reveal. 

Same with Repo Men.  Good actors, great story, well shot. And then the "you're shootting me, you really copped out" ending?   Surely they're not going to be Bobby Ewing in the shower obvious.  And then they are.  No.  Booo. 

Oh, as for Prince of Persia, why would I watch it with any expectations?  Four words:  Pirates of the Caribbean.   shootty Disney ride.  One of the most surprising, enjoyable movies I've ever seen.   I expected half that with Prince, seeing as the concept was basically the same.  Didn't get it.  Just abysmally bad.  It bordered on unwatchable. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 09, 2011, 11:21:20 PM
Salt

Angelina Jolie just doesn't do it for me.  She's a decent enough actress, though, but I grew a little tired of watching her pout and slink before improbably blowing shoot up. 

She was a double, double, double agent or just a double, double?  Or maybe a double, double, double, double? 

Movie was almost exactly what you'd expect it to be with a couple of plot twists thrown in. 

As with far too many movies the ending was totally unrealistic. 

Better than The Expendables. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 12:08:04 AM
Plus, just like with the huge supposed "twist" in Shutter Island, I'd figured out the deal way, way, way before the reveal. 


Tell me the deal and the reveal.  I go back and forth on how that is supposed to end.  Shutter Island as well.  I don't think that one is as cut and dry as you would have me believe.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 01:03:01 AM
Speaking of Boyd Crowder, just finished watching the season premiere.  Looks good, but can't really tell how much of a role Goggins will play in this season.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 01:15:30 AM
Wall Street II: Rise of the Decpticons

I'm tired of being disappointed.  I expected a lot from this movie.  Not the slow, plodding, meandering story.  I couldn't get attached to any of the characters.  Another morality tale from crackpot Oliver Stone. 

Worst of all was the music.  It was completely out of place from the opening credits. Dreadful musical selections. fudgeing TERRIBLE.  Gawd fudgeing AWFUL. The music alone was an epic disaster.  I hated every second of it.  Every note made my skin crawl. 

LeBouf needs to eat a sandwich.  He weighed like 18 pounds.  The girl was completely unattractive and unsexy and unappealing. Douglas hammed up his part. 

The bike racing scene was stupid. 

I don't know, it just left me wishing it would hurry the fudge up and be over.  That's not the sign of a good movie. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 09:46:20 AM
Speaking of Boyd Crowder, just finished watching the season premiere.  Looks good, but can't really tell how much of a role Goggins will play in this season.

I haven't watched the premier yet, but Boyd/Shane makes the show what it is. When he first came on the show, I expected more Shane and got a big surprise. They can go a ton of different ways with this show. It'll be interesting to see where they take it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 09:53:57 AM
Tell me the deal and the reveal.  I go back and forth on how that is supposed to end.  Shutter Island as well.  I don't think that one is as cut and dry as you would have me believe.

I thought shutter island was pretty good. I'll admit it took me by surprise. It was well done. The recent movie that disappointed to me was Devil. Expected this huge twist that never was. Shamylan should have saved Sixth Sense for last. I now expect too much of him I think.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 10:30:11 AM
Tell me the deal and the reveal.  I go back and forth on how that is supposed to end.  Shutter Island as well.  I don't think that one is as cut and dry as you would have me believe.

Knew he killed them. 

Knew she killed them. 

Didn't care.

Where the thing lost me?  When everybody in the hotel was floating around because the van was floating, but the same rules of gravity didn't apply in the snow.  I was tolerating the damn thing to that point, but then I just quit giving a shoot.  That was just one of the instances where they just made shoot up so they could do what they want. 

I liked Memento and I liked this movie okay, but neither are iconic must see movies for me.  It's like Nolan thinks he's brilliant but all he's doing is asking a bunch of questions and providing no answers. 

At some point as all the ridiculous dream rules kept getting more and more convoluted I just quit caring.  I didn't care which level of hell they were in or whether they'd ever get out. 

EDIT:

After thinking about it more, I just realized what my real problem with Inception is.  And it's pretty simple. 

I don't want to write my own ending to a movie.   And I don't want to write the beginning or middle either.  If I'm going to do that, I'll just save my money pop some popcorn in the microwave and make up my own movie in my head. 

If you want me to write the ending?  Pay me.  Otherwise, write the damn ending.   Would Citizen Kane have been as good if you were left to guess at the identity of Rosebud?  Would To Kill A Mockingbird have been a classic if you were left to wonder whether Boo Radley existed?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 10:47:53 AM
Wall Street II: Rise of the Decpticons

I'm tired of being disappointed.  I expected a lot from this movie.  Not the slow, plodding, meandering story.  I couldn't get attached to any of the characters.  Another morality tale from crackpot Oliver Stone. 

Worst of all was the music.  It was completely out of place from the opening credits. Dreadful musical selections. fudgeing TERRIBLE.  Gawd fudgeing AWFUL. The music alone was an epic disaster.  I hated every second of it.  Every note made my skin crawl. 

LeBouf needs to eat a sandwich.  He weighed like 18 pounds.  The girl was completely unattractive and unsexy and unappealing. Douglas hammed up his part. 

The bike racing scene was stupid. 

I don't know, it just left me wishing it would hurry the fudge up and be over.  That's not the sign of a good movie.

You need to go watch Wall Street again...the music was a tribute to that.  In fact most of the same music was played in both movies.  I really liked this movie, they did I damn fine job on what was happening at the time.  But its my industry, maybe thats why I liked it so much.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 10:49:37 AM
You need to go watch Wall Street again...the music was a tribute to that.  In fact most of the same music was played in both movies.  I really liked this movie, they did I damn fine job on what was happening at the time.  But its my industry, maybe thats why I liked it so much.

I didn't realize that it was about whore island?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 10:59:02 AM
Memento was fudgeing brilliant...

That is all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 01:37:18 PM
I didn't realize that it was about whore island?
And Boom goes the Dynamite.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 04:45:51 PM
The King's Speech

Tired of being disappointed?  Go see this.  Quirky.  Historical.  Enjoyable.  Feel good.

I really enjoyed it.

Also, I feel the same way about Inception.  I never cared about his big secret concerning his wife's death.  I didn't care about the characters enough to care about the plot.

And they strayed from the plotline too much.  Wasn't planting the idea in the banker's head the ultimate goal of the movie?  It just kind of happened and then ended.  Then he was saving the Asian dude.  Then he was with his kids and a spinning top was spinning and then skipped a beat and then kept spinning. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 10, 2011, 05:18:51 PM
The King's Speech

Tired of being disappointed?  Go see this.  Quirky.  Historical.  Enjoyable.  Feel good.

I'll wait on the Blu-Ray.  Netflix. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 11, 2011, 01:26:46 AM
Machete

Thirty-nine spicy flavors of awesome.  It is what The Expendables should have been.  Didn't take itself seriously at all, was so bad it was good.

Michelle Rodriguez is impossibly hot.  Impossibly.  Jessica Alba is as well. 

The cast was great. Just great.  Segal, Lohan, Cheech, Don Johnson..... Just fun. 

Not for everybody.  Not Inception.  No thinking needed. 

FWIW, I don't agree with the point of view advocated.  Build the wall. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 01:20:04 AM
JUST GO WITH IT

Saw the premier tonight.  A few points right off the bat. Take a date, your wife, husband, whatever floats your boat.  Understand from the start that this is a comedy and nothing more.  For those of you anticipating a plot, surprise ending, twists and turns etc....do not read the following lines.  Disclaimer:

There are NO surprises!!! The movie begins and ends EXACTLY the way you expect.  That's not what this movie is about.

It is a comedy with Adam Sandler, Jennifer Aniston, Nicole Kidman, 2 cute, talented kids, HOT ass Brooklyn Decker and funny as hell Eddie Swardson.  As such, these are seasoned vets who get it right in a just above PG comedy.  Bottom line, I....along with a packed house theater, laughed our collective asses off for 2 hours.  This movie is funny as hell.  No classic lines and certainly no threads will be hijacked on the X because of it.  But from 10 minutes in until the ending, absolute comedy gold. 

It's a Sandler produced film with Jennifer Aniston.  Sandler is his usual non-stop one liner self, but Aniston is the best she's ever been opposite Sandler.  You may go to it and hate it...but a packed house in Dothan disagrees with you. Seriously, take your significant other and understand going in, it's a slapstick comedy with a little, totally predictable romance thrown in.  MUCH better than I expected.  I laughed my ass off all the way through. Worth the price of admission.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 06:22:33 AM
I spit on your grave
This remake's worth a look.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 11:46:13 AM
It is a comedy with Adam Sandler...

Comedy and Adam Sandler are mutually exclusive terms. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 01:21:06 PM
The Town
Good film.  Affleck is a better director than he is an actor.  A little unbelivable in the relationship with the female lead, but it was a movie after all.  Worth watching. 


Inception
Expected too much, I suppose.  Was just meh. Wasn't awed in the least.  Closer to yawn than awe.   



The Town: Enjoyed...pretty good flick.  Agree on Affleck

Inception: Modern high-tech version of Dreamscape.  It lost my interest, and I can't explain why exactly. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 03:33:32 PM
The Social Network

I know it's not historically accurate, but it was certainly interesting.  In fact, it inspired me to be more of an asshole to people I work with.  Assholes always seem to succeed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 12, 2011, 04:28:09 PM
The Social Network

I know it's not historically accurate, but it was certainly interesting.  In fact, it inspired me to be more of an asshole to people I work with.  Assholes always seem to succeed.

I enjoyed it.

Also watched Brooklyn's Finest last night.  Good movie.  I love Don Cheadle, though this isn't his best work.  I recommend it.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 13, 2011, 11:31:11 AM
Red
Not the movie I expected from the trailers.  Well, somewhat the movie I expected but not entirely.  It was what The Expendables aspired to be. 

It hit most of the right notes even if the story was somewhat implausible. I don't know what's happened to John Malkovich's face, but he's still a decent actor and was good here.  It's gotten where you can't tell if he's smiling or shootting himself.  His facial expressions are bizarre.

One thing that annoyed me?  During part of the movie they are in Pensacola and go intercept someone they're looking for at the airport in Mobile.  The only time the city name is mentioned, the stupid whore calls it "mobil"  Like mobile phone.  Idiot skank.  And then as they exit the airport you can hear the announcements over the loudspeaker in the background.  Sounds like Grandpa Jones is doing them.  Horrible fake southern accent.  Wish they'd bothered to get some of that right. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2011, 09:42:00 AM
Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad weekend for movies.

Dinner with Shmucks

Unwatchable.  One of the most embarrassing movies I've ever seen, and I typically like Steve Carrell.  Every attempted joke was a miss.  We didn't even make it to the dinner scenes.

Eat Pray Love

My wife roped me into watching this.  She loves chick flicks, and she loves the idea of being a world traveler who is well versed in different cultures.  But even she instantly recognized how inherently selfish the main character was.

Pretty much, an attractive married woman who lives a successful life in New York City decides that she hasn't "found herself," and that her marriage is preventing her from doing so.  She says she doesn't need a man to help her with identity.  So, she abruptly divorces him and decides to spend a year traveling to 3 different locations in 4 month increments. 

In Italy, she learns to how to eat a lot.
In India, she learns to forgive her husband.
In Bali, she learns that in order to achieve "balance," she must find love.

So in the end, (after breaking the hearts of three men - who all, by the way, love everything about her) she ends up with a man. 

Awful.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2011, 10:35:37 AM
I'm seriously late to the party on this one, but - just now seeing the Blindside. Caught it Saturday on Netflix. Good movie. Not a blockbuster, but def good.


If it did anything, it made me hate the NCAA even more. Sandra Bullock steals the show....and is uber HAWWWTTTTTTT!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 14, 2011, 11:05:19 AM
I'm seriously late to the party on this one, but - just now seeing the Blindside. Caught it Saturday on Netflix. Good movie. Not a blockbuster, but def good.


If it did anything, it made me hate the NCAA even more. Sandra Bullock steals the show....and is uber HAWWWTTTTTTT!

I thought the opposite.  Hated the movie with every fiber of my being because it was such bullshoot.  I guess the fact that Oher started distancing himself from them while they bathed themselves in his glory influenced my perception as well.

I left absolutely LOATHING the Touhey's (or however you spell it) and that sanctimonious Lee Anne twat.  She can SUCK it.   fudge the whole family and the little retarded boy, too.  fudge Ole Miss.

Also hated Bullock's performance.   She can go to hell.

Just a shootty movie IMO. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2011, 11:04:39 AM
Dinner with Schmucks

Oh, lord.  Poor Steve.  He's a decent character, but he can't stray too far from Michael Scott or he flops.

I have come to really hate Paul Rudd.  Every movie he's in is just lame.  No personality.  He really sucked in this one. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2011, 11:23:15 AM
Dinner with Schmucks

Oh, lord.  Poor Steve.  He's a decent character, but he can't stray too far from Michael Scott or he flops.

I have come to really hate Paul Rudd.  Every movie he's in is just lame.  No personality.  He really sucked in this one.

Kissmyanthia
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2011, 11:51:02 AM
Kissmyanthia

Tell her you love her whispering eye....snicker
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2011, 12:27:43 PM
Tell her you love her whispering eye....snicker

Who the fudge is Marvin Hamlisch
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 16, 2011, 04:45:53 PM
Re-watched Less Than Zero for the first time in a loooong time last night.

Great fudgeing movie.  Downey the junkie man-whore, Spader the greasy dealer-pimp, Gertz the coke tramp, and McCarthy as the clean-cut college boy.

I like Ellis's novels, but this one and American Psycho worked so much better on screen than in print.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 17, 2011, 12:05:53 AM
Re-watched Less Than Zero for the first time in a loooong time last night.

Great fudgeing movie.  Downey the junkie man-whore, Spader the greasy dealer-pimp, Gertz the coke tramp, and McCarthy as the clean-cut college boy.

I like Ellis's novels, but this one and American Psycho worked so much better on screen than in print.

American Psycho is a great f'n movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 18, 2011, 10:00:41 AM
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

Way over the top, but in the end, I enjoyed what I watched.  This movie tries to combine Japanese anime and videogames with a mainstream movie.  It works for the most part especially if you've played videogames your whole life.

A few scenes really pissed me off.  Like when the first battle involved a musical number by the immigrant douchebag. 

Overall - a decent film.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 20, 2011, 11:25:09 AM
Pirahna

Intended to be an homage to the spectacularly gory horror genre of the 70s and 80s (I guess), The Fish Movie poured on the boobs, blood, gore and debauchery.

Ving Rhames, Elisabeth Shue (my favorite babysitter), Doc from Back to the Future and Richard Dreyfuss are among the "stars" slumming it in the flim.

Maybe I've just grown up some since I reveled in Spring Break the Movie and Friday the 13th Part III, but the continual nudity and crudity just wore on me.  Where is this place where all the girls are naked and all the boys are stupid? 

I watched it with a friend and her 17 year old daughter.  I cringed (and so did they both) at several just unnecessary and gratuitous parts.

Jerry O'Connell should be barred from acting ever again unless he gets fat and visits a train track where a dead body hides.

I could never get any sympathy for the lead character although I didn't want his cute sorta girlfriend to be eaten by the fish.

Some really bad special effects marred some of the gorier scenes, too.

It wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but I guess I'm just too mature now to fully enjoy the presentation.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 21, 2011, 09:45:15 AM
Legion

Had been warned that this was an awful movie so I ignored it for a long time.   Accidentally came across it in the middle of the night on Starz and it wasn't nearly as bad as I anticipated. 

I'm a little fuzzy on the concept of God sending angels to possess people and also why that would be necessary.  If God wanted to destroy the world I think He would be a little more direct than that.  Also not sure why that particular baby was of such importance. 

The special effects were good.  Using the old lady and a little kid as primary protagonists was good too, particularly the old lady. 

It wasn't nearly as crappy as I'd been led to believe.  Not going to win any awards, but was a decent, if muddled, supernatural tale.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 12:00:09 PM
Anyone going to see Unknown? Looks good and I like liam neeson.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 01:13:33 PM
Anyone going to see Unknown? Looks good and I like liam neeson.

If it's half as good as Taken, it should kick major ass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 01:43:03 PM
Anyone going to see Unknown? Looks good and I like liam neeson.

What is the new movie with the hot guy from The Hangover and DeNeiro?  Something about take a pill to get unlimited mental intelligence or power or something.  I caught the end of the trailer but did not catch the name...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 01:44:48 PM
What is the new movie with the hot guy from The Hangover and DeNeiro?  Something about take a pill to get unlimited mental intelligence or power or something.  I caught the end of the trailer but did not catch the name...

Limitless
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 01:52:02 PM
Limitless

Can't take Bradley cooper serious in this kind of movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 02:10:10 PM
Can't take Bradley cooper serious in this kind of movie.

To me, he is an up and comer... way hot without being too pretty, and a good enough actor to maybe pull off some meaty parts.  I hope he gets good reviews for this movie - playing opposite DeNeiro is big time... (insert Ben Stiller/Focker joke here tho...   do NOT know what The Man was thinking...)

But I get what you are saying.  Even if Keanu was a freaking Oscar worthy actor, I can never get past Bill & Ted.  I would never be able to see the goofy dentist guy/Andy from Office as any kind of serious actor.  Ever.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 02:23:10 PM
To me, he is an up and comer... way hot without being too pretty, and a good enough actor to maybe pull off some meaty parts.  I hope he gets good reviews for this movie - playing opposite DeNeiro is big time... (insert Ben Stiller/Focker joke here tho...   do NOT know what The Man was thinking...)

But I get what you are saying.  Even if Keanu was a freaking Oscar worthy actor, I can never get past Bill & Ted.  I would never be able to see the goofy dentist guy/Andy from Office as any kind of serious actor.  Ever.

I cant get past cooper in wedding crashers. Although Vince Vaughn is hilarious to me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 22, 2011, 02:36:04 PM
I cant get past cooper in wedding crashers. Although Vince Vaughn is hilarious to me.

He was in a really bad horror movie about some dude on a train with a meat cleaver, too.  Can't see past it. 

Plus he looks like my accountant.   He's not high on my list.   He's like Matthew McBongodrums lite.  And McBongo's no Malkovich.  Not what you'd call a great actor, anyway. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 02:30:24 AM
The American

Should have just named it "The Slow and shootty" 

What a plodding, boring load of crap.  Brooding piano. Brooding Clooney. Hot Italian prostitute.  Brood. Brood. Brood. Brood.  Never get anywhere.  Never offer even the slightest explanation of who anyone was, what they were doing or what purpose they served. 

Awful. 

If I'd paid to see that in the theaters....

Awful.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 08:24:15 AM
Due date sucked balls. It was much funnier with Steve Martin and John Candy.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 08:27:59 AM
Due date sucked balls. It was much funnier with Steve Martin and John Candy.

Those aren't pillows.

Hate to hear that.  I had high hopes for that movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 09:03:12 AM
Those aren't pillows.

Hate to hear that.  I had high hopes for that movie.

Had they gone another direction with the movie, I maybe could have appreciated it.  After all, it had Downey Jr as the lead actor.  And he had some moments.  Danny McBride had a good scene in the movie.  But it followed "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" from start to finish. 

Business man.  Lonely fat guy just trying to make it.  First meet at airport with a luggage scene.  Then on the airplane.  Then again when the business man is stranded and gets a ride from the fat guy.  Minus the train, it follows lock-step all the way down to the fat guy secretly having the business guys wallet. 

Steve Martin was a better business man.  John Candy was a better slob. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 09:27:18 AM
Had they gone another direction with the movie, I maybe could have appreciated it.  After all, it had Downey Jr as the lead actor.  And he had some moments.  Danny McBride had a good scene in the movie.  But it followed "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" from start to finish. 

Business man.  Lonely fat guy just trying to make it.  First meet at airport with a luggage scene.  Then on the airplane.  Then again when the business man is stranded and gets a ride from the fat guy.  Minus the train, it follows lock-step all the way down to the fat guy secretly having the business guys wallet. 

Steve Martin was a better business man.  John Candy was a better slob.

I liked it and laughed...but Token is dead nutz, I said the same thing.  Still worth a look though IMHO.

and Kaos I agree on the American 100% ...it didn't know what the fudge it was supposed to be.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 09:36:28 AM
I liked it and laughed...but Token is dead nutz, I said the same thing.  Still worth a look though IMHO.

and Kaos I agree on the American 100% ...it didn't know what the fudge it was supposed to be.

All I know is I watched Avatar a couple of days ago and never got to see any blue boobies.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 11:02:50 AM
The American

Should have just named it "The Slow and shootty" 

What a plodding, boring load of crap.  Brooding piano. Brooding Clooney. Hot Italian prostitute.  Brood. Brood. Brood. Brood.  Never get anywhere.  Never offer even the slightest explanation of who anyone was, what they were doing or what purpose they served. 

Awful. 

If I'd paid to see that in the theaters....

Awful.

The American isn't really an American movie.  It was directed by a dutchman (the damn dutch!) and consisted of mostly Italian actors.  Clooney - for whatever reason - jumped on board in the production phase and also became the main actor.  Perhaps he's shooting for legit actor status instead of roostery, rat-pack-esque pretty boy. 

Anyway, if this had been a foreign film with subtitles, I would have enjoyed it more.  Essentially the movie was analyzing the last job of an assassin who had spent his entire life devoted to his work.  He realized he wanted to fall in love with a woman, but the only women available to him were prostitutes.  I'm assuming the woman he killed in the beginning was also a prostitute. 

The plot did have too many holes.  In fact, the plot turned into more of a hindrance than anything.  But in terms of a character analysis, it was pretty good in my opinion. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 11:06:18 AM
It was directed by a dutchman (the damn dutch!)

There's only two things I hate in this world.  People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 11:15:48 AM
There's only two things I hate in this world.  People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.

Yeah.

Like people who look down on hookers.


"How 'bout no, you crazy Dutch bastard?"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on February 24, 2011, 12:11:24 PM
There's only two things I hate in this world.  People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.
I must shay, you look toit. Toit, like a tiger. I can tell by your toit pantsh.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 01, 2011, 08:32:36 PM
Impostor (2002)

Philip K. richard stories get totally screwed when translated to film and this is no different. The theatrical release is totally worthless because it wasn't supposed to happen. It was a short (like 14 pages) story that was supposed to serve as one of three parts of a sci-fi trilogy. They shot some, then abandoned the idea, leaving the studio to come back in and add in 45 minutes of uselessness to this story.

Here's what's worth watching: if you get a hold of the Director's cut you can see the original 40 minute short film in the bonus features. That's actually a pretty fun ride. As a total movie, this sucks like a Hoover, but the short is worth a look.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 12:16:00 AM
Impostor (2002)

Philip K. richard stories get totally screwed when translated to film and this is no different. The theatrical release is totally worthless because it wasn't supposed to happen. It was a short (like 14 pages) story that was supposed to serve as one of three parts of a sci-fi trilogy. They shot some, then abandoned the idea, leaving the studio to come back in and add in 45 minutes of uselessness to this story.

Here's what's worth watching: if you get a hold of the Director's cut you can see the original 40 minute short film in the bonus features. That's actually a pretty fun ride. As a total movie, this sucks like a Hoover, but the short is worth a look.

Kirbys suck more than Hoovers. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 02:22:40 AM
Kirbys suck more than Hoovers.
Blast from the past.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 06:59:32 AM
Blast from the past.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 09:22:26 AM
Blast from the past.

It's like showing my ID.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 10:40:34 AM
Philip K. richard stories get totally screwed when translated to film and this is no different.

I tend to agree, but for some reason, I want to see The Adjustment Bureau.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 11:03:24 AM
I watched "127 Hours" last night. I thought it was pretty good. I'd recommend it for everyone to give it a try. I also recommend not going your ass out 5+ hours from a town without folks knowing where you're going. The military would recommend you learn the buddy system.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 02, 2011, 12:46:27 PM
Folks, please read thread title before posting a movie review.    :civic:

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 04, 2011, 11:20:11 PM
Unthinkable

Stellar cast.  Sort of.  Samuel L. (who has essentially become the black Michael Caine because he's in everything), the dude who played Lucien in Underworld (and David Frost in Frost/Nixon), the chick from The Matrix (and a host of terrible movies) and several minor characters you've seen before.

Basic storyline: Terrorist (the Underworld dude) confesses to setting a bunch of bombs but not where.  It's Samuel's job to torture the fudge out of him until he tells.  The Matrix chick is supposed to sort of mediate or whatever. 

As with so, so many movies for me, the idea is great but the execution is weak.  Sam is good.  The Matrix chick is a frigid robot.  Hate her.   Lucien isn't bad, but who's buying him as a Muslim extremist?  He's a fudgeing werewolf for Jeeve's sake. 

The interaction at some points is laughable.  "Get him out of there!"  Guns are drawn and pointed every where.  "We need to find the bombs!  Get him back in there NOW!"  More guns drawn and pointed. 

Would like to have seen this if Julia Roberts or maybe Angie Harmon had played the female lead.  Or especially even Emily Procter.

Wasn't bad, but some seriously shootty dialogue, some ridiculously corny setups and some wooden ass acting kept it from reaching its potential.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 06, 2011, 10:03:59 AM
Ramona and Beezus

You have kids.  You watch what you watch. 

Expected it to be torture.  It wasn't.  Yeah it was predictable.  Yeah, at times it was corny.  But as an "it's okay to be you" tale which is a pretty important message for kids aged 8 - 14 it wasn't really that bad. 

It walked some well-trod ground that tons of kids movies (including the unwatchable Marmaduke) have trod over the years:  Quirky kid searching for identity, dad loses job, family in peril, miraculously tidy "all is well" ending.  But unlike far too many of its contemporaries it didn't stray into schmoozy teen angst romance, it didn't artificially try to turn on the waterworks, and it didn't sink into sappiness. It struck a good balance between goofiness and pathos.  It gave all the characters a little bit to do.

Yes, the timeline was a little odd.  Dad loses job and two days later the bank might take the house?  Yet work on an additional room (and the furnishing of it and another) continues unabated?  But that really didn't detract. 

Selena Gomez has a good screen presence away from the cookie-cutter Disney one-liner smartass role they pigeonhole all of their "stars" into.  The scene where she gets Ramona to come sleep with her when both are scared and concerned over the future of their families rings true and is very sweet. If she picks her roles with care, she is one of the few Disney-philes who could break away and be something away from the Mouse.  Spare me Ashley Tisdale and the loathsome Zack and Cody twins, please. 

I've suffered through a ton of schmaltzy, syrupy, sappy "kids" movies.  This just wasn't that bad.   Not worth watching without a kid (and there are some kid movies that are -- Lion King, for instance) but a decent little film for a dad and daughter to watch together. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 06, 2011, 11:07:31 PM
Saw The King's Speech and The Fighter today.

The King's Speech was about what I expected. A slow-paced movie about King George VI and his fear of public speaking. Great. The Social Network should have won best picture.

The Fighter, however, was awesome. I definitely recommend it. Christian Bale was phenomenal as richardy Ecklund. He really transformed himself for the role. They left out Micky Ward's bouts with Arturo Gatti, and instead chose to end the film after he won the Welterweight title in London.

Skip The King's Speech, but don't miss The Fighter.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 06, 2011, 11:47:11 PM
Folks, please read thread title before posting a movie review.    :civic:



Just a reminder.

Thank you...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 06, 2011, 11:53:50 PM
Just a reminder.

Thank you...
Some of us only have memory up to and at max of a week. Its not our fault that Kaos is way behind.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 07, 2011, 03:19:34 AM
The Social Network

Very well done movie. 

The pacing was a little uneven because of the bouncing back and forth in time. 

Eisenberg channeling Zuckerberg is a dismal, sad fudge.  Assuming the movie is anywhere close to reality, he's a psychological mess and will likely be miserable regardless of the success or failure of his efforts. 

One casting change I would have made was the CFO.  That guy didn't carry his part IMO.  Eisenberg plays that exact same guy in everything I've seen him in only with varying degrees of misery. 

Not a movie that everybody would care for, but it was good. 

I was primarily disappointed because I was really hoping to get some intel on what the fudgeing "like" button meant and how to change between profiles, but they never got into that at all. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 09, 2011, 06:01:12 PM
Kaos, you gotta watch "The Next Three Days" with Russell Crowe. It just came out on DVD and in my opinion its one of the best I have seen in a long time.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 11, 2011, 12:50:41 AM
Kaos, you gotta watch "The Next Three Days" with Russell Crowe. It just came out on DVD and in my opinion its one of the best I have seen in a long time.

I don't think Crowe can act his way out of a paper bag. 

Him, Travolta, Cage and that awful, pathetic, stroke-faced Gerard Butler are the worst actors in the history of the universe.  They collectively make Adam West look like Nicholson or Depp.   

That said, I have the movie in my Netflix queue.  Glutton for punishment I suppose. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 11, 2011, 10:53:42 AM
Kaos, you gotta watch "The Next Three Days" with Russell Crowe. It just came out on DVD and in my opinion its one of the best I have seen in a long time.
Watched it last night...some holes...but I give it.

 :thumsup: :thumsup:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 12, 2011, 10:07:32 AM
The American

Should have just named it "The Slow and shootty" 

What a plodding, boring load of crap.  Brooding piano. Brooding Clooney. Hot Italian prostitute.  Brood. Brood. Brood. Brood.  Never get anywhere.  Never offer even the slightest explanation of who anyone was, what they were doing or what purpose they served. 

Awful. 

If I'd paid to see that in the theaters....

Awful.

One of thase that was soooooo slow and bad I couldn't make myself endure until it got good, which apparently never happened.  The opening scene grabbed my attention, but then it quickly got shootty.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 12, 2011, 10:12:43 AM
One of thase that was soooooo slow and bad I couldn't make myself endure until it got good, which apparently never happened.  The opening scene grabbed my attention, but then it quickly got shootty.

Opening scene was good.  First five minutes and I thought the movie would fulfill.  But after that it just sank in somber boring piano music. 

Even that opening scene was never fully justified.  There was no rational explanation for his action.  It was simply unnecessary.  It set up nothing. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 12, 2011, 10:18:11 AM
Opening scene was good.  First five minutes and I thought the movie would fulfill.  But after that it just sank in somber boring piano music. 

Even that opening scene was never fully justified.  There was no rational explanation for his action.  It was simply unnecessary.  It set up nothing.

Product of bad edit?  Or what.  It made me have visions of "Mike's Murder".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 12, 2011, 10:29:04 AM
The Social Network

Very well done movie. 

The pacing was a little uneven because of the bouncing back and forth in time. 

Eisenberg channeling Zuckerberg is a dismal, sad fudge.  Assuming the movie is anywhere close to reality, he's a psychological mess and will likely be miserable regardless of the success or failure of his efforts. 

One casting change I would have made was the CFO.  That guy didn't carry his part IMO.  Eisenberg plays that exact same guy in everything I've seen him in only with varying degrees of misery. 

Not a movie that everybody would care for, but it was good. 

I was primarily disappointed because I was really hoping to get some intel on what the fudgeing "like" button meant and how to change between profiles, but they never got into that at all.

Agree.  Wonder if the truth about how it all went down is as interesting as  the movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 13, 2011, 01:41:39 AM
The Collector

Part Saw, part Hostel, part Silence of the Lambs (well, not much of that), part Hellraiser The Collector is essentially a torture fest for people who derive pleasure from torture for the sake of torture. 

The premise is sort of ridiculous.  The ending sucks donkey nuts.  The alternate ending was better, but still completely lacking in resolution. 

The film created a series of setups for which there was no solution.  If you're going to watch, stop reading.

But I've got a ton of questions.

1) Why bother with the whole family backstory if you're not going to address in in the denouement?
2) Why bother with the entire who's paying who setup if it's going to be nothing more than a dangling thread with no meaning?
3) How exactly was the idiotic box supposed to be "bait"?  What purpose did it serve at all?  Stupid.
4) We watched the family drive away together to go on vacation.  Why the fudge were they back at the house?
5) Why was teen-whore with the soft pillow bag tits and henious face out with richardweed?  She'd been forced on the family vacation, too.
6) Why did stupid fudge keep hitting the horn? What dumbass does that?
7) Just how in the hell did The Collector have time to completely "Home Alone" the entire house?  And to what end?  if he had the family restrained, why set the ridiculously elaborate traps? 
8) Why set the traps if he's just going to firebomb the house anyway?
9) Why did dumbfudge criminal keep allowing himself to get right crossed by the damn psycho?

If you get a stiffy from random, senseless torture porn done not nearly as cleverly as Saw, climb on board.  Otherwise? Pass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 13, 2011, 01:55:52 AM
The A-Team

Really didn't expect much.  So that's what I basically got.  It was better than I expected and far better than the reviews led me to believe it would be.  Some was a little far-fetched, but it had its moments. 

Cast:

Liam Neeson - Did an adequate job.  I normally like him but I didn't warm to him in this role at all. His accent was off-putting.  Would have preferred maybe James Brolin, DeNiro, Eastwood, Harrison Ford, Bruce Willis or Malkovich as Hannibal. 

Bradley Cooper was very good in the Dirk Benedict role and hammed it up to just the right extent.

Whoever played BA?  Boo.  Would rather have had the role be completely different than that guy doing it.  Didn't buy him at all. 

The Murdock character was fair and had a funny moment or two.  But he reminded me of one of those insufferable Wilson brothers -- I bet he is one, isn't he? 

Jessica Biel - ick.  She was not that hot, needed a bra and completely out of her depth.  In retrospect i can't think of any role she's really done well.  She's not a good actress and not quite as hot as some seem to think.  Oh, I'd do her.  But she's down the list.  Sorry, Jess.

The guy who played Raoul in Phantom of the Opera was good.  Added a lot. 

Brian Bloom who I sort of thought was Richard Grieco added eyebrows. 

It wasn't a bad movie.  Just popcorny.  Seemed to have a hard time deciding if it wanted to be a serious action flick or pure camp. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 13, 2011, 03:00:20 AM
The Runaways

Didn't finish it.  Was just stupid as far as I could tell.  And I fudgeing hate the Twilight bitch.  She sucks.  Wouldn't fudge her with a cold vampire richard.

I only made about 25 minutes before I just gave up. 

The only redeeming feature I saw at all?   The guy who played Damone in Fast Times at Ridgemont High (one of the greatest movies of all time) showed up as a music teacher.  Oddly I didn't recognize him by sight, but his voice was unmistakable.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 11:02:30 AM
These reviews will not be complete until you give us a review on this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvuopBG7tBc
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 11:10:19 AM
These reviews will not be complete until you give us a review on this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvuopBG7tBc

WHAT.THE.fudge!? Holy shoot, I can not help but laugh. It looks more like they are setting up for a game of leap frog.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 11:15:47 AM
Who....could have possibly dreamed up something so completely.......oh forget it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 11:32:24 AM
Saw Winter's Bone and Black Swan last night.

Didn't care for either.

Winter's Bone was treacherously slow. I don't get Jennifer Lawrence being tauted as highly as she was for her performance here. I found it to be pretty weak, to be honest. The visuals of Podunk-assed-white-trashville was someone interesting, but the story was quite dull for it's label as a "thriller".

Black Swan was better, but not by much. I don't mind a little artistic expression and a plot that is hard to ascertain what is real and what is imagined by the main character. But this was just lacking coherency to me, and was also pretty dull in parts. I guess what it comes down to is there was too much ballet for my taste. I could see where if you were into avant-garde theatrical ballet and, say, didn't like boxing, you might prefer this film over The Fighter, for example. What was worth seeing this film for, of course, is an "alone time" scene with Natalie Portman as well as some lesbo action with her and Mila Kunis.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 12:46:03 PM
What was worth seeing this film for, of course, is an "alone time" seen with Natalie Portman as well as some lesbo action with her and Mila Kunis.

Would these clips perchance be available on YouTube? 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 04:25:54 PM
Would these clips perchance be available on YouTube?

Um...yeah chad...get to linking this shoot...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 14, 2011, 04:31:36 PM
Um...yeah chad...get to linking this shoot...

I giggled like a school girl
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 16, 2011, 01:48:01 AM
Red Riding Hood

When i was a small child, my grandmother used to tell me the story of Little Red Riding Hood.  Always one of my favorites. I told the story (albeit with a few of my own flourishes) to my own kids. 

I realize this movie wasn't intended to be that story, but after sitting through it I really wish my grandmother could have come back from the dead and directed it at least. 

The movie had no idea what audience it was trying to reach. 

Since it was rated PG-13 the sex, violence and gore couldn't reach the level to draw the serious horror fan.  There was no sex, almost no cursing, and zero gore.   So it's not for horror fans.

It considered trying to be a romantic kind of thing, maybe on the Twilight level but that failed broadly.  There was no PG-13 tension between the lead characters. 

It could have played as a comedy but instead found unintentional humor with bad acting and asinine setups. 

It wasn't an action film.  It wasn't a drama.  It wasn't scary.  It wasn't uplifting. It flat out wasn't interesting. It offers nothing to any audience. 

Several actors you've seen polluted this film including the creepy Amish kid from Witness, Gary Oldman (who overhammed his part to no end) and Virginia Madsden.  All were wasted. 

I adore Amanda Seyfried.  I think she's achingly cute and can be seriously sexy.  Her work in Jennifer's Body and Chloe was mesmerizing.  Maybe it was because she had super hot lesbian scenes in both, i don't know.  (See severely edited Chloe scene below).   But even her smoldering cuteness and impossibly big eyes couldn't save this turd of a movie. 

So watch a little of Chloe set to some shootty music instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhI2MuOvOeQ
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 17, 2011, 11:14:02 AM
CENTIPEDE!!

CENTIPEDE!!

CENTIPEDE!!

CENTIPEDE!!

CENTIPEDE!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 10:31:49 AM
Let Me In

i'd already seen the Swedish film Let The Right One In and was looking forward to an Americanized version of the creepy child vampire movie.  I was hoping the new film would scale back some of the brooding slowness and add some American flavor.

Unfortunately the American version was nothing but a carbon copy of the Swedish one.  Same impossibly ugly and creepy white kid, same constant backdrop of snow, even the same basic look for the wardrobe and sets.

The movie was set in Los Alamos New Mexico, where it apparently snows non-stop.  That threw me off from the beginning.  I could have accepted snow from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine... But I spent the first half of the movie wondering whether or not it really snowed in New Mexico.

I wanted to like this movie.  Might have if I hadn't seen the Swedish one.  It was good because it was Swedish and weird.  This wasn't because it tried to shoehorn the entire Swedish experience into an American setting rather than taking the concept and updating it for an American audience.  It just felt wrong and artificial. 

If you're going to watch, I suggest the Swedish version available on Netflix on Demand.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 10:35:12 AM
The Last Three Days

It was just fair.  Wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but it dragged for far too long. 

The opening argument was artificial and unnecessary.

It had its moments, but in the end I'd much rather he had just given up on the whole idea and hammered Olivia Wilde. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 01:30:34 PM
These reviews will not be complete until you give us a review on this...
The Human Centipede

I highly recommend this podcast about it.
http://www.nowplayingpodcast.com/archives/npp031.php (http://www.nowplayingpodcast.com/archives/npp031.php)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 04:32:39 PM
The Last Three Days

It was just fair.  Wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but it dragged for far too long. 

The opening argument was artificial and unnecessary.

It had its moments, but in the end I'd much rather he had just given up on the whole idea and hammered Olivia Wilde.

Damn, your harsh.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 05:29:51 PM
I highly recommend this podcast about it.
http://www.nowplayingpodcast.com/archives/npp031.php (http://www.nowplayingpodcast.com/archives/npp031.php)
I loved the Friday the 13th series, those guys are hilarious.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 19, 2011, 05:34:17 PM
Damn, your harsh.

Don't let him fool you...he only looks like Ebert.

but in the end I'd much rather he had just given up on the whole idea and hammered Olivia Wilde. 
Can't argue with this though
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 21, 2011, 12:05:59 AM
My Soul To Take

Wes Craven helmed horror flick. 

Pretty tame and a relatively lame concept.  Dead schizophrenic murderer kills wife and dies on the way to the hospital?  Or does he? 

Will give Wes credit because I wasn't sure who was possessed or if murderer man actually had survived until the denoument. 

Will deduct credit from Wes for playing politically correct culture bingo and making sure he included every stereotype in the book:  Dumb jock, blonde bimbo with a good heart being led astray by the mean girl, the angry goth chick, the nerdy doofus who has a bad home life, the black guy, the handicapped guy (who was also the black guy), the chinese guy, the misunderstood nerd and the religious zealot. 

Wes gets a serious plus for casting Zena Grey's hair.  She wasn't much of an actress but her amazing red mane was a star in its own right. 

Didn't contain the teenaged punch of Wes' Freddy Krueger films, it lacked the mystique of the Serpent and the Rainbow and it wasn't as much campy fun as Scream.

It was just a typical teen horror film that I probably would have enjoyed a lot more if I were still 17 and snuggled up to a girl who was going to jump every time the music crescendoed. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 21, 2011, 09:18:33 AM
K, I was scouring the video rental joint looking for a movie because we've seen almost everything else. I came across a movie that I have been tempted to rent but ended up finding something else that I figured would be better. The movie, Triage starring Colin Farrell and Paz Vega (hot hot hot). Not sure if you've seen it but its a mix of a little action and more drama with a little little splash of romance. I know you will critique a movie more than me but its not a bad movie at all so check it out if you haven't already.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 21, 2011, 12:56:48 PM
Anyone seen 'Exam'?

British psychological thriller.

Starts with a simple precept. Turns into a complicated game. Goes all over the place to get to the end with a cliche twist. Not great, but ok. Lot of misdirection and it kept my attention. Decent flick.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 21, 2011, 01:20:46 PM
The Machinist

I saw this movie right before I left for Orlando. 

Pretty good movie.  Christian Bale lost 62 pounds for this role, and his disgusting physique really set the tone for the movie. 

It's intense.  That's for sure.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2011, 10:37:49 AM
Stone

Robert DeNiro. Edward Norton. Mills Jojovich (sp).

Basic premise: parole board dude (Bobby) deciding the fate of con (Ed). His wife (Milla) wants her hubby out of the joint and is willing to do anything to help him with the board.

Good setup.  Why this movie had to drift off into brooding spiritual self-analysis and the predictable condemnation of Christians as sanctimonious zealots is a mystery. 

Couple of problems. Didn't buy norton as the con even though he gave a great effort. Cornrows Ed? Really?

Timeline was also an issue.  Allegedly in the slam for torching his grandparents he had supposedly been in a dozen years I think.  That would have made milla's wife character 16 or 17 at the time of incarceration?  She's going to sit around with her itty bitty titties and tootsie roll nips and wait on this guy? 

Bobby D was good as usual but overplayed his breakdown a little bit. 

Pretty good setup but no resolution. All movies don't have to be tidy and sometimes it's okay to leave everybody in a state of tortured misery.  This film seemed to beg for a little more though.  It established a series of emotional interactions and then just left them wrecked.

Not a bad movie. May watch it again with different expectations to see if I missed something. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2011, 10:41:45 PM
Rango

Johnny Depp is a genius.

The animation was amazing.  It was as good -- no probably better -- than Pixar. 

Story wise and character development wise it beat the pants off Despicable Me (which I liked) and MegaMind (which I thought was crappy).

The movie tipped its hat to just about every spaghetti western ever filmed.   It would almost be worth watching again just to see how many of them it channeled.  Among my favorites was the scene where the undertaker was measuring him for a coffin.

There was also a random KISS reference which made me laugh. 

So many animated movies miss the mark and dwell in crude jokes and/or sappy schmaltz.  This film did neither.  It told an intelligent, engaging story and did it with flair. 

The cast of characters was quite ugly, but the movie found a way to make all the dirty, scuzzy stereotypical spaghetti western dirtbags charming. 

Very good movie. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 23, 2011, 11:30:32 PM
I love Mr. Depp. He is one of my all time favs. Watch the Tourist. My wife doesn't fully like it, but what the fudge does she know, right? Wait, she is a utopia in the bed, but she knows nothing about decent movies. Johnny Depp plays this movie through. Of course, you know who is still Mrs. Sexy. If I had my turn, she would f.o.r.g.et. about Pitt.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 09:24:55 AM
The Machinist

I saw this movie right before I left for Orlando. 

Pretty good movie.  Christian Bale lost 62 pounds for this role, and his disgusting physique really set the tone for the movie. 

It's intense.  That's for sure.

I actually fell asleep watching this one on teh Netflix. It seemed slow moving.


Quote from: XMember

Rango
There was a random KISS reference which made me laugh. 
Very good movie.

FIXT your review to reflect more accuracy.


Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 09:46:42 AM
The Fighter

Rocky for this generation. 

Basic plot: Pedestrian fighter has to overcome his crack addled attention hog brother and his two minutes of fame, his white trash mother, his seven whore sisters and his own self doubt to earn a shot at the title.  It's not exactly an uplifting film, but it does tell a great story of the internal family conflict that almost derailed Micky Ward's path to the top.

Mark Wahlberg played pretty much the same role as he did in Invincible and even Rock Star to a degree as Mick. But it fit him well. 

Christian Bale absolutely deserved the Oscar for his performance as the crack head brother who once knocked Sugar Ray Leonard down, even if Ray actually slipped.  He did a great job of making you hate him while simultaneously feeling sorry for him.

Melissa Leo was pretty good as their trailerpark trashy meddling mother. Loathed her and the seven skanks she spat out.  She also won an Oscar for her role.  I thought she hammed it up way too much. 

If I had been deciding the Oscar would have gone to Amy Adams instead.  She played Mick's girlfriend and the one person who was able to finally disconnect him from his family of albatrosses and get his career moving in the right direction.  Never really been a fan of her work but she was outstanding here. 

The movie was a little long but that's the only real criticism, which is a strange one because I wish it had been a little longer and dealt with Ward's fights against Gatti.

Good movie. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 09:51:40 AM
I stopped reading when I saw "seven whore sisters".  I give two thumbs up, sight unseen.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 09:55:36 AM
I stopped reading when I saw "seven whore sisters".  I give two thumbs up, sight unseen.

Its the kind of whores you want to punch in the face.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 09:56:59 AM
Its the kind of whores you want to punch in the face.

I thought that was all whores?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:01:02 AM
I thought that was all whores?

They charge extra for punching. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:12:51 AM
They charge extra for punching.

Not if they're unconscious.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:18:51 AM
Not if they're unconscious.
8 more posts and you get a button
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:22:35 AM
I thought that was all whores?

Well there's the face punching kind and the donkey punching kind.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:32:33 AM
donkey punching kind.

Meh, they say they are going to let you see a donkey punch on them, and they give you their number, and when you call, they never call you back.

I speak from experience.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 10:33:23 AM
8 more posts and you get a button

I have an uneasy feeling about this. Like Y2K or something.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 01:50:11 PM
What you're missing here is that Kaos liked back-to-back movies.  And they were both watched on the same day. 

Upon further consideration, however, I'm thinking The Fighter was actually Invincible but it was about boxing instead of football.   The two movies could almost play side by side.  They're really interchangeable.  That being the case, I'd probably take Elizabeth Banks over Amy Adams.  Why didn't Invincible get the same kind of Oscar buzz that The Fighter did?  (One word:  Christian Bale. Okay, that's two words, but it means one person).

And how does Marky Mark keep grabbing roles in Oscar-heavy films but keeps getting ignored by The Academy?  The Departed wouldn't have worked without Mr. Marky.  The Fighter was his movie, but just like Micky in real life, he was overshadowed by his more outspoken but less accomplished brother (Bale/richardy).  At some point the Oscars are going to have to reward this former rapper/underwear model.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 02:28:15 PM
What you're missing here is that Kaos liked back-to-back movies.  And they were both watched on the same day. 

Upon further consideration, however, I'm thinking The Fighter was actually Invincible but it was about boxing instead of football.   The two movies could almost play side by side.  They're really interchangeable.  That being the case, I'd probably take Elizabeth Banks over Amy Adams.  Why didn't Invincible get the same kind of Oscar buzz that The Fighter did?  (One word:  Christian Bale. Okay, that's two words, but it means one person).

And how does Marky Mark keep grabbing roles in Oscar-heavy films but keeps getting ignored by The Academy?  The Departed wouldn't have worked without Mr. Marky.  The Fighter was his movie, but just like Micky in real life, he was overshadowed by his more outspoken but less accomplished brother (Bale/richardy).  At some point the Oscars are going to have to reward this former rapper/underwear model.

Agree...The Departed was great. He confuses me though. One good movie, then something terrible or just average. Maybe just bad movie selection or just hindsight.

The Happening...really? The plot was horrible to me. Marky was good but the movie itself? Meh...And maybe its because everything Shamalyan does now will seem to be a let down after making his mark with Sixth Sense, but lately his movies just haven't done it for me.  Devil was 'ok'.

But back to topic, I do generally like Marky's acting and movies.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 02:30:52 PM
8 more posts and you get a button
Button?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 04:07:32 PM
Anyone want to review Devil's Reject for AUT1?  I haven't got around to watching it yet.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 04:08:58 PM
Anyone want to review Devil's Reject for AUT1?  I haven't got around to watching it yet.

I already did somewhere in this thread.  Or on this board.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 04:17:21 PM
What you're missing here is that Kaos liked back-to-back movies.  And they were both watched on the same day. 

Upon further consideration, however, I'm thinking The Fighter was actually Invincible but it was about boxing instead of football.   The two movies could almost play side by side.  They're really interchangeable.  That being the case, I'd probably take Elizabeth Banks over Amy Adams.  Why didn't Invincible get the same kind of Oscar buzz that The Fighter did?  (One word:  Christian Bale. Okay, that's two words, but it means one person).

And how does Marky Mark keep grabbing roles in Oscar-heavy films but keeps getting ignored by The Academy?  The Departed wouldn't have worked without Mr. Marky.  The Fighter was his movie, but just like Micky in real life, he was overshadowed by his more outspoken but less accomplished brother (Bale/richardy).  At some point the Oscars are going to have to reward this former rapper/underwear model.

I mean, when are they going ot recognize the greatness of Boogie Nights?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 04:39:22 PM
Rango

Johnny Depp is a genius.

The animation was amazing.  It was as good -- no probably better -- than Pixar. 

Story wise and character development wise it beat the pants off Despicable Me (which I liked) and MegaMind (which I thought was crappy).

The movie tipped its hat to just about every spaghetti western ever filmed.   It would almost be worth watching again just to see how many of them it channeled.  Among my favorites was the scene where the undertaker was measuring him for a coffin.

There was also a random KISS reference which made me laugh. 

So many animated movies miss the mark and dwell in crude jokes and/or sappy schmaltz.  This film did neither.  It told an intelligent, engaging story and did it with flair. 

The cast of characters was quite ugly, but the movie found a way to make all the dirty, scuzzy stereotypical spaghetti western dirtbags charming. 

Very good movie.

Four kids went.  Three hated it.  One fell asleep.  Acompanying parents also disliked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 05:05:38 PM
Four kids went.  Three hated it.  One fell asleep.  Acompanying parents also disliked.


Not for everybody apparently.  I hate most movies that are hailed 'round here anyhow. 

One of the highest rated movies currently on RottenTomatoes. 

Quote
So many animated movies miss the mark and dwell in crude jokes and/or sappy schmaltz.  This film did neither.  It told an intelligent, engaging story and did it with flair. 
 

Yes.  I said that.   I'd watch it again right now. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 24, 2011, 08:18:49 PM

Not for everybody apparently.  I hate most movies that are hailed 'round here anyhow. 

One of the highest rated movies currently on RottenTomatoes. 
 

Yes.  I said that.   I'd watch it again right now.

I have not seen it. This was the comment from some friends whom took their kids.  Said the plot was nebulous and you never really connect with the main character. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 26, 2011, 01:10:42 AM
Faster

Billy Bob Thornton, Carla Gugino, Simon Adibesi (from Oz, no idea what his real name is), the creepy red Malachi dude from the original Children of the Corn and The Rock in a violent tale of revenge. 

Not a fan of Billy Bob with the exception of his role in SlingBlade.  Carla has looked better. 

The story was very weak.  Rock's rage was not convincingly defined and the parental/sibling relationship was, frankly, laughable. 

Rock is a good actor when spoofing himself (Get Smart), when doing broad comedy (Tooth Fairy) or in roles where he's not required to convincingly emote (Scorpion King).  Here where he had to play a flashback death scene where his brother was killed?  Ugh.  Just plain terrible acting.  Seriously awful. 

The film jumped from implausible scene to implausible scene. Where are all the cops when he just walks out of a bar/hospital/office after shooting somebody? How come Rock can put a bullet through the middle of a guy's forehead while essentially shooting from the hip, but he can unload the clip at another guy standing in the hall and miss every time?  Why does the fudgeing assassin just watch instead of unloading on him during any of the 15 dozen opportunities he has?  Why does the assassin's wife -- who in one scene was sexually aroused by gunplay -- suddenly turn into mush when he doesn't quit the killing game?  How come the voices of the employer and the employer himself don't come close to matching?   

Whatever. 

It was a carnage-filled, utterly joyless rampage.  The Rock is so much better when he gets to add a touch of humor.  He's like Cam.  Things are better when he's smiling. 

Forgettable movie.  For all involved.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 26, 2011, 01:20:45 AM
Unstoppable

This movie was generally panned and I didn't expect much. 

But I liked it.  I liked Pelham 123, too, and it got the same critical bashing. 

There were some extraneous scenes.  Why bother to show the kids at all if they weren't going to be in peril?  That was a wasted 15 minutes of the movie. 

But the rest was pretty tight.  Denzel brings a breezy cool to every role he plays. I've come to appreciate him more and more as an actor.  He'll take the occasional dud role, but he makes the acting seem so completely effortless it's hard not to enjoy his performance. 

The action was well paced, the disagreements between the corporate suits and the men/women in the trenches rang true and the movie steered clear of ridiculous and unnecessary sub plots (with the exception of the damn kids). 

I wish they hadn't done the "based on a true story" thing, though, because from what I understand the real story was much less dramatic.  There was no arched curve, the train wasn't going but something like 20 mph, nobody had to run across the boxcars. 

Just make the movie and keep it to yourself that you heard a story about a train that ran away and decided it would make a great film.  Happens all the time.  Based on a true story?  So was Inglorious Basterds. 

I still thought this was a good movie.  I enjoyed watching it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 26, 2011, 07:13:59 AM
Faster

Billy Bob Thornton, Carla Gugino, Simon Adibesi (from Oz, no idea what his real name is), the creepy red Malachi dude from the original Children of the Corn and The Rock in a violent tale of revenge. 

Not a fan of Billy Bob with the exception of his role in SlingBlade.  Carla has looked better. 

The story was very weak.  Rock's rage was not convincingly defined and the parental/sibling relationship was, frankly, laughable. 

Rock is a good actor when spoofing himself (Get Smart), when doing broad comedy (Tooth Fairy) or in roles where he's not required to convincingly emote (Scorpion King).  Here where he had to play a flashback death scene where his brother was killed?  Ugh.  Just plain terrible acting.  Seriously awful. 

The film jumped from implausible scene to implausible scene. Where are all the cops when he just walks out of a bar/hospital/office after shooting somebody? How come Rock can put a bullet through the middle of a guy's forehead while essentially shooting from the hip, but he can unload the clip at another guy standing in the hall and miss every time?  Why does the fudgeing assassin just watch instead of unloading on him during any of the 15 dozen opportunities he has?  Why does the assassin's wife -- who in one scene was sexually aroused by gunplay -- suddenly turn into mush when he doesn't quit the killing game?  How come the voices of the employer and the employer himself don't come close to matching?   

Whatever. 

It was a carnage-filled, utterly joyless rampage.  The Rock is so much better when he gets to add a touch of humor.  He's like Cam.  Things are better when he's smiling. 

Forgettable movie.  For all involved.
(http://www.imfdb.org/w/images/thumb/1/17/Ruger_sup_redhawk_alaskan.jpg/400px-Ruger_sup_redhawk_alaskan.jpg)
The Ruger 454 Casull Alaskan was worth the price of admission.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 27, 2011, 12:01:12 AM
Due Date

This must be a record.  Four movies of the last five I actually liked. 

Fact is I didn't expect to like it at all.  I don't care for Zack Gaffinakalkiginas at all.  I didn't find The Hangover all that funny.  I thought he sucked iguana ass in Dinner for Schmucks (a terrible, terrible movie).   I expcected him to befoul this one, too. 

Not so fast.  I laughed when I was supposed to laugh, and a few times I probably wasn't supposed to. 

Yes it followed basically the same pattern as Planes, Trains and Automobiles.  Yes, PT&A was done better in terms of character development and had the tear-jerking sentimental sap going for it at the end.  Yes, John Candy is significantly better than Zack Glfarifikghekpias.  No, Steve Martin is not better than Robert Downey Jr. 

My one real complaint was the anticlimactic ending.  It built all that comedic tension and then just fizzled to the end because it was time for the movie to be over. 

Blu-Ray was disappointing because it offered nothing but "Play Movie" and "Set Up"  No commentaries, no bloopers, no deleted scenes, no alternate endings, no nude shots of Michelle M.

I thought it was a funny movie that hit more than it missed. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 02:36:04 AM
A Time to Kill
It's the middle of the night.  I can't sleep. This movie is on TNT.  It's an outstanding film, the To Kill a Mockingbird of this generation.

John Grisham's books are barely eighth grade level.  They're fast-food literature. He tells essentially the same story every single time, he just changes a few of the names.  I read his books and it's never taken me less than a day to chew through any of them.

Of all his books, A Time to Kill was easily the best.  After its success, it seems to me that Grisham got lazy. It happens to the best.  Stephen King has also fallen prey to the lazy gene.  Instead of breaking new ground like he did with Salem's Lot and The Stand (a fantastic book) he churns out formulaic potboilers with little to no imagination.

Where many of King's novels have not translated well to the screen (curiously his short stories -- Green Mile, Stand By Me, Shawshank -- have been much more successful), Grisham's books do adapt well.

The film version of A Time to Kill is even better than the book.  Far better, in fact. It's exceedingly well done. So many outstanding performances:  Matthew McBongo, Samuel L, Donald Sutherland, Kevin Spacey, Sandra Bullock, Keifer, Ashley Judd and more. 

Ridiculous that this movie wasn't nominated for an Academy Award and the shootty pile of gnu excrement The English Patient won that year. 

Bullock was so much more amazingly hotter 15 years ago.  So was sweaty Judd. 

Hate the characterization of Mississippi as a Klan haven.  I haven't seen that many klansmen in one place since I witnessed a march in the early 70s. 

Still a very good movie and a story well told. 


Side note:  A girl I knew in high school was an extra during the riot scene. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 08:34:08 AM
A Time to Kill
It's the middle of the night.  I can't sleep. This movie is on TNT.  It's an outstanding film, the To Kill a Mockingbird of this generation.

John Grisham's books are barely eighth grade level.  They're fast-food literature. He tells essentially the same story every single time, he just changes a few of the names.  I read his books and it's never taken me less than a day to chew through any of them.

Of all his books, A Time to Kill was easily the best.  After its success, it seems to me that Grisham got lazy. It happens to the best.  Stephen King has also fallen prey to the lazy gene.  Instead of breaking new ground like he did with Salem's Lot and The Stand (a fantastic book) he churns out formulaic potboilers with little to no imagination.

Where many of King's novels have not translated well to the screen (curiously his short stories -- Green Mile, Stand By Me, Shawshank -- have been much more successful), Grisham's books do adapt well.

The film version of A Time to Kill is even better than the book.  Far better, in fact. It's exceedingly well done. So many outstanding performances:  Matthew McBongo, Samuel L, Donald Sutherland, Kevin Spacey, Sandra Bullock, Keifer, Ashley Judd and more. 

Ridiculous that this movie wasn't nominated for an Academy Award and the shootty pile of gnu excrement The English Patient won that year. 

Bullock was so much more amazingly hotter 15 years ago.  So was sweaty Judd. 

Hate the characterization of Mississippi as a Klan haven.  I haven't seen that many klansmen in one place since I witnessed a march in the early 70s. 

Still a very good movie and a story well told. 


Side note:  A girl I knew in high school was an extra during the riot scene.

I watched it last night also, for about the elevententh time.  As I am want to do with movies I like and have seen many times, I start watching for the literary meanings and commentary.

I agree, good flick.  Like so many other movies, one can, if they're not paying close attention, get the wrong impression, and think it's a liberal commentary on the death penalty or race.  However, the death penalty issue is merely, and I don't think Grisham is good enough to give any real credible political commentary on either, and I'm not sure he'd care enough to anyway.  However, it was a great snapshot,  (as opposed to commentary) that included the yin and the yang, of race, and race relations as a southern writer like Grisham could do, and not terribly fudgeed up by Hollywooed; a snapshot that just happened to take place within the context of a good story like that set in the south.  A strong commentary would have fudgeed it up. 

McConaughey...I like him, and most things he's done that I've seen.  Just saw "The Lincoln Lawyer" and I recommend it.  He's not a great actor, and brings pretty much the same things to every character, but he's likable and believable.  Thankfully this TX born actor doesn't have to manufacture a bad southern accent and can get by on a generic accent of his own.

I don't think I've ever seen Samuel L. Jackson when I didn't love him and his role. 

Can't add more than you did on either Judd or Bullock.  Both, I think, could have factored in more to the story than they did.

I like Kevin Spacey, but in all movies set in the south, I get irritated and distracted at the inability to do a believable southern accent.  And his character didn't get developed, and was incidental.

Actually, there wasn't enough time to properly develop all the characters you mentioned that had much potential in this flick, yet, it worked well.   

The jail scene at the end while not Oscar worthy, was a great scene.  The closing argument was perfect, and yet,  "Now, imagine she's white" was the boom goes the dynamite moment that, at least for me, was a completely unexpected twist that was done completely with dialogue, or rather monologue in this case.   

Note to Hollywood, we have air conditioners in the south, we don't all sweat all the time, though Judd does look nice sweaty.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 09:06:50 AM
McConaughey...I like him, and most things he's done that I've seen.  Just saw "The Lincoln Lawyer" and I recommend it.  He's not a great actor, and brings pretty much the same things to every character, but he's likable and believable.  Thankfully this TX born actor doesn't have to manufacture a bad southern accent and can get by on a generic accent of his own.

My favorite movie he's been in was 2002's Frailty, not counting Dazed and Confused, of course.  If you haven't seen it, it should be added to your netflix queue ASAP.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 10:34:25 AM
The wife, after 6 years, talked me into watching this for the first time.

Dirty Dancing

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 10:56:26 AM
Due Date

This must be a record.  Four movies of the last five I actually liked. 

Fact is I didn't expect to like it at all.  I don't care for Zack Gaffinakalkiginas at all.  I didn't find The Hangover all that funny.  I thought he sucked iguana ass in Dinner for Schmucks (a terrible, terrible movie).   I expcected him to befoul this one, too. 

Not so fast.  I laughed when I was supposed to laugh, and a few times I probably wasn't supposed to. 

Yes it followed basically the same pattern as Planes, Trains and Automobiles.  Yes, PT&A was done better in terms of character development and had the tear-jerking sentimental sap going for it at the end.  Yes, John Candy is significantly better than Zack Glfarifikghekpias.  No, Steve Martin is not better than Robert Downey Jr. 

My one real complaint was the anticlimactic ending.  It built all that comedic tension and then just fizzled to the end because it was time for the movie to be over. 

Blu-Ray was disappointing because it offered nothing but "Play Movie" and "Set Up"  No commentaries, no bloopers, no deleted scenes, no alternate endings, no nude shots of Michelle M.

I thought it was a funny movie that hit more than it missed.
I thought this movie was fudgeing horrible.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 11:20:34 AM
I thought this movie was fudgeing horrible.

You thought wrong.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 11:21:45 AM
You thought wrong.
[/quote
 :pwnd: :facepalm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 11:51:13 AM
Quote function rulz
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 12:02:39 PM
Quote function rulz
That was funnier than Due Date.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 01:10:32 PM
A Time to Kill
It's the middle of the night.  I can't sleep. This movie is on TNT.  It's an outstanding film, the To Kill a Mockingbird of this generation.

John Grisham's books are barely eighth grade level.  They're fast-food literature. He tells essentially the same story every single time, he just changes a few of the names.  I read his books and it's never taken me less than a day to chew through any of them.

Of all his books, A Time to Kill was easily the best.  After its success, it seems to me that Grisham got lazy. It happens to the best.  Stephen King has also fallen prey to the lazy gene.  Instead of breaking new ground like he did with Salem's Lot and The Stand (a fantastic book) he churns out formulaic potboilers with little to no imagination.

Where many of King's novels have not translated well to the screen (curiously his short stories -- Green Mile, Stand By Me, Shawshank -- have been much more successful), Grisham's books do adapt well.

The film version of A Time to Kill is even better than the book.  Far better, in fact. It's exceedingly well done. So many outstanding performances:  Matthew McBongo, Samuel L, Donald Sutherland, Kevin Spacey, Sandra Bullock, Keifer, Ashley Judd and more. 

Ridiculous that this movie wasn't nominated for an Academy Award and the shootty pile of gnu excrement The English Patient won that year. 

Bullock was so much more amazingly hotter 15 years ago.  So was sweaty Judd. 

Hate the characterization of Mississippi as a Klan haven.  I haven't seen that many klansmen in one place since I witnessed a march in the early 70s. 

Still a very good movie and a story well told. 


Side note:  A girl I knew in high school was an extra during the riot scene.

I watched as well, this is one of my favorite flicks. Of course Matthew McConaughey is so dreamy.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 01:14:50 PM
I watched as well, this is one of my favorite flicks. Of course Matthew McConaughey is so dreamy.

Isn't he though?  I mean his abs are so darn.....

Wait...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 01:15:30 PM
Faster

Forgettable movie.  For all involved.

This might be a first as well.  Agree 100%

It was better the first three times I saw it.

Hard to Kill 1990
Payback 1999
Get Carter  2000
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on March 28, 2011, 02:21:51 PM
Pananormal Activity 2
Caught this Sat night on teh Netflix. Didn't realize it was a Prequel to the first one. The whole movie pretty much explains throughout HOW the first one came to being. The end of this one is the first 2-3 mins or so of the 1st one. AND this one also skips forward after that part to show you what happens after the first one as well where it left off. It was "ok". Had a few "shoot your pants" moments but to me all these type of movies now are just cheap Blair Witch knockoffs.

Anyone else see it? Any opines?

I'm watching the Fourth Kind tonight so I'll post my thoughts on that one soon......


Also caught another classic this weekend as well:

Deerhunter
I've seen it 100 times but its still classic. A little long and slow moving but you get the point of the movie pretty quickly. Weird seeing Walken and DeNiro that young. Good but depressing IMHO.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2011, 01:07:46 AM
This Thing of Ours

Major fan of mob movies.  Godfather, Godfather II, Casino, Goodfellas, Donnie Brasco, Once Upon a Time in America, The Departed... all among some of my favorite movies of all time.  I've watched Godfather I and II probably 100 times each. 

So when I saw This Thing of Ours on the Netflix list and saw the cast, i figured there was no way I could go wrong. 


Phil Leotardo from The Sopranos AKA Frank Marino from Casino AKA Billy Batts from Goodfellas (Frank Vincent)
Big Pussy from The Sopranos (Vincent Pastore)
Sonny Corleone from The Godfather (James Caan)
Jimmy Patrille from The Sopranos  -- AKA Artie Piscano from Casino (Vinnie Vella, Sr)
with
Joseph Rigano (one of the bosses from Casino)
and one other guy I know, but can't come up with the name of. 

Gotta be a slam dunk, super fun mob movie, right? 

Oh holy shoot..  What a festering sack of garbage. 

Imagine the worst porn movie you've ever seen.  And by porn movie I mean one of the super bad shootty ones that tries to have a plot.  Then take out all the sex.  And leave only the bad acting.  It was worse than that. 

The story was stupid. The acting was horrific.  It sucked balls the size of Maine. 

This was quite possibly the worst movie I've ever seen.   The. WORST.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 01, 2011, 08:59:42 AM
This Thing of Ours

Major fan of mob movies.  Godfather, Godfather II, Casino, Goodfellas, Donnie Brasco, Once Upon a Time in America, The Departed... all among some of my favorite movies of all time.  I've watched Godfather I and II probably 100 times each. 

So when I saw This Thing of Ours on the Netflix list and saw the cast, i figured there was no way I could go wrong. 


Phil Leotardo from The Sopranos AKA Frank Marino from Casino AKA Billy Batts from Goodfellas (Frank Vincent)
Big Pussy from The Sopranos (Vincent Pastore)
Sonny Corleone from The Godfather (James Caan)
Jimmy Patrille from The Sopranos  -- AKA Artie Piscano from Casino (Vinnie Vella, Sr)
with
Joseph Rigano (one of the bosses from Casino)
and one other guy I know, but can't come up with the name of. 

Gotta be a slam dunk, super fun mob movie, right? 

Oh holy shoot..  What a festering sack of garbage. 

Imagine the worst porn movie you've ever seen.  And by porn movie I mean one of the super bad shootty ones that tries to have a plot.  Then take out all the sex.  And leave only the bad acting.  It was worse than that. 

The story was stupid. The acting was horrific.  It sucked balls the size of Maine. 

This was quite possibly the worst movie I've ever seen.   The. WORST.

I never thought much of Pastore and Vincent in Sopranos anyway. We all know Sirico and Van Zandt stole the show there. Although I expect better out of Caan. I will try and catch this on the Netflix. Is it DVD or streaming available?

Watched The Fourth Kind last night.....

Fourth Kind
Oh ma Jesus....it doesn't even deserve a review. THAT bad. Horrid. Bad screenplay. Bad acting. Bad directing. I just hated it. I usually like Supernatural horror movies but this one was just awful. Jollovich - not her best. It wasn't even believable. Although it does show some real "actual" scenes of a dude killing people on film. Kinda weird.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 02, 2011, 10:57:08 PM
Hop

Packed theater.  Mostly kids under 14 and parents.  Maybe -- maybe -- two or three "full theater" laughs. 

A couple of "over their heads" shots that got a smattering of small laughs from the grownups. 

So it wasn't a comedy.  Surely it could wring some drama from the premise, maybe give a tear-jerker moment (like The Santa Clause was able to do).  Nope.  All eyes dry. 

So what was it.  Cute.  That's about it.  It was just cute.  It wasn't "awwww" cute.  It wasn't "that's so" cute.  It was just cute.  Really had nothing to say. 

What happened to Kaley Cuoco?  She was sooooo hot in "fudge You If You Want To Date My Daughter" or whatever that show was where John Ritter had his swan song (see below).  She looked absolutely horrible here.  Her hair was a shootty mess, her face looked puffy and swollen, and her clothes (except for the jogging outfit) didn't even fit well.  She looked horrible and was a pretty bad actress, too. 

Marsden?  Goofy grinning bastard.  Found him utterly annoying. 

The thing I was most dreading -- Russell Brand as the bunny -- was actually tolerable.  Apparently Russell is only an annoying fudge when you have to actually look at his goofy ass.  He was much, much better as an animated character. 

Animation was okay -- not nearly as good as Rango, but the job on the rabbit hair was very good. The movie just had a hard time drumming up any feeling for any of the cardboard cutout characters. And it really needed it. 

Based on the enormous crowd I saw lining up for this one, it's going to make a shootload of cash and be number one for a week or so.  Really a sad state of affairs. 

Be glad when Kung Fu Panda 2 and Pirates 4 come out.   

(http://www.gunaxin.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kaley_cuoco-018.jpg) 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 07:15:56 AM
I have noticed that if the chick has a puffy or round face then she has no chance with you.  Not critiquing just and observation.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 07:55:55 AM
I have noticed that if the chick has a puffy or round face then she has no chance with you.  Not critiquing just and observation.

Round face, okay.  Pie face not.  kate winslet and Charlize Theron are said to have round faces.  They are both pretty hot.   

Puffy?  No, I don't like swollen and misshapen.  If they look like they've been boxing that day or just endured a bout of bee stings?  Not a fan.  Kaley looked like she boxed a swarm of bees in Hop. 

(http://media.photobucket.com/image/kaley%20cuoco%20hop/bastardlybutta/bastardly-photos/album162/kaley-cuoco-03191001.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 09:39:10 AM
In another wife-decided movie choice:

The Bridges of Madison County

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 02:37:52 PM
In another wife-decided movie choice:

The Bridges of Madison County

 :facepalm:
I raise you with my wife's movie choice last night....
Everybody's Fine
Notebook and Jersey Girl are comedies compared to this shoot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 02:46:14 PM
I raise you with my wife's movie choice last night....
Everybody's Fine
Notebook and Jersey Girl are comedies compared to this shoot.

I double raise with ANY movie on LMN. She gets to the remote before I get home-  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 02:52:18 PM
I double raise with ANY movie on LMN. She gets to the remote before I get home-  :facepalm:

When I was at Auburn my roommate's parents were visiting.  My roommate walked into the living room and saw his mom watching LMN.  He said, "Hey! Isn't this the one with the asshole husband?"  She said, "Yeah! How did you know that?"  She never did understand what was so funny.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 02:54:51 PM
I raise you with my wife's movie choice last night....
Everybody's Fine
Notebook and Jersey Girl are comedies compared to this shoot.

Kate Beckinsale vs. Meryl Streep?
Widower vs. Infidelity?
Did your wife enjoy Everybody's Fine?  Because mine was pissed after watching Bridges of Madison County. 

I'd take the recent non-old people chick flick over the liberal puke I watched last night. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 02:58:14 PM
When I was at Auburn my roommate's parents were visiting.  My roommate walked into the living room and saw his mom watching LMN.  He said, "Hey! Isn't this the one with the asshole husband?"  She said, "Yeah! How did you know that?"  She never did understand what was so funny.

That's good shoot right there.  You also could have substituted "this is the one with Valerie Bertenelli" and been pretty safe.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 03:16:45 PM
On a cold and rainy Saturday afternoon, I've been known to watch a Lifetime movie or two. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 04:23:30 PM
On a cold and rainy Saturday afternoon, I've been known to watch a Lifetime movie or two.

Thats breeding ground for a bout of depression.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 04, 2011, 11:48:33 PM
Unstoppable

This movie was generally panned and I didn't expect much. 

But I liked it.  I liked Pelham 123, too, and it got the same critical bashing. 

There were some extraneous scenes.  Why bother to show the kids at all if they weren't going to be in peril?  That was a wasted 15 minutes of the movie. 

But the rest was pretty tight.  Denzel brings a breezy cool to every role he plays. I've come to appreciate him more and more as an actor.  He'll take the occasional dud role, but he makes the acting seem so completely effortless it's hard not to enjoy his performance. 

The action was well paced, the disagreements between the corporate suits and the men/women in the trenches rang true and the movie steered clear of ridiculous and unnecessary sub plots (with the exception of the damn kids). 

I wish they hadn't done the "based on a true story" thing, though, because from what I understand the real story was much less dramatic.  There was no arched curve, the train wasn't going but something like 20 mph, nobody had to run across the boxcars. 

Just make the movie and keep it to yourself that you heard a story about a train that ran away and decided it would make a great film.  Happens all the time.  Based on a true story?  So was Inglorious Basterds. 

I still thought this was a good movie.  I enjoyed watching it.

I watched it based on this review.  The kids didn't bother me, but I found myself on a continuous plateau with no real peak.  The end was ok, but it left me wanting some gratuitous blood and guts...somebody falling under the train...something.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 05, 2011, 12:01:20 AM
On a cold and rainy Saturday afternoon, I've been known to watch a Lifetime movie or two.

Is this done with a loaded revolver and the kind of vodka that comes in plastic bottles?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 05, 2011, 12:28:30 AM
Kate Beckinsale vs. Meryl Streep?
Widower vs. Infidelity?
Did your wife enjoy Everybody's Fine?  Because mine was pissed after watching Bridges of Madison County. 

I'd take the recent non-old people chick flick over the liberal puke I watched last night.
No she cried the last hour of the movie, we looked at the movie description on the Dvr that shoot said comedy?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 05, 2011, 11:54:06 AM
That's good shoot right there.  You also could have substituted "this is the one with Valerie Bertenelli" and been pretty safe.

Or the guy from Animal House (Otter?) he fudge overs-kills-steals-from alot of women. When I come from umpiring at night-I can tell if shes been watching it and how bad of an asshole the guy(any guy) was that night.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 06, 2011, 11:49:02 PM
Hop

Packed theater.  Mostly kids under 14 and parents.  Maybe -- maybe -- two or three "full theater" laughs. 

A couple of "over their heads" shots that got a smattering of small laughs from the grownups. 

So it wasn't a comedy.  Surely it could wring some drama from the premise, maybe give a tear-jerker moment (like The Santa Clause was able to do).  Nope.  All eyes dry. 

So what was it.  Cute.  That's about it.  It was just cute.  It wasn't "awwww" cute.  It wasn't "that's so" cute.  It was just cute.  Really had nothing to say. 

What happened to Kaley Cuoco?  She was sooooo hot in "eff You If You Want To Date My Daughter" or whatever that show was where John Ritter had his swan song (see below).  She looked absolutely horrible here.  Her hair was a poopty mess, her face looked puffy and swollen, and her clothes (except for the jogging outfit) didn't even fit well.  She looked horrible and was a pretty bad actress, too. 

Marsden?  Goofy grinning bastard.  Found him utterly annoying. 

The thing I was most dreading -- Russell Brand as the bunny -- was actually tolerable.  Apparently Russell is only an annoying eff when you have to actually look at his goofy ass.  He was much, much better as an animated character. 

Animation was okay -- not nearly as good as Rango, but the job on the rabbit hair was very good. The movie just had a hard time drumming up any feeling for any of the cardboard cutout characters. And it really needed it. 

Based on the enormous crowd I saw lining up for this one, it's going to make a poopload of cash and be number one for a week or so.  Really a sad state of affairs. 

Be glad when Kung Fu Panda 2 and Pirates 4 come out.   

(http://www.gunaxin.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kaley_cuoco-018.jpg)

I got stuck seeing this Friday when it came out with the family.  It was painful.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 17, 2011, 04:03:54 AM
Scream 4

Let me get this out of the way first.  Courtney Cox looks like hammered buzzard shoot.  Her plastic surgery was a disaster, the fake cheekbones and ghoulishly stretched smile is reminiscent of the Joker. Never thought I would say this but Arquette could do better.  Congrats to him for moving on. 

Neve Campbell, on the other hand, didn't go the "carve-em-up" route and has aged pretty well.

And now the movie. 

It's exactly what you expect.  Exactly.

Plenty of attractive beasts.  Marielle Jaffe?  Holy smoking cow. See below.  Hayden Panieterre?  Meh, reminded me of a midget.  Brittany Robertson?  Nice hair.  Happy 21st birthday on Monday, BTW, Miss Robertson.  Emma Roberts?  Not so much hot, but a nice performance as the stalked one.   

Like the original Scream you were never really sure who was under the mask until the final reveal.  That's always good. I hate seeing what's coming early on.   The script dropped a few red herrings and kept Ghostface's identity secret. 

What the film lacked, though, was bite.  We've seen it before.  The cast -- and it was better than the average horror flick -- seemed to be going through the motions.  The original was fresh and served as a springboard for a number of new faces like Neve, Courtney, Skeet, Jamie, Lillard and Rose McGowan.  This version -- with the exception of Roberts -- was more a vehicle for established stars to chew a little scenery.  Don't think there's a budding Jamie Kennedy in the group of lesser names here. 

Complaint?  Ghostface talked too damn much.  And if you've seen the Scary Movie franchise, it's hard to take old Ghosty serious any more.  When he's huffing weed with the Wayans brothers and his mask changes?  Can't get that image out of my head.  In a way, the Scary Movie series surpassed all but the first Scream anyway.  It was better.  But...

If you go, you'll get exactly what you pay for.  Some low rent slashing, some attractive teens (no nudity at all), a shockingly hideous Courtney Cox, a surprisingly preserved Neve, a reveal you didn't expect and a pile of dead bodies. 

The theater we went to added the surprise of a staffer dressed as Ghostface slipping into the screening as the credits rolled.  He lurked in the shadows toward the exit and scared the absolute bejesus out of a group of ignorant, obnoxious, punk ass teens who'd spent most of the movie running their mouths from the back row.  It was worth the price of admission to see the piggy bitch knocking her friends aside like bowling pins as they threw popcorn and drinks and scrambled back up the aisle. 

(http://shocktillyoudrop.com/nextraimages/marielle-jaffe-scream-4b.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 17, 2011, 04:28:02 AM
The Kindgom

How did I miss this movie when it was in theaters?  I got it from Netflix by accident, it wasn't even in my queue.  Started to send it back, but thinking it was that Burt Reynolds, Ray Liotta, Jason Statham medieval movie and good for a laugh or two, I put it in. 

Not that movie.  It's actually called In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (which should tell you all you need to know about that). 

No, The Kingdom is a story about the bombing of a US outpost in Saudi Arabia and the response by an FBI team led by Jamie Foxx.  Team includes Jennifer Garner, Chris Cooper (very underrated actor) and Jason Bateman (who was pretty damn good in his role). 

This movie was everything I hoped The Hurt Locker would be.  Instead Hurt Locker was an emotional morass, obviously directed by a woman.  This movie was much more direct, the action sequences were a little over the top, but they kept your attention. There was no wobbly moral compass, no effort to delve into the emotional crises of the main characters.  It told a straightforward story.  It was a story of conflict directed by a man. 

The Kingdom offered a disturbing and sobering tale of US-Saudi relations. It dealt with the interaction between the Muslim and western worlds and painted a pretty stark picture of the ever expanding gulf between them both. 

The performances were understated and that gave them gravitas.  There was no hulking Arnold shooting up buildings and declaring he'd be back. But there was a tense shoot-em-up preceded by a major car crash/chase scene.   

The emotions rang true on all sides.  Foxx was steady.  Garner was very solid. 

Ok, so I don't necessarily buy that the FBI would go rogue and send in a team when their intervention had been expressly forbidden, but beyond that the film was done very, very well. 

The action sequences were taut. The tension felt legitimate. The director did a nice job of setting the stage and then letting the actors and the environment do their jobs. 

I know I would hate to be an American in the Middle East.  The movie effectively conveyed that. 

It was a pretty decent movie with a relatively thought-provoking epilogue.  Hackneyed?  Yeah.  A little, but sometimes the best endings are.

Why didn't I know about this movie?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 17, 2011, 08:44:27 AM
Anyone ever seen Yojimbo? 

It's from the 50s and served as the inspiration for the Firstful of Dollars series.  Excellent movie if you can handle subtitles. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 19, 2011, 11:17:10 PM
The Tourist

Preface.  I love Johnny Depp.  Think he is incredibly talented. 

I must amend that statement now, however, to include the following caveat:  in certain types of roles. 

If the character Depp is playing is weird, fey, affected, afflicted with some bizarre abnormality or otherwide prop-aided odd, Depp is as good as there is. 

When asked to play a role where he has to exist as an allegedly normal guy and interact normally with other human beings and you get The Tourist.  Depp is awkward. His emotions are so flat that they don't register.  He delivers 'I love you" and "this was very good wine" with the same earnest puppy dog expression.  Might as well have been reading from the phone book. 

When called on to perform action scenes, he can't escape the arms-flailing quirkiness that characterizes Jack Sparrow -- and makes that role such a perfect fit.  Perhaps Depp isn't playing Sparrow so much as he's just being himself. 

I watched this movie with it's implausible, nonsensical plot, its continual contrivances and its liberal application of deus ex machina and found myself wishing for another actor in the lead -- one with the chops and bravura to lend some credence to the role.  This movie with Robert Downey Jr. might have elevated itself from dreck to tapioca, perhaps. 

But it was still bad.  So bad that maybe it couldn't be rescussitated. 

Cast was solid but did little with it.   

Depp was dreary although he did sneak in a somewhat clever quip about his inability to sustain an accent, something that plagues the Kentucky boy in real life.

Angelina Jolie essentially pouted, sashayed and smirked her way through this turkey.  She was useless and lightweight.

The guy who played Chaucer in A Knight's Tale was adequate and delivered the best line, a sly homage to the Heath Ledger film.

The guy who played Count Adhelmar in Knight's Tale was also in the cast, but he was completely wasted in a throwaway role.   

The scenery was spectacular if you like a little Venice. 

The performances were just so devoid of honest human emotion that I didn't care.  I wondered (aloud more than once) if they sat through the dailies and thought to themselves "wow, this is great!"   I snorted audibly at some of the asinine "emotional" moments.

The director -- some cat named Doofenschmirtz -- said he intended the film to be a comedy with some dramatic moments.  Too bad he didn't bother to film it in that manner.  It might have actually worked as a comedy.  As what it turned out to be?  It didn't work at all.  It was nothing.

What is it about people that they can't recognize complete and utter shoot when they're making it?  I might not could make a better movie, but I could have spent 15 minutes looking at any day's shooting and told them this was dead in the water. 

I have a number of rules in my life.  Don't eat at a buffet restaurant from 1:15 to 5:40 pm is one of them.  Another time-honored maxim is that if a Blu-Ray/DVD has no additional features -- no bloopers, no director's cut, no alternate ending, no exposition, no making of, no deleted scenes -- it's going to be a big old honking wad of excrement.  Proven once again. 

Dammit Johnny.  I'm going to just erase this one from memory.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 20, 2011, 06:57:41 AM
Depp hasn't been normal since 21 Jump Street
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 20, 2011, 10:01:39 AM
The Tourist

Preface.  I love Johnny Depp.  Think he is incredibly talented. 

I must amend that statement now, however, to include the following caveat:  in certain types of roles. 

If the character Depp is playing is weird, fey, affected, afflicted with some bizarre abnormality or otherwide prop-aided odd, Depp is as good as there is. 

When asked to play a role where he has to exist as an allegedly normal guy and interact normally with other human beings and you get The Tourist.  Depp is awkward. His emotions are so flat that they don't register.  He delivers 'I love you" and "this was very good wine" with the same earnest puppy dog expression.  Might as well have been reading from the phone book. 

When called on to perform action scenes, he can't escape the arms-flailing quirkiness that characterizes Jack Sparrow -- and makes that role such a perfect fit.  Perhaps Depp isn't playing Sparrow so much as he's just being himself. 

I watched this movie with it's implausible, nonsensical plot, its continual contrivances and its liberal application of deus ex machina and found myself wishing for another actor in the lead -- one with the chops and bravura to lend some credence to the role.  This movie with Robert Downey Jr. might have elevated itself from dreck to tapioca, perhaps. 

But it was still bad.  So bad that maybe it couldn't be rescussitated. 

Cast was solid but did little with it.   

Depp was dreary although he did sneak in a somewhat clever quip about his inability to sustain an accent, something that plagues the Kentucky boy in real life.

Angelina Jolie essentially pouted, sashayed and smirked her way through this turkey.  She was useless and lightweight.

The guy who played Chaucer in A Knight's Tale was adequate and delivered the best line, a sly homage to the Heath Ledger film.

The guy who played Count Adhelmar in Knight's Tale was also in the cast, but he was completely wasted in a throwaway role.   

The scenery was spectacular if you like a little Venice. 

The performances were just so devoid of honest human emotion that I didn't care.  I wondered (aloud more than once) if they sat through the dailies and thought to themselves "wow, this is great!"   I snorted audibly at some of the asinine "emotional" moments.

The director -- some cat named Doofenschmirtz -- said he intended the film to be a comedy with some dramatic moments.  Too bad he didn't bother to film it in that manner.  It might have actually worked as a comedy.  As what it turned out to be?  It didn't work at all.  It was nothing.

What is it about people that they can't recognize complete and utter shoot when they're making it?  I might not could make a better movie, but I could have spent 15 minutes looking at any day's shooting and told them this was dead in the water. 

I have a number of rules in my life.  Don't eat at a buffet restaurant from 1:15 to 5:40 pm is one of them.  Another time-honored maxim is that if a Blu-Ray/DVD has no additional features -- no bloopers, no director's cut, no alternate ending, no exposition, no making of, no deleted scenes -- it's going to be a big old honking wad of excrement.  Proven once again. 

Dammit Johnny.  I'm going to just erase this one from memory.

I actually agree with you on this one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 21, 2011, 11:25:04 AM
Depp hasn't been normal since 21 Jump Street

If 21 jump street is normal, then I would like to be weird. Depp is a great actor - in certain roles, as Kaos said. When he's on, there's no one better. I'm not gonna say he's Tom Hanks or Jimmy Stewart, but I think he's pretty versatile and believable in most roles.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 09:33:23 AM
I Love You Phillip Morris

I made a mistake. No really, a serious fudgeing mistake renting this movie. There wasn't shoot to rent so I went for this one since I had noticed it a couple times while browsing. I thought surely it would be decent since it had Jim Carrey and Ewon McGreggor. To hell with that. This movie has now officially become the #1 worst movie eva; even worse than Bug. Nothing but a gay love fest b/w Carrey and Ewon. I actually heard the words "I want to cum in your ass" come out of Carrey's mouth. We couldn't recover from that. The movie was turned off and back to our regularly scheduled cable programming.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:06:04 AM
I Love You Phillip Morris

I made a mistake. No really, a serious fudgeing mistake renting this movie. There wasn't shoot to rent so I went for this one since I had noticed it a couple times while browsing. I thought surely it would be decent since it had Jim Carrey and Ewon McGreggor. To hell with that. This movie has now officially become the #1 worst movie eva; even worse than Bug. Nothing but a gay love fest b/w Carrey and Ewon. I actually heard the words "I want to cum in your ass" come out of Carrey's mouth. We couldn't recover from that. The movie was turned off and back to our regularly scheduled cable programming.
Carey jumped the shark with Truman Show or perhaps Liar Liar.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:14:06 AM
Carey jumped the shark with Truman Show or perhaps Liar Liar.

He rode into the business on a fudgeing shark.  Dreadfully unfunny.  Should have been shot after his first Fire Marshall Bill sketch and left for dead. 

I've hated everything he's ever been in except The Dead Pool and that's only because it was Dirty Harry and because Axl, Duff, Slash and Izzy were also in the film.  GnR in a movie?  Win. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:16:30 AM
He rode into the business on a fudgeing shark.  Dreadfully unfunny.  Should have been shot after his first Fire Marshall Bill sketch and left for dead. 

I've hated everything he's ever been in except The Dead Pool and that's only because it was Dirty Harry and because Axl, Duff, Slash and Izzy were also in the film.  GnR in a movie?  Win.

Except for the Commie sympathizing agenda in it, I thought The Majestic was pretty decent. He actually ACTED in it instead of the standard Ace Ventura mannerisms in every other movie he does. Dare I mention.....gulp......23?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:30:25 AM
Except for the Commie sympathizing agenda in it, I thought The Majestic was pretty decent. He actually ACTED in it instead of the standard Ace Ventura mannerisms in every other movie he does. Dare I mention.....gulp......23?

I refused to watch 23 because the premise seemed...how do you say?...retarded.  So I don't know how he acted in it, but I also enjoyed The Majestic.  The Truman Show was alright, considering that he was supposed to take on a goofy, 1950's television stereotype, but as the movie progressed, it required him to take on a more serious role.

He's definitely not my favorite actor by far, mostly due to the over-the-top physical comedy that brought him to fame, but at least he's gotten less goofy in recent roles.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:45:12 AM
Jim Carrey?

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. 

He was good in that.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:48:18 AM
Jim Carrey?

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. 

He was good in that.

That movie sucked a 45-pound richard. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:48:51 AM
That movie sucked a 45-pound richard.

No it didn't.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 10:49:13 AM
That movie sucked a 45-pound richard.

I liked it.

...the 45-pound richard, that is.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 11:03:35 AM
I liked it.

...the 45-pound richard, that is.

Then you would love I Love You Phillip Morris. There is even a huge richard cloud in the sky.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 11:09:18 AM
No it didn't.

Okay.  A 60-pound richard then.  I was trying to be nice. 

Dreadful movie.  Mawkish shoot.  It's one brain cell elevated from 50 First Dates. 

The asinine plot device where memories are hiding memories?  Asinine.  shootty writing. 

And Carrey sucked in it.  Hard.

Allow me to rephrase:  I did not like this movie at all.  The only redeeming feature was Winslet's varying hair color.  At least her rainbow coif was mildly interesting. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 11:27:07 AM
Okay.  A 60-pound richard then.  I was trying to be nice. 

Dreadful movie.  Mawkish shoot.  It's one brain cell elevated from 50 First Dates. 

The asinine plot device where memories are hiding memories?  Asinine.  shootty writing. 

And Carrey sucked in it.  Hard.

Allow me to rephrase:  I did not like this movie at all.  The only redeeming feature was Winslet's varying hair color.  At least her rainbow coif was mildly interesting.

So I take it you aren't a big fan of Charlie Kaufman - Adaptation, Being John Malkovich.

And to compare it to 50 First Dates in terms of substance?  That's weak.  Really weak. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 11:51:06 AM
So I take it you aren't a big fan of Charlie Kaufman - Adaptation, Being John Malkovich.

And to compare it to 50 First Dates in terms of substance?  That's weak.  Really weak.

Those movies weren't as great as people made them out to be, it's just that so much of moviedom is so completely and totally mindless that anything that is remotely clever or attempts to engage you mentally is hailed as some kind of cinematic triumph. 

Inception was like that.  Really not a very good movie, but it was huzzahed to the heavens because it wasn't Fast and Furious Seven.  It allegedly required you to think.  It required me not to care in the least and to laugh at ridiculous plot holes, but I digress. 

50 First Dates had more substance.  It wasn't filled with sappy faux sentimentality and logical fallacies you could drive Precious through.  It also had Adam Sandler who is on par with Carrey in terms of acting ability.  As in a stuffed hamster has more. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 27, 2011, 01:19:10 PM
Those movies weren't as great as people made them out to be, it's just that so much of moviedom is so completely and totally mindless that anything that is remotely clever or attempts to engage you mentally is hailed as some kind of cinematic triumph. 

Inception was like that.  Really not a very good movie, but it was huzzahed to the heavens because it wasn't Fast and Furious Seven.  It allegedly required you to think.  It required me not to care in the least and to laugh at ridiculous plot holes, but I digress. 

50 First Dates had more substance.  It wasn't filled with sappy faux sentimentality and logical fallacies you could drive Precious through.  It also had Adam Sandler who is on par with Carrey in terms of acting ability.  As in a stuffed hamster has more.

Do I think Sandler is a cool guy who seems to be funny in SOME roles? But on par with Carrey's abiity? No way.

By ability I mean, ceiling. Carrey CAN act when he choses to. Sandler is what he is. An avg actor who comes off as being a genuine guy. I don't expect blockbusters out of him. I expect more of Carrey because I know he has it in him. He just rarely shows it anymore.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 29, 2011, 04:58:45 PM
The Breakfast Club

Yeah.  I know. 

But it's on and I'm temporarily stuck inside. 

I once had a professor who made us watch 15 minutes of this movie every day and then dissect the characters, their motivations, methods to handle their issues, ways to connect with them, etc.  Because of that, I sort of lost just how fantastic the overall movie actually was. 

The casting was dead solid perfect.   Yes each character was a stereotype to an extent.  And yeah, the resolution was a little packaged.  But the movie itself?  Quite simply the greatest teen angst movie ever made.  John Hughes should have started and stopped here. 

Molly Ringwald carries just the right rich bitch princess tone.  Judd is outstanding playing a ramped up version of me in high school.  Emilio turns in a solid performance as the jock.  Sheedy is adorable as the weirdo. Anthony Michael Hall has the dweeb down pat. 

Paul Gleason is somewhat undervalued in his role as Principal Vernon.  If you grew up in the 70s and 80s you had to deal with at least one Vernon.  The empty threat bully who spouted cliches and thought them life lessons was a staple of every high school.  So was the guy who told him to fudge off, like Nelson's character did.

"I make $31,000.  I have a home.  I'm not going to waste that on a piece of punk like you.....  Just as I thought, you're a gutless turd." 

That particular speech was delivered to me by our Vice Principal, a bald black man named Mr. Thomas (he called himself Mr. T) just before he shut me up in the "hot box" for an entire day. 

The movie is 25 years old (will there be a 25th anniversary retrospective?  Maybe a sequel, called The Country Club where we find out that Bender is a state senator, the wrestler works at a factory, the princess finished community college and works as a hairdresser, the weirdo owns a restaurant and the nerd is an accountant stuck in a boring life with a wife who is fudgeing her massage therapist?).  Even at 25, it still perfectly captures all the emotion, frustration, fear, hope, pain, anger and joy of that particular time in a person's maturity. 

It's an outstanding character study and one of my favorite movies of all time.   

If I only had ten movies on an island, I'd hope one of them was this one. 

A good story well told and well acted.  Can't ask for anything more.  Except nudity and that might have been creepy here.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 29, 2011, 05:01:08 PM
The Breakfast Club



One time when I was holding Saturday School, I said to a student, "Quiet down, Wang Chung."  I thought it was hilarious.   

He didn't get it.  His mom didn't get it.  Luckily my AP got it and only gave me a "warning." 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on April 29, 2011, 05:04:59 PM
One time when I was holding Saturday School, I said to a student, "Quiet down, Wang Chung."  I thought it was hilarious.   

He didn't get it.  His mom didn't get it.  Luckily my AP got it and only gave me a "warning."

What I could never get my professor to understand was that all kids didn't have a heart of gold hiding behind whatever wall they'd erected for themselves. 

Some kids are just plain mean ass bastards.  Some are simply sluts.  Some have no compassion for anyone or anything. 

Some just aren't reachable. 

But he never got it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 02, 2011, 09:55:00 AM
The Breakfast Club

Yeah.  I know. 

But it's on and I'm temporarily stuck inside. 

I once had a professor who made us watch 15 minutes of this movie every day and then dissect the characters, their motivations, methods to handle their issues, ways to connect with them, etc.  Because of that, I sort of lost just how fantastic the overall movie actually was. 

The casting was dead solid perfect.   Yes each character was a stereotype to an extent.  And yeah, the resolution was a little packaged.  But the movie itself?  Quite simply the greatest teen angst movie ever made.  John Hughes should have started and stopped here. 

Molly Ringwald carries just the right rich bitch princess tone.  Judd is outstanding playing a ramped up version of me in high school.  Emilio turns in a solid performance as the jock.  Sheedy is adorable as the weirdo. Anthony Michael Hall has the dweeb down pat. 

Paul Gleason is somewhat undervalued in his role as Principal Vernon.  If you grew up in the 70s and 80s you had to deal with at least one Vernon.  The empty threat bully who spouted cliches and thought them life lessons was a staple of every high school.  So was the guy who told him to fudge off, like Nelson's character did.

"I make $31,000.  I have a home.  I'm not going to waste that on a piece of punk like you.....  Just as I thought, you're a gutless turd." 

That particular speech was delivered to me by our Vice Principal, a bald black man named Mr. Thomas (he called himself Mr. T) just before he shut me up in the "hot box" for an entire day. 

The movie is 25 years old (will there be a 25th anniversary retrospective?  Maybe a sequel, called The Country Club where we find out that Bender is a state senator, the wrestler works at a factory, the princess finished community college and works as a hairdresser, the weirdo owns a restaurant and the nerd is an accountant stuck in a boring life with a wife who is fudgeing her massage therapist?).  Even at 25, it still perfectly captures all the emotion, frustration, fear, hope, pain, anger and joy of that particular time in a person's maturity. 

It's an outstanding character study and one of my favorite movies of all time.   

If I only had ten movies on an island, I'd hope one of them was this one. 

A good story well told and well acted.  Can't ask for anything more.  Except nudity and that might have been creepy here.

Don't you......forget about me........
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 02, 2011, 11:31:28 AM
Some of my favorite 80's movies.
The Breakfast Club
Goonies
Sixteen Candles
Some Kind of Wonderful
Can't Buy Me Love
One Crazy Summer
Better Off Dead
Stand By Me
Caddyshack
Fletch
Over the Top
Roadhouse
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 02, 2011, 12:14:52 PM

Roadhouse

(http://www.underculture.co.za/images/starwars_homo.gif)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 02, 2011, 12:24:16 PM
(http://www.underculture.co.za/images/starwars_homo.gif)
I'm the Cooler...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 02, 2011, 12:29:32 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtBIHcSnyF0&feature=related
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 11:55:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey9MTt2RWRk&feature=related
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 04:53:06 PM
Judd is outstanding playing a ramped up version of me in high school.

It was the fingerless gloves, wasn't it?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:00:37 PM
(http://www.underculture.co.za/images/starwars_homo.gif)

Did you not see the smoking hot blond in Roadhouse?  Makes it worth watching
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:15:20 PM
Did you not see the smoking hot blond in Roadhouse?  Makes it worth watching

Meh.  She was fair.

(http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsL/10740-16104.gif)

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:31:32 PM
Meh.  She was fair.

(http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsL/10740-16104.gif)

By 1980's standards, SMOKING HOT.  By todays standard STILL SMOKING HOT.  The scene in Swazey's barn loft where she was naked showed how hot her body was. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:37:03 PM
She gave my teenage body wood. 


Coughlin's Law: anything else is always something better
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:40:20 PM
She gave my teenage body wood. 


Coughlin's Law: anything else is always something better

Watched that movie over and over just because of her as well.  That Bo Derek type bikini sure did look good on her.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:41:40 PM
Watched that movie over and over just because of her as well.  That Bo Derek type bikini sure did look good on her.

SWEETHEART....COME HITHER
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:45:26 PM
SWEETHEART....COME HITHER

The Red Eye...Breakfast of champions
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:50:51 PM
When you see the color of their panties, you know you've got talent. Stick with me son and I'll make you a star.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 05:51:46 PM
(http://blog.mrskin.com/data/features/131/lynch-roadhouse-1.jpg)

It's okay...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 06:10:51 PM
Review this:
(http://www.brooklandsvideo.com/Road%20House%202.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 06:13:40 PM
(http://blog.mrskin.com/data/features/131/lynch-roadhouse-1.jpg)

It's okay...

Ahhhh, teenage memories.  I used to love myself to that scene
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 06:18:28 PM
Ahhhh, teenage memories.  I used to love myself to that scene

I believe you have mistaken it for this scene which happens earlier in the movie.

(http://www.neonbubble.com/neonimg/1/roadhouse1.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 07:47:25 PM
When you see the color of their panties, you know you've got talent. Stick with me son and I'll make you a star.
roostertail's and Dreams.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 03, 2011, 08:36:18 PM
Do I think Sandler is a cool guy who seems to be funny in SOME roles? But on par with Carrey's abiity? No way.

By ability I mean, ceiling. Carrey CAN act when he choses to. Sandler is what he is. An avg actor who comes off as being a genuine guy. I don't expect blockbusters out of him. I expect more of Carrey because I know he has it in him. He just rarely shows it anymore.

Carrey, like Will Ferrell, uses idiotic/improbable backdrops to put on a weak, unfunny slapstick routine.  The only difference in Carey and Ferrell, is that once in blue moon, Carey can make it work in a flick IF you don't go in expecting anything. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 04, 2011, 07:27:03 AM
Coughlin's Law: Bury the dead.  They stink up the place.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 12:23:26 AM
Hobo with a shotgun

Jeez. 

I know it was supposed to be camp.  Supposed to be tongue in cheek.  Supposed to be goofy gory fun.

Where Machete filled that job, Hobo just didn't do it. 

It was dumb. 

I didn't make it through it. 

The hooker with a heart of gold was pretty, though. 

Holly Dunsmore.  Molly Dunsworth.  Something like that. 

It just wasn't good.  One of the few movies I didn't bother to finish.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 01:06:58 AM
Jim Carrey?

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. 

He was good in that.
I agree
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 10:31:53 AM
Hobo with a shotgun

Jeez. 

I know it was supposed to be camp.  Supposed to be tongue in cheek.  Supposed to be goofy gory fun.

Where Machete filled that job, Hobo just didn't do it. 

It was dumb. 

I didn't make it through it. 

The hooker with a heart of gold was pretty, though. 

Holly Dunsmore.  Molly Dunsworth.  Something like that. 

It just wasn't good.  One of the few movies I didn't bother to finish.

You just crushed my soul...hadn't watched it yet.  Have it saved but haven't gotten a chance to view. :(
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 11:34:39 AM
(http://blog.mrskin.com/data/features/131/lynch-roadhouse-1.jpg)

It's okay...

(http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/eloehr/Roadhouse/Roadhouse2.gif)   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 01:09:33 PM
(http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/eloehr/Roadhouse/Roadhouse2.gif)
Don't make me rip out your throat...cause that's my move, I rip out throats.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 01:14:21 PM
(http://blog.mrskin.com/data/features/131/lynch-roadhouse-1.jpg)

It's okay...

She's got factory air
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 01:48:49 PM
She's got factory air

And I bet he would like a BIG do over on that smoking thing.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 02:35:02 PM
And I bet he would like a BIG do over on that smoking thing.

Smoking causes pancreatic cancer?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 02:41:01 PM
Smoking causes pancreatic cancer?

He meant how smoking hot he looked, I'm sure (considering that it was dallas who made the comment).

Maybe if he knew how sick he was going to get, he might have spent less time buffing up and more time enjoying shoot. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 02:46:30 PM
Smoking causes pancreatic cancer?

Theoretically, yes, but I don't know how they arrived at that conclusion.  It may be the same reasoning that declared eggs to be a cause of cancer.  Apparently smoking also causes bladder cancer.

(http://www.rollogrady.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/the_more_you_know.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 03:13:18 PM
Smoking causes pancreatic cancer?

Didn't say it casued it, but I read (looking for link) that during his treatment his body was unable to heal (not that it would have) due to the years of smoking and he contiuned to smoke while receiving treatment.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 03:42:04 PM
I heard the butt sex causes pancreatic cancer. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 04:11:02 PM
Didn't say it casued it, but I read (looking for link) that during his treatment his body was unable to heal (not that it would have) due to the years of smoking and he contiuned to smoke while receiving treatment.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1145486/Gaunt-Patrick-Swayze-defiantly-chain-smokes-battles-cancer.html
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 09:01:15 PM
I heard the butt sex causes pancreatic cancer.

And shootting yourself.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 09:08:39 PM
Felon

Caught this on the tube the other night.  I thought it was OK.    Basically this was an episode of Oz except an hour longer.  Highlights were a completely unrecognizable Val Kilmer as the grizzled prison vet, some pretty realistic fight scenes (supposedly they hired real ex-cons as the extras so they could show how prison fights and gang beat downs looked), and the daughter from Vegas Vacation getting strip searched after her underwire bra set off the metal detector.

I think there was a moral to the story, the moral was being in prison sucks.  Actually it was supposed to show how the US penal system is lacking proper oversight, desensitizes cons even more than they already were, and is utterly failing at rehabilitating criminals.  It did a good job at showing this without being overly preachy.  Of course, it presented no answers to these issues either.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 05, 2011, 11:26:06 PM
And shootting yourself.
Can you believe THIS shoot? That chick frosted me like I was a fudgeing cake!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 06, 2011, 10:08:28 AM
Felon

Caught this on the tube the other night.  I thought it was OK.    Basically this was an episode of Oz except an hour longer.  Highlights were a completely unrecognizable Val Kilmer as the grizzled prison vet, some pretty realistic fight scenes (supposedly they hired real ex-cons as the extras so they could show how prison fights and gang beat downs looked), and the daughter from Vegas Vacation getting strip searched after her underwire bra set off the metal detector.

I think there was a moral to the story, the moral was being in prison sucks.  Actually it was supposed to show how the US penal system is lacking proper oversight, desensitizes cons even more than they already were, and is utterly failing at rehabilitating criminals.  It did a good job at showing this without being overly preachy.  Of course, it presented no answers to these issues either.

Oz was some scary shoot. 

I still have trouble watching Law&Order SVU.   I can't keep from thinking of Elliot as Keller.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 06, 2011, 12:16:59 PM
Kaos - finally got around to catching Inception ALL THE WAY through with no interuption. I agree with you. Did not like it. It sucked. Was hoping for Shutter Island and all I got was a maze of a movie that made no sense as far as where it wanted to go.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 06, 2011, 02:12:02 PM
Oz was some scary poop. 

I still have trouble watching Law&Order SVU.   I can't keep from thinking of Elliot as Keller.

I feel that way about the insurance commercials with Schillinger.  I keep seeing him and Keller breaking the student's arms and legs like they did to Beecher.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 06, 2011, 03:05:58 PM
Or burning a swastika into his ass. 

That show did a good job of showing that "progressives" like McManus will meet with mixed results and in a lot of cases make things worse because they are so easily manipulated by sociopaths.

Another one I have trouble with is Eames on L&O: CI.  She showed it all and more as the death row psycho who killed her kids.  And then she rejected Adabisi because he was black. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 07, 2011, 06:46:30 AM
African Cats

Eleven year old animal-loving daughter having a sleepover.  Wife who wants to go see Waterboarded Elephants, something I'm not about to do.  So I get the Cats and the kids. Better than Waterhead Elephants I figure.

So about the African Cats, a Disney wildlife production.

Imagine an episode of Wild Kingdom. 

Not take away Marlin Perkins.  Take away Jim and the unintentional comedy he provided. 

Now give names to all the animals in the production.  Lions named Mara, Fang, Layla and Kali.  A cheetah named Sita. 

Now stretch it out to 90 minutes. 

Now give Samuel L. Jackson the task of reading an over the top script that overdramatizes and over emotes.   There are no snakes on these motherfudgeing plains, but Sam ramps it up anyway. 

Now add one of the worst movie scores you can imagine.  Sam is over the top.  Way over.  But the music?  Completely distracting, overly tense, overly dramatic, utterly annoying.

Once all that gets rolling,  commence yawning.

The visuals, the cinematography is stunning.  It's amazing that the crew was able to get that embedded in the world of these magnificent creatures.  I've always marveled at the ability to get cameras into these locations to capture the interactions between the animals and their environment. 

As a screensaver, this would be great.  Picture after picture of beautiful animals (but somebody could perhaps CGI out all the flies). 

In the end, though, the film tells us nothing.   The "bad lion" wins.  Some cats survive, some don't (and we don't care).   We're not breaking any new ground here.  It's pretty, but that's all.  It can't overcome the lack of story, the cloying score and Sam's "do they speak English in what?" narration. 

On the plus side, there was a long trailer for Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides in the previews.  May 20.  I will be lining up for that one.  Love Captain Jack. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 07, 2011, 11:41:50 AM
Thor

Not my genre of movie, but I expected Anthony Hopkins and Natalie Portman could help it.  They didn't.   If you're in to computer generated, complete fantasy, parallel world, action/violence over the top bullshoot....have a fudgeing ball.

As for me... :puke:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 11, 2011, 09:18:25 AM
Good Will Hunting

I know this is an older movie I should have seen, but I finally got around to watching it last night. 

Not bad.  A lot of parts I could criticize like the fight scene on the basketball court, the "It's not your fault" scene, and the fact that they didn't build the "love is the most important aspect of life" angle enough. 

I thought Matt Damon did a good job as did Robin Williams.  Affleck was Affleck.  He should have quit after Voyage of the Mimi.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 11, 2011, 09:37:31 AM
Good Will Hunting

I know this is an older movie I should have seen, but I finally got around to watching it last night. 

Not bad.  A lot of parts I could criticize like the fight scene on the basketball court, the "It's not your fault" scene, and the fact that they didn't build the "love is the most important aspect of life" angle enough. 

I thought Matt Damon did a good job as did Robin Williams.  Affleck was Affleck.  He should have quit after Voyage of the Mimi.

Soundtrack to this movie is tits.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 11, 2011, 10:46:10 PM
Ya'll are fudgein' up my thread....

I need to watch a movie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 12, 2011, 03:02:50 AM
Ya'll are fudgein' up my thread....

I need to watch a movie.
Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 12, 2011, 03:40:51 PM
Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
In future conversations, you will refer to me as... Mr. Sanderson and I will refer to you as... Mrs. Esterhouse
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 13, 2011, 07:08:03 AM
In future conversations, you will refer to me as... Mr. Sanderson and I will refer to you as... Mrs. Esterhouse

We're talking mucho dinero, and probably some American money too.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 13, 2011, 12:11:35 PM
In future conversations, you will refer to me as... Mr. Sanderson and I will refer to you as... Mrs. Esterhouse
Keep your eye on the fruit, keep you eye on the fruit.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 09:37:22 AM
Neighbor

The promo photo (below) looked good.  The premise was interesting:  Attractive woman with a bent mind moves in, dude next door ends up getting tortured in the basement for her amusement. 

Problem?  Too many to list.  Here are a few:

Film looked like it was shot on some douchebag's hand-held HD camera.

Nobody in the movie could act -- not even a little bit.

The lead actress, America Olivio, was the worst actress of all.  I've seen grade school plays with better performances.  Maybe if she'd taken her clothes off there would have been some miniscule amount of redeeming value, but not even close. 

The score was atrocious.

The storyline was muddled, none of the characters had any depth or believability.

The characters had no viable motive, there was no rationale for their actions.  And they couldn't act a lick.

Flipping back and forth in time/dream sequences left the film confused (but you won't care).

Constant continuity foul ups.  Slam a door and the sign on it falls off.  Next scene sign is back.  Same sign appears in three different locations.

Wasn't expecting Pulp Fiction or Halloween (the 70s version) but figured to get a little spooky torture porn to pass the time.  Instead, got this abomination.   

Absolutely in the top five of worst movies I've ever seen.  Give me ten days, $50, two bottles of vodka, and an iPhone and I could make a better film. 

(http://images.moviepostershop.com/neighbor-movie-poster-2009-1020550043.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 09:48:17 AM
Easy A

I like it.  I love Emma Stone. 

fudge yall.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 09:55:16 AM
Easy A

I like it.  I love Emma Stone. 

fudge yall.

Movie already reviewed several pages back. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 10:46:35 AM
Easy A

I like it.  I love Emma Stone. 

fudge yall.

(http://www.tigersx.com/images/navybolt.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 12:07:20 PM
Bridesmaids is teh shiznit.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 12:08:35 PM
Bridesmaids is teh shiznit.

In depth, yet succinct and to the point.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 12:16:49 PM
In depth, yet succinct and to the point.
Like fisting.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 12:26:44 PM
Hit the Redbox over the weekend and finally got around to seeing The Green Hornet and Little Fockers.

I loathe almost everything about Seth Rogen, so I hadn't really had any desire to see TGH...but little man is into the superhero action flicks already, so we got it against my better judgment.  A few minutes into the movie, I realized that Britt Reid was the perfect character for him to play though; a simple, childish idiot who thinks he's ten feet tall and bullet proof.

The action scenes were decent at best, but the comedic interface was enough to make the movie entertaining.  The cars were badass though.

As for Little Fockers...
I fell asleep 25 minutes in.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 01:29:01 PM
Way way way behind movie review.  Mad Max 2 aka The Road Warrior aka Smokey and the Bandit gone horribly wrong.

Flipping through the movie channels and saw that this was going to be on, decided to DVR for later viewing which I got around to last night.

If you are going to make a movie with no plot, hardly any dialogue, and no big problems to solve this is the way to do it.  George Miller really made his chops with the first two Mad Max films and then somebody gave him a budget and he responded by hiring Tina Turner and crapping out Beyond Thunderdome, Babe, and Happy Feet.  That's right, the guy who gave us Mad Max Rockatansky went on to make movies about pigs who talk to sheep and dancing penguins.

If any of you have ever missed this movie and really like car chase scenes you have got to pick this one up, it should be at a dollar bin near you.  If you like to nitpick apart mechanical and engineering impossibilities such as a semi rig sitting out in the desert for years just need 5 gallons of diesel to start up and drive on its non dry rotted tires you will like it to. 

Oh, and according to IMDB the scene where the biker hits the car and then flips end over end toward the camera was not fake.  The stunt went wrong and the stuntman nearly died and they left it in the film anyway.

And watching this movie again reminded me of why I always wanted a Blue Heeler named Dog.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 16, 2011, 01:37:21 PM
Amadeus

I like it.  Great movie.  Seemed a bit "made for TV," so I was a little confused on how it won so many awards.

I did get annoyed with the whole "God hates me" angle.  Also, the priest listening to the story was a nancy.  He should have interrupted him very early on in his story to say, "Shut up and get over yourself."
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 19, 2011, 02:49:42 PM
It's Complicated

It's not complicated. It's dreary, overlong and drizzly.

If you like watching Meryl Streep (one of the most overrated actresses of our time) flit, flip her hair, laugh like a loon for no apparent reason and look like hell on a platter, this is your movie.  If you want to watch Alec Baldwin priss, purse his lips and make hangdog eyes at a creepily ugly hag then this is your film.  If you want to see John Krasinski fail yet again to escape being Jim from the Office pretending to be another goofy guy you're supposed to like, then grab this off the rental rack.   If you're into watching Steve Martin portray a sad and ineffectual schlub who is mystifyingly attracted to a shrewish hag and is simultaneously mystifyingly seen as attractive by her, then you've found your flick. 

If you don't want to wish you had seven hours of your life back, then let this one go.   What?  Run time was only 120 minutes? You're KIDDING.   Seemed like I spent a month waiting for this to end. 

Basic premise? Shockingly poorly aged Meryl Streep has an affair with ex husband ten years after the divorce and while he's having a bad time with his marriage to a much younger (and much tighter) other woman. How bad did Streep look with her big baggy ass and sandblasted face? During one scene where she was eating some chocolate turd thing, I thought she had a wad of chocolate on her nose.  Nope.  It was a shadow from her hawkish bill.

Obviously, obviously, obviously written by a woman.  Probably a very ugly woman who hates men because they fudge her for sport and then don't bother calling again.  Either that or her husband left her for somebody who didn't look like a fudgeing yeti. 

No way is Alec's character going to be attraced to leatherface when he has a better-looking option at home.  No way.  Written by a woman?  Yep.  Because at the end -- and this shoot is so dreadful I'm not going to even avoid spoilers -- the only person left with nothing is Baldwin's character.  He slinks off broken and empty, but happy he ruined his life by sticking it to a baggy piece of naugahyde.   And then leatherface humps her big fat ass over toward schlubbing Steve Martin instead.  Mr. Mealymouth nice guy. 

I LOATHED this dreadful wad of shoot.  What a terrible movie.  Utter garbage.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2011, 09:06:27 AM
Skyline

Another "aliens take over the world" film. 

Unlike Independence Day where we were inspired and allowed to hope that somewhere, somehow a nerd and a fighter jockey could team up to find the brains and brawn to defeat the bastards, this movie left us with the depressing concept that in the end we're pretty much fudgeed.   Aliens gonna vacuum us up, eat our brains and be essentially impervious to any method of retaliation.  No hope. We lose.

Film starts with some ridiculous and unnecessary backstory about a guy who's made millions flying some friends out to LA.  Throwaway and a waste of nearly 30 minutes of movie time.  Dude's wealth plays no part in the movie.  Neither does another throwawy subplot regarding whether or not he was having an affair with his assistant -- which I think he was. But it didn't matter if he was or wasn't.  Wasted. 

Movie did feature Brittany Daniel, Scottie Thompson and Crystal Reed (all of whom are moderately hot and have porn star names) but none of them even approached naked.  Fail.

It started with the alien invasion and then flipped backward 15 hours to tell the flight to LA and party like a rock star story.  Stupid and unnecessary.  Total waste.

The special effects were fair, but not great. 

The ending was just terrible.  Terrible and ignorant.  It was like the producers ran out of money and said "okay, wrap this shoot up now."

Rumor is that there will be a Skyline 2.  Maybe they'll provide some hope that the humans can win in that one.  Or what would be even better is if the producers of Independence Day saw this lame ass movie and decided to revive theirs. 

Of course this movie may have deterred that.  Despite a ridiculous amount of promotion the film tanked after the opening weekend.  It only took in $11 mil  when it opened and was outpaced by a dreadful Megamind and Due Date (both in their second weeks) as well as the debut of Unstoppable.  After that it fizzled away, drawing only another $10 mil.  With foreign box office, it finished 88th for the year. 

Battle Los Angeles fared better.  Will maybe give that a shot. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2011, 10:00:10 AM
Skyline

You were kind in your review....this was one of the 2hrs in my life I will never get back.

Battle Los Angeles was decent, but when comparing it to Skyline its like comparing Godfather to well uh Skyline.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 20, 2011, 03:13:57 PM
Meryl Streep (one of the most overrated actresses of our time)

You serious Clark?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 21, 2011, 12:01:43 AM
You serious Clark?

Yep.  Sure am.  She's never impressed me. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 21, 2011, 12:11:19 AM
Pirates 4: On Stranger Tides

Never thought I'd say this, but the film suffered from a little too much Depp. 

Never thought I'd say this, either, but it also suffered greatly from not having Bloom and Kiera to counterbalance the bizarre pretend world where people die and come to life at a whim. 

Never thought I'd say this, but the movie sorely missed the humor of the pirate pair (Pintel and Rigetti).  Side note, the guy who played Rigetti also played the Dwight character in the British version of The Office.

Never thought I'd consider this, but Ian McShane just didn't make a menacing enough foe.  There really wasn't a true villainous character to add the sense of danger.

Didn't count on this, but Penelope Cruz did look pretty hot in a couple of scenes, because she's generally not all that.  Her stupid accent was off-putting.  She also was clearly playing a part, you never quite went over and accepted her as what she was attempting to portray as you did in the past with Keira, Orlando and even Bill Nighy.

Not nearly as fun as the first movie, not nearly as convoluted as the third, not nearly as open-ended as the second.  But still...

It just seemed to me that the characters of Barbosa, Sparrow and Gibbs were playing caricatures of themselves, like cardboard cutouts standing around in lush locales. 

It wasn't bad.  Johnny Depp is still pretty and he had a few good lines. 

He's just not pirate enough to carry the entire movie (or franchise) by himself.  Savvy?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 21, 2011, 11:27:34 PM
Pirates 4: On Stranger Tides

Didn't count on this, but Penelope Cruz did look pretty hot in a couple of scenes, because she's generally not all that.

Johnny Depp is still pretty

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 22, 2011, 10:51:33 AM
:facepalm:

you beat me to it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 23, 2011, 11:14:30 AM
Shawshank Redemption

What's the big deal?

I mean, great movie.  I like it a lot.  But it's #1 on IMDB.com's top 250 list. 

Better than Godfather?  No.

Better than The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly?  No.

I'd put it in my top 25.  It might make the top 25.  Maybe. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 23, 2011, 11:03:11 PM
Shawshank Redemption

What's the big deal?

I mean, great movie.  I like it a lot.  But it's #1 on IMDB.com's top 250 list. 

Better than Godfather?  No.

Better than The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly?  No.

I'd put it in my top 25.  It might make the top 25.  Maybe.

Agree....great movie. But far from the best of all time.  Its not even Morgan Freeman's best of all time.

Just gone done watching The Expendables....finally.

Agree with Kaos. It was ok, but not the juggernaut they built it up to be. Too much special effects and CGI. Not enough substance. Stallone needs to put down the HGH already.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 01:34:28 AM
In Bruges

I think this was the movie The American aspired to be. 

Couple of remorseful murderers hiding out in Bruges, which Colin Farrell describes as "a shoothole" on multiple occasions. 

The older murderer enjoys the scenery and the history of the oldest preserved medieval town in Europe.  Their boss compares it to a fairy tale.  Colin hates it and wishes he was home or at least in London.  Then their boss gives them an order that changes all their lives.  Each has to make life and death decisions -- sometimes more than once.

Masterful mix of humor and pathos.  One minute you're feeling horrible over the angst and horror Farrell's Ray feels over an assisination that went wrong. The next you're laughing at his frustration with Bruges or at him karate chopping a midget.  Yes, he karate chops a midget. 

There's a dalliance with Chloe (played by Clémence Poésy who is pictured below).  She's not what you'd call classically beautiful, but she's engagingly cute and sexy. 

I liked this movie.  I ended up liking it a lot. Not something I'm going to watch ten or eleven times, but it's worth a look just for Farrell's performance as a petulant, childish gangster who's beating himself up.

It dragged in parts and was maybe a little too in love with Bruges (although I now want to go there).  It was a touch too brooding in parts and it started so slowly I wasn't sure I could get behind it but once I figured out where it was headed I really enjoyed the slow ride.

For the record, I laughed three times as much in this movie as I did during The Hangover.

No nudity, no sex. Lots of use of the word "fudge."

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_OuKIMUeA20M/TDvhTQXxczI/AAAAAAAADf4/cCbISg6L7Og/s400/Cl%C3%A9mence%2BPo%C3%A9sy%2Bgossip%2Bgirl.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 09:40:27 AM
Mr. Popper's Penguins

I have not seen this film.  I will not see this film.  I just wanted to be the first to say that this film is God awful and should be burned. 

This review is based off of the one TV spot that was on during the NBA game last night.  These guys do a good job of summing it up.  http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2011/may/25/mr-poppers-penguins-jim-carrey-trailer

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 04:40:29 PM
How many of you fudges are named Kaos?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 07:21:17 PM
How many of you fudges are named Kaos?

flex your e-penis and make it a lockable thread...you with the only key. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 10:58:12 PM
How many of you fudges are named Kaos?

Who the fudge wants to hear your opinion about movies in this thread?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 11:39:53 PM
Who the fudge wants to hear your opinion about movies in this thread?
:jesus:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 26, 2011, 11:55:44 PM
:jesus:

Weak.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 27, 2011, 12:08:04 AM
Weak.
:23:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 27, 2011, 07:40:05 AM
Who the fudge wants to hear your opinion about movies in this thread?

44 pages mocks you. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 28, 2011, 08:09:45 AM
Solitary Man

This movie was what Wall Street II: Boring as fudge really should have been. 

Change Michael Douglas' name from Ben to Gordon, change the business from car dealer to financial broker and the films easily could have been interchangeable -- except this one was better, way better than Wall Street.  It's the movie Wall Street could have been but failed miserably to attain.

This is one of those "how did this movie miss" curiosities that I don't understand.  It was released in 2009 nad just sort of disappeared from the radar. 

Top notch cast, but it just vanished.  Cost $15 million to make, did only about $4 mil box office.

It drifts into a very grey area early on, brushing up against an extremely uncomfortable and disturbing subject with serious taboos attached.  Maybe this is why the film never made a mainstream dent.  I'm sure it probably crossed enough lines to cause some pushback.

Michael Douglas, Danny DeVito, Susan Sarandon, Mary-Louise Parker, Imogene Poots, Jesse Eisenberg, Richard Schiff and Jenna Fischer (who says "fudge" at least twice) populate the cast.

An disturbing visit to a doctor sets an ultra successful businessman on a path of self-destruction.  He destroys everything that once meant anything to him and revels in his own debauchery.   

The film makes no apologies for occasional ambiguity, even at the end.  Was anything ever realy wrong with Ben or did he just freak out out of unwarranted fear?  Is he really a skeevy bastard or is he just reacting to his fear? Is it young ass or security that he seriously craves?

Douglas is completely at home playing this part.  He does the downtrodden rich like he was born into it.  He plays the lothario sleaze to perfection.  He rolls around in this role like your favorite dog in a piece of dead roadkill.  Ends up stinking like hell, but you can't help but like him even though he really has no redeeming qualities.

Sarandon, who I hate, wasn't bad.  Her scenes were limited and she didn't over act.  Fischer never got remotely naked and I have a hard time seeing her as anything but Pam.  She's not nearly as stuck as Pam as Jim is as Jim, but it is close.

The head turning scene at the very end is classic.  Closure would have been nice, but is there ever really any closure in life?  The ending was as open-ended as The Sopranos finale in its own weird way. 

Not the best movie I've ever seen, but as a character study it wasn't bad even though Douglas' take on this skeevy character has been studied repeatedly in film.  He's almost playing a caricature of the other skeeves he's played.

Still, if you can get past the taboo (which I won't spoil)  check out this superior version of Wall Street II.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 28, 2011, 08:40:35 AM
The Babysitters

Yet another movie that busts a taboo wide open. 

It's a little like Risky Business in reverse.  Babysitter hooks up with a dad and then helps her friends earn a little side money.  Of course it gets out of hand. 

Very weird movie.  The lead babysitter, Shirley, is oddly attractive.  Shows her sweaty midsection and crazily decent tits in one pretty cool scene.  Difficult to manage looking at them knowing that she's the daughter of Law & Order's Jack McCoy in real life. (Daa-DUMMMM)

For any guy who's ever hired a good looking baby sitter and had a random inappropriate thought while driving her home..... this is why you keep those thoughts locked away deep, deep in your head where they belong.

Lots of sad, seeking, lost, confused married schlumps finding validation and being manipulated by all-too-mature teenage girls.  Living the fantasy -- except the fantasy has fangs.

Only a little (okay, maybe a lot) unrealistic in the lack of consequences.  In the real world somebody's going to jail.  Jack McCoy (with help from Elliot Stabler and Olivia Benson) would make sure of it.  Letting everybody skate is a story-telling fail. 

But of course everybody skated in Risky Business, too, so it's the filmmaker's prerogative.  The final spoken denoument makes no sense, though. 

Worth seeing just for Jack McCoy's daughter's sweaty tits. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 28, 2011, 10:07:57 PM
I was at the grocery store and saw this girl in cutoff stretching up to get something off the top shelf.  I thought to myself, "Those are some nice legs."  Then she turns around and it is our 16 year old babysitter.  I went home and told my wife, "I heard Olivia has been caught smoking weed, we can't hire here anymore."
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 29, 2011, 08:14:04 AM
I was at the grocery store and saw this girl in cutoff stretching up to get something off the top shelf.  I thought to myself, "Those are some nice legs."  Then she turns around and it is our 16 year old babysitter.  I went home and told my wife, "I heard Olivia has been caught smoking weed, we can't hire here anymore."

I demand, uh I mean, saniflush demands pics of this encounter.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 29, 2011, 07:12:34 PM
The Dilemma

Holy fudge. This shoot was a disgrace. One of the worst movies I have ever seen...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 30, 2011, 04:13:55 AM
Who the fudge wants to hear your opinion about movies in this thread?
Ummm Yeah...that's already been covered, back on page one or two.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 30, 2011, 05:05:17 AM
Ummm Yeah...that's already been covered, back on page one or two.

It wasn't a serious question.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 12:03:45 AM
Green Zone -- 2010
The Longest Day -- 1962

I watched Green Zone with Matt Damon and Greg Kinnear.  Within 24 hours I watched The Longest Day with John Wayne, Sean Connery, Robert Wagner, Henry Fonda, Robert Mitchum, Red Buttons, Steve Forrest, Fabian, Richard Burton, Peter Lawford, Roddy McDowell, Sal Mineo and Richard Dawson (among hundreds of others you'd likely recoginze. 

The dicohtomy in presentation made me physically ill and very clearly illustrated just how far we as a nation have slid in the way we view ourselves and our position in the world.  The media's relentless "need to know" coupled with general public apathy and compounded by the current "love in, laugh in" generation of radical hippie fudges who have become the establishment all conspire to destroy everything we are and everything we could be -- and do it from the inside.

In The Longest Day, the soldiers were portrayed as heroes, putting their lives on the line and willingly sacrificing themselves in the name of honor, country, loyalty, faith and dury. 

In Green Zone, the US is the bad guy, the clueless invader, the arrogant deceiver bent on war for reasons of greed.  We lie to our troops, we lie to our allies, we lie to our enemies, we lie to ourselves.  That's the message of Green Zone. 

In The Longest Day, valor was exhibited by our heroic troops. In Green Zone, the troops were confused and disorganized, their agendas self-serving. The only nobility and valor was exhibited by a one-legged local.

I'm sick of movies that demonize our soldiers, paint our administration (under GWB) as inept and corrupt and portray America as the evil empire imposing its bogus will on the world.   

After watching The Longest Day, I shut off my television and said a slient prayer thanking God for the men who spilled their blood and sacrificed their lives so that air-headed shoot bags like the pacifist fudges who make movies like Green Zone have the freedom and the right to smear the name and reputation of this country.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 06:50:20 AM
I'm sick of movies that demonize our soldiers, paint our administration (under GWB) as inept and corrupt and portray America as the evil empire imposing its bogus will on the world.   

 :thumsup:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 09:35:55 AM
It's amazing to me that the only movie that makes US troops look like brave, organized, upstanding people that I have seen in the last 10 years was....Transformers.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 11:44:42 AM
The Babysitters

Yet another movie that busts a taboo wide open. 

It's a little like Risky Business in reverse.  Babysitter hooks up with a dad and then helps her friends earn a little side money.  Of course it gets out of hand. 

Very weird movie.  The lead babysitter, Shirley, is oddly attractive.  Shows her sweaty midsection and crazily decent tits in one pretty cool scene.  Difficult to manage looking at them knowing that she's the daughter of Law & Order's Jack McCoy in real life. (Daa-DUMMMM)

For any guy who's ever hired a good looking baby sitter and had a random inappropriate thought while driving her home..... this is why you keep those thoughts locked away deep, deep in your head where they belong.

Lots of sad, seeking, lost, confused married schlumps finding validation and being manipulated by all-too-mature teenage girls.  Living the fantasy -- except the fantasy has fangs.

Only a little (okay, maybe a lot) unrealistic in the lack of consequences.  In the real world somebody's going to jail.  Jack McCoy (with help from Elliot Stabler and Olivia Benson) would make sure of it.  Letting everybody skate is a story-telling fail. 

But of course everybody skated in Risky Business, too, so it's the filmmaker's prerogative.  The final spoken denoument makes no sense, though. 

Worth seeing just for Jack McCoy's daughter's sweaty tits.

WARNING NSFW....MAY CONTAIN BREASTS!
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2396152/katherine_waterston_in_the_babysitters/ (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2396152/katherine_waterston_in_the_babysitters/)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 12:53:26 PM
insert Jumbo's video

Thank you, you saved me from having to watch the movie, I just saw the best part.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 12:58:27 PM
It just moved
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 01:12:28 PM
It just moved
I am calling your IT department!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 01:21:12 PM
I am calling your IT department!

Don't disturb them.  They are very happy right now.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 01:30:11 PM
Don't disturb them.  They are very happy right now.

I thought they cared?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 01:40:58 PM
I thought they cared?

My IT department cares very much about any movement.  They monitor such things closely.  THAT made IT move.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 02:25:07 PM
Thank you, you saved me from having to watch the movie, I just saw the best part.
Sorry I should have posted the disclaimer.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 02:30:54 PM
Sorry I should have posted the disclaimer.

WARNING: It could move
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on May 31, 2011, 02:38:30 PM
WARNING: It could move
Pet the sweaty.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 05, 2011, 08:51:21 AM
Brotherhood

College freshman Adam Buckley finds himself blindfolded in the back of a van dealing with the fact that he has to rob a convenience store as the final step of his initiation into the Sigma Zeta Chi fraternity. Minutes later he finds himself dealing with the fact that a fellow-pledge just got shot while doing it.

Frank, the senior fraternity brother in charge of the night’s events, is able to get the injured pledge out of the store alive, but the fraternity’s troubles are just beginning. Thinking they can get out of the situation without taking the pledge to a hospital, Frank decides the group will handle things themselves. But when every move is met with disaster, Adam must find it within himself to go against Frank and his new brothers in order to save his friend’s life.


After a string of suck ass DVD rentals, I think this is a sleeper. It was entertaining all the way through the movie and thats without all the high tech Hollywood special effects. I def suggest all to watch.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 05, 2011, 12:37:38 PM
Solitary Man

This movie was what Wall Street II: Boring as fudge really should have been. 

Change Michael Douglas' name from Ben to Gordon, change the business from car dealer to financial broker and the films easily could have been interchangeable -- except this one was better, way better than Wall Street.  It's the movie Wall Street could have been but failed miserably to attain.

This is one of those "how did this movie miss" curiosities that I don't understand.  It was released in 2009 nad just sort of disappeared from the radar. 

Top notch cast, but it just vanished.  Cost $15 million to make, did only about $4 mil box office.

It drifts into a very grey area early on, brushing up against an extremely uncomfortable and disturbing subject with serious taboos attached.  Maybe this is why the film never made a mainstream dent.  I'm sure it probably crossed enough lines to cause some pushback.

Michael Douglas, Danny DeVito, Susan Sarandon, Mary-Louise Parker, Imogene Poots, Jesse Eisenberg, Richard Schiff and Jenna Fischer (who says "fudge" at least twice) populate the cast.

An disturbing visit to a doctor sets an ultra successful businessman on a path of self-destruction.  He destroys everything that once meant anything to him and revels in his own debauchery.   

The film makes no apologies for occasional ambiguity, even at the end.  Was anything ever realy wrong with Ben or did he just freak out out of unwarranted fear?  Is he really a skeevy bastard or is he just reacting to his fear? Is it young ass or security that he seriously craves?

Douglas is completely at home playing this part.  He does the downtrodden rich like he was born into it.  He plays the lothario sleaze to perfection.  He rolls around in this role like your favorite dog in a piece of dead roadkill.  Ends up stinking like hell, but you can't help but like him even though he really has no redeeming qualities.

Sarandon, who I hate, wasn't bad.  Her scenes were limited and she didn't over act.  Fischer never got remotely naked and I have a hard time seeing her as anything but Pam.  She's not nearly as stuck as Pam as Jim is as Jim, but it is close.

The head turning scene at the very end is classic.  Closure would have been nice, but is there ever really any closure in life?  The ending was as open-ended as The Sopranos finale in its own weird way. 

Not the best movie I've ever seen, but as a character study it wasn't bad even though Douglas' take on this skeevy character has been studied repeatedly in film.  He's almost playing a caricature of the other skeeves he's played.

Still, if you can get past the taboo (which I won't spoil)  check out this superior version of Wall Street II.

Agree, but I still wanted closure in the end.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 13, 2011, 08:51:43 AM
Catfish

Ton of critical buzz, uproar because it was snubbed by the Academy Awards.  Supposedly groundbreaking. Allegedly a poignant portrayal of lost souls congregating on the Internet. 

I'm calling bullshoot on the entire exercise. 

Nothing that happened in this so-called documentary was real.  Everything was completely scripted.  And poorly so.  You could see what was coming a mile away.  Every step was telegraphed.

Nev is a complete douche.  He should change his name to Naive.  What a stupid fag. 

Short version?  Douchey fag begins an online relationship.  Equally douchey fag friends decide to start filming his online interactions. (There's your first giveaway that this is totally fake, who films anybody talking to somebody online?  What could be more boring than watching somebody type?).  Douchey fag "falls in love" with one of the people he's chatting with and then these three douches decide to take a road trip to see what's real and what's not.  And who's surprised when things aren't exactly as they were represented. 

fudge the idiots in this film.  Nev, Ariel, Joost and Angela can all suck it.  Complete and utter frauds. 

Moral of the story?  People are stupid.  That this fluff would draw critical acclaim illustrates yet again just how low our standards have fallen. 

We're just really retarded. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 14, 2011, 03:55:48 AM
Human Centipede

Stupid.  And gross.  Significant inconsistencies. 

Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans

Eva Mendes is smoking hot.  Fairuza Baulk is hot and essentially wasted. 

Nicholas Cage is the absolute worst actor in the history of American film.  You put a sniveling gibbon in his role and this movie might have elevated itself.  With Cage?  Just an absolute, complete and total suckfest.  He fudges up every single scene he is in -- and he's in every fudgeing scene. 

I'm done with this assclown.  Unless it's Valley Girl or Raising Arizona, I won't watch another movie Mr. Cage is ever in.   If you took Will Ferrell, John Travolta, Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, porn's Randy Spears, Owen Wilson, Brendan Fraser, Josh Hartnett and David Caruso and merged them all together, and they collectively had a baby they named Prudence with Kristen Stewart, dearl little Pru would be a much, much better actor than Nicholas Cage. 

He's without question the worst fudgeing actor on the planet and that's saying a lot.  I couldn't enjoy the movie and have no idea what the story was supposed to be thanks to his shoot-tastic performance.  God he sucked balls.   

Here's a visual example of just how bad he sucked:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qJQQ6GDNiIU/TAFcY-sB7CI/AAAAAAAACBk/-Maq0pkfCGE/s1600/bad_lieutenant_nicolas_cage.jpg)

And another

(http://thumbnails.truveo.com/0018/5B/B3/5BB3602278F58C540F9EF8_Large.jpg)

And here's why I bothered:

(http://www.theme-vista.com/images/wallpapers/59400376/Celebrities/Eva%20Mendes/Eva%20Mendes%20Wallpaper.jpg)

And another

(http://thumbs.twilightsex.com/blog/201003/celebs-102323.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 17, 2011, 12:19:12 AM
Much Ado About Nothing

Kate Beckinsale, Denzel Washington, Keanau Reeves, Michael Keaton, Emma Thompson, Kenneth Branagh and House's friend from House. 

Great cast. 

Denzel is Keanau's brother.  I think that was done in the stage tradition of suspending reality.  Boys can play girls, girls boys and Denzel and Keanau are brothers and nobody bats an eye.  I batted.  It fudgeing confused me for far too long. 

Ken and Emma blithered and blathered hamming it up and gnawing on the bones of scenery.  They over-emoted, overacted and overreacted all of which fouled up the works. 

Kate was a freaking baby, just barely 20 when the movie was released.  She still had a puffy little baby face.  Love some kate, but she wasn't what you'd call 100% appealing. 

There was a purpose behind watching this particular film.   Daughter has to know it.  The beginning of the movie very nearly bored her out of watching the entire thing.  I had to make her sit through the pretentious setups before they got to the meat of the story.  But once she figured out what was going on she was fully engaged. 

Keanau sucked.  Sucked balls.  Ken and Emma were so over the top I wanted to punch both of them in the teeth.  They were four years into a marriage that only lasted two more beyond this film.  Already looked strained and old.  She was particularly bad, but I've never liked her in much of anything anyway. 

The movie was fluff.  Could have been done much better but it was tolerable at least. 

I get the impression that Branagh is a pretentious ass, though.  Real life. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 21, 2011, 05:02:18 PM
Black Dynamite

I was flipping through the channels last night when this gem caught my eye.  At first I thought it was an actual '70's blaxploitation film, but I quickly caught on.  If you like the cheesiness of the '70's, movies that parody cliches, or mustaches you must see this.  It hits every '70's blaxploitation cliche available.  All I should really have to say is that the finale features a nun-chuck fight between a militant Shaft knockoff with a CIA issued license to kill and Richard Nixon in the Oval Office.  And to quote Roger Ebert from his review of the film.

Quote
I am happy to say it brings back an element sadly missing in recent movies, gratuitous nudity. Sexy women would "happen" to be topless in the 1970s movies for no better reason than that everyone agreed, including themselves, that their breasts were a genuine pleasure to regard -- the most beautiful naturally occurring shapes in nature, I believe. Now we see breasts only in serious films, for expressing reasons. There's been such a comeback for the strategically positioned bed sheet, you'd think we were back in the 1950s.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 21, 2011, 05:17:46 PM
Funhouse
Typical 80s era horror flick.  Obligatory shower scene with plump natural breasts. 

Side note:  I adore actual breasts with their funky nipples, odd shapes and fullness.  Fake breasts are not good.  I don't like them. 

Side note two: The plump breasts in the shower scene were later revealed to supposedly belong to a junior in high school.  Sixteen.  Of course she wasn't, but that was the connotation.

Obligatory lecherous jackass jock in an Members Only jacket who drives a loud muscle car. Obligatory glasses-wearing nerd who'd outkicked his poon coverage.  Obligatory obtuse parents and obligatory jerk little brother. 

Cheesy sub-human wearing a frankenstein mask gets a hand job from a fortune teller in torn fishnets.  Sweet.

All the elements were there.  But it failed to deliver.  No chills, little spookiness. 

This is the kind of movie you'd take a date to at the drive in, you might look up once or twice from your bra plundering to see what was on the screen and then you'd pour out the popcorn and take the disheveled chick back home.  Completely forgettable, never meant to actually be watched, I don't think. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 21, 2011, 05:20:30 PM
It's Alive

No. It's not. 

Bad movie.  Bad fake baby.   Bad acting. Bad setup. Bad performance. Bad delivery.

Bad. 

I'd beat that baby's ass
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 22, 2011, 12:11:43 AM
Being John Malkovich

What the hell was I thinking in college?  I thought this movie was some cerebral masterpiece, but after a second viewing, it's utter shoot. 

I even hyped it up to my wife who hadn't seen it before.  She barely made it through. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 22, 2011, 10:47:36 AM
Being John Malkovich

What the hell was I thinking in college?  I thought this movie was some cerebral masterpiece, but after a second viewing, it's utter shoot. 

I even hyped it up to my wife who hadn't seen it before.  She barely made it through.

I think we've covered Charlie Kaufman in this thread previously.  You either love him or hate him.  I think he's one of the few original minds in Hollywood.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 22, 2011, 11:06:22 AM
I think we've covered Charlie Kaufman in this thread previously.  You either love him or hate him.  I think he's one of the few original minds in Hollywood.

The stories my 5 year old makes up are original too.  I don't know if I want them stretched to 2+ hours and filmed.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 22, 2011, 09:46:50 PM
I think we've covered Charlie Kaufman in this thread previously.  You either love him or hate him.  I think he's one of the few original minds in Hollywood.

We did. 

And I defended him with all of my might.

But Being John Malkovich was awful.  It tried way too hard to have a profound meaning.

I still stand behind Eternal Sunshine and Adaptation.  I just may never watch them again. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 23, 2011, 09:23:51 AM
May have been covered earlier but I saw the new Pirates the other night.  Same as all the others.  Took the 10 year old and we both enjoyed it because I'm a big fan of that series.  Same story line, pretty much the same actors, same ending.....

But that's okay because I don't care for sequels that go to extremes to try and top the one before.  If the original works, stay with it.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 23, 2011, 09:57:49 AM
It's Alive

No. It's not. 

Bad movie.  Bad fake baby.   Bad acting. Bad setup. Bad performance. Bad delivery.

Bad. 

I'd beat that baby's ass 

I remember this movie...  Typical 70's crap...  I was a little too young to see it when it came out, but when I eventually saw it, I was severely disappointed.  The television commercials were far more scary than the actual movie. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 23, 2011, 09:59:57 AM
I remember this movie...  Typical 70's crap...  I was a little too young to see it when it came out, but when I eventually saw it, I was severely disappointed.  The television commercials were far more scary than the actual movie.

New version, actually. 
(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTI3NDg5NTExN15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMjQ2NjQ3Mg@@._V1._SY317_.jpg)

Made in 2008. 

Still sucked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 24, 2011, 11:00:04 PM
Cars 2

Animation is absolutely amazing.  The background scenery is particularly impressive. 

I hate Owen Wilson's whiny ass voice.  The only time I can tolerate Larry the Dumbass, Legend's role model, is when he's being a tow truck. Then he's tolerable.  Even occasionally amusing. 

Cars 2 was half again too long, despite the eye-popping animation.  It began to drag with its convoluted race/spy movie mashup. 

The original Cars had heart and purpose.  You grew to care at least a little about the plight of the little wide spot in the road the crew called home. It was a wistful homage to the hundreds of small towns that shriveled up and died as a result of Interstate projects that bypassed them. 

This?  Zero heart at all.  Just a visually overwhelming and incredibly noisy explosion of color and sound. 

For parents of small kids there were a couple of references to "killing" this car or that car, including one demand to "kill Lightning McQueen."  This frightened and disturbed my niece (five years old) who understands that "killed means they can't wake up any more."  Not good. 

For the record, I didn't need, want or give half of a technicolor shoot in a leprechaun's pot to have the "green agenda" rammed down my throat in the guise of a kid's movie.   Whatever happened to just telling a good story (this one was not) without using the film as a pulpit to preach "oil companies are bad..?"

Cars, I'd give a solid four out of five (in retrospect).  Cars 2?  Two is right. 

That said?  It's going to make a fudgepot of money.  Every showing was sold out tonight.  And by sold out, I mean people in every fudgeing seat. 

Transformers comes out next week.  That's what I'm waiting on.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 25, 2011, 10:55:34 PM

Transformers comes out next week.  That's what I'm waiting on.
meh...you are just happy Megan Fox isn't in it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 25, 2011, 11:49:29 PM
meh...you are just happy Megan Fox isn't in it.
The new chick is smoking hott.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 01:46:12 AM
Transformers 3

It's rare when the third film in a series manages to rise to the occasion and elevate the franchise. Usually the third film sucks ass as the franchise grows flat and stale.  Godfather III anyone?

There are exceptions. Friday the 13th 3D managed the trick.  Star Wars: Return of the Jedi was as good as any even though the damn Ewoks very nearly fudgeed it completely up.  Rocky III didn't diminish the franchise, but it was Rocky 4 that raised the bar.   Christmas Vacation remains the best of the Vacation foursome.

Add Transformers to the list.  The third installment of the Transformers series is far, far better than the second which suffered from a number of false starts, not the least of which was the Ying Yang twins.  It's not quite as good as the first but only because the first was such a mind-blowing special effects spectacle and nobody was really sure Shia could pull off his role. 

The Dark of the Moon stretches the bounds of logic a little and has some surprise guests lend realism to the fable.  But so what?  It's gorgeously rendered.  It tells a story that can be fairly easily followed and doesn't stray into too much mumbo jumbo jargon or preachiness.

The producers took out the idiotic dog humping and horny mother eats pot brownies lowbrow efforts at comedic relief and let Shia channel his inner Lewis Stevens instead.  There was just enough of the mom and dad to remind you of their eccentricities and just the right mix of moments that make you laugh. 

You know they've done a good job when you find yourself cheering the Autobots and hoping nothing bad happens to them.  They manage to humanize animated objects. 

Speaking of animation--- holy shoot.  Absolutely amazing.  At some point you start to wonder if they didn't just build the damn things in real life and then destroy a large American city to get it right. 

It is what it is.  Lots and lots of things blow up.  The good guys fight the bad guys.  You know the good guys will eventually win because that's what happens in movies, but the film gets you to care about the ride. 

Awesome movie.   99.583% bad ass.  Can't wait to see it again. 

Tons of star power. Lots of people got their beaks wet on this one.

If there is any complaint it would be that it is a little long. 2:34 Could probably have cut about 20-30 minutes and tightened it up a bit.  I can see how it would be hard to decide what to cut.  Do we kill some of this abso-fudgeing-loutely awesome animation?  Dial back some of the humorous breaks?  Cut mom and dad out of the movie completely?   Not sure what could or should have been trimmed. 

Oh, one more thing?  Meagan who? 

The movie didn't suffer at all from her absence.  In fact, i think it might have been better without her.

You can bet that the critics will savage it, but when it comes to movies like this, they are elitist fudgewad assholes. 

It's a big, noisy, fun movie.  fudge the critics.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 10:32:15 AM
Quote
The Dark of the Moon stretches the bounds of logic a little

Besides the intelligent transforming alien machines? 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 10:33:40 AM
Besides the intelligent transforming alien machines?
That's plausible??
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 11:27:59 AM
That's plausible??

Yes.

(http://jcolavito.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/sphinxbluesky.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 01:35:16 PM
I was right.  Critics can't see past their own snobbery. 

They see "Michael Bay" and start pissing blood.  On this one, they're all full of shoot.  Here's how pathetic their kind can really be:

Quote
With "Transformers," the third time is apparently the charm.
Not that there's much that's actually charming about "Transformers: Dark of the Moon." It is the same sort of deafening mayhem celebration as its two absolutely awful predecessors.
Except this time it works. Or at least it isn't fully repugnant. OK, I'll admit it — this is hard — the big silly thing is sort of great.
An admission like that can end a critical career, the first two "Transformers" movies being among the most loathsome films of the past decade, but it must be made.

This fudge is so worried that someone might think him less discerning for actually liking a loud, fun, screen chewing, robot brawling, visually bad ass movie that he has to couch it in negatives. 

Most weren't able to leave their haughtiness at the door. 

Here's a sample:
Quote
Despite having the finest technical talent at his disposal, Bay just flails around like a kid in a 3D candy store watching bots morph into cars and back again and battle each other like dueling refrigerators. Bay believes that you can indeed kick a dead horse forever and the profits his bot epics rake in prove him right. He's laughing (at us) all the way to the bank.


Of course this comes from the same kind of fudges who thought "The Reader" was great cinema and that "Inception and "Kings Speech" are masterpieces. 

Apparently when you become a movie critic, you are issued a stick to shove up your ass. 

Irony?  Maybe.  But I like what I like and don't rape or love stuff because other people do or because I want to appear more erudite. 

fudge the critics.  Go see Transformers. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 01:47:30 PM
fudge the critics.  Go see Transformers.

Wait..by reviewing movies doesn't that make you a critic?  But you like Transformers....but I am supposed to fudge the critics.  I am so confused. Hold me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 01:59:11 PM
Wait..by reviewing movies doesn't that make you a critic?  But you like Transformers....but I am supposed to fudge the critics.  I am so confused. Hold me.

Everything I tell you is a lie. 

I just lied. 




Your brain just exploded. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on June 29, 2011, 02:12:04 PM
I read a review about the original Transformers which perfectly sums up the movies and why I like them.  It went something like,

There was no plot, the dialogue was horrible....Giant robots are hitting each other!  Weeeee!!!!!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 04, 2011, 12:09:58 PM
The Green Hornet

Should have been named The Unfunny Brown Turd

Hate for Seth Rogen reinforced.  What a putz. 

This movie fails on so many levels you can't list them all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 05, 2011, 12:17:50 PM
The Green Hornet

Should have been named The Unfunny Brown Turd

Hate for Seth Rogen reinforced.  What a putz. 

This movie fails on so many levels you can't list them all.

Seth Rogan and Zack Garagahauytytsdgdllaiifiliggas most overrated actors evah.

Ray Liotta and Don Cheadle most underrated actors evah.

Discuss.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 30, 2011, 02:20:26 PM
Limitless

I really, really, really wanted to like this movie. 

The concept of tapping the alleged unused portion of the brain, the ability to catalog and store everything you've ever seen and heard -- and have the means to call it up whenever necessary -- and the power that could come from being able to think two steps ahead is fascinating to me. 

But the movie fumbled the ball.

I still liked it because I went into it wanting to like it, but there's not much to recommend it. 

Bradley Cooper was pretty good, but there were some absolutely ridiculous contrivances. 

For starters why was the creepy Russian mobster guy coming to whip his ass?  He sold the book, kicked stock market ass and had plenty of cabbage.   Was he really going to let that loose end dangle ESPECIALLY since he'd been operating at high mental capacity and should have easily seen the potential trouble brewing there? 

Could you really leave bloody, murderous carnage in your apartment and be elected to the Senate?  Doubt even Ted Kennedy could have gotten away with that.

Why did the (admittedly cute) girlfriend keep bipping and bopping in and out of his life? 

Why did the killers of the ex-GF's brother leave the place?  If the cops weren't coming, why were they not still there tearing it apart? 

The movie was supposed to explore the concept of expanding mental capacity.  Instead it only used about 5% of its brainpower in this sloppy mess. 

Didn't hate it, but I wouldn't tell anybody to go see it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on July 30, 2011, 07:55:00 PM
Kaos have you watched Unknow with Liam Neeson, it's worth a look.
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z55/ajbar7/fashionising/eight/gallery_enlarged-)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 01, 2011, 09:27:58 AM
Horrible Bosses

Pretty sad when a weak movie like this gets credit just for not being completely awful.  But in the world of "comedy" as it stands today, avoiding sucking complete and total ass gets you a pass. 

This was an occasionally amusing film that just sort of innocuously meandered its way to a convenient conclusion. 

As with several other comedic efforts, the bloopers during the credits showed a cast apparently having a much better time making the film than I did watching it. 

Jason Bateman played the same neurotic ineffectual schlump he's portrayed in a dozen or more movies now.  He wasn't bad, he wasn't good he was just a set piece.  He seemed restrained and could have added more with better direction.

The chipmunk guy was occasionally OCD funny but never reached the hilarity I'm sure he was supposed to bring.

Jason Sudekis was fair.  Of all the recent SNL alums to graduate to film he's the least obnoxious.  He understands how to play a role (the same role repeatedly) without flailing over the top and wrecking the movie.  I'd much rather watch a film he's in than I would anything with Ferrell, Fallon, Hader, Armisen, Forte, Meyers, Carvey, etc.

Kevin Spacey was good but somewhat wasted.
Colin Farrell was completely wasted as a one-note character that could have been played by anybody.

Jennifer Aniston had an opportunity to take a significant step forward with a bawdy comedic role but either a lack of talent or piss poor direction held her back.  Her role could have been so, so much more but it felt like she was being held back.  Didn't buy her horny fascination with a chipmunk. 

She does still have an amazing body to be 42, but it seems pretty obvious that her face has had some serious work -- and it wasn't good.  She looked very plastic, her eyes were funny and it was off-putting.  I've always thought she was hot, but she didn't move me with her plastic face blown up on the big screen.

The bathtub scene had so much potential but it didn't stick with it long enough.  Or maybe I was expecting porn, I dunno.

Jamie Foxx gnawed on a throwaway role that didn't add a whole lot to the film other than a repeated joke about his name.

The film had an R rating but could easily have kept a PG-13.  Not really sure why it WASN'T PG-13, actually.  The R should have allowed them to push the envelope much further which could have added to the humor.

Wasn't horrible, but it could have been a much better film by reaching just a bit instead of always trying to reap the lowest hanging fruit. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 01, 2011, 10:52:58 AM
(http://celebshut.com/wp-content/uploads/celebrities/jennifer-aniston/horrible-bosses-screencaps/jennifer-aniston-horrible-bosses-screencaps-05.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 02, 2011, 09:39:15 AM
Source Code

Garbage. 

Convoluted impossibility.

Michelle is super cute but wasted. She couldnt save this load of crap.   I loved her in that insane movie with Robert Downey, Jr and Val Kilmer.  Here she is just set dressing. 

Jake sucks.  He should leave the business. 

Just a bad movie.  The groundhog day matrix on a train. 

Awful.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 03, 2011, 09:07:30 AM
Ray Liotta and Don Cheadle most underrated actors evah.

I agree and would add Edward Norton.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 04, 2011, 10:10:01 AM
Unknown

Better than I anticipated. 

Some goofy plot holes and an ambiguous too neat conclusion, but generally well done. 

Diane Kruger's accent was horrible and there's no way she or the other chick were into Liam.

Also his passport listed his birthday as 1964.  Ha.  No way.

Pretty good movie overall, though.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 05, 2011, 11:39:27 AM
Hall Pass

I'm ready to see Jenna Fischer naked.  But not with a spray tan like she had in this movie.

Owen Wilson absolutely sucks.  I can't stand him and he ruins this movie. 

It was fair.  About the same as Horrible Bosses in terms of comedic moments -- meaning they were few and far between -- and about the same level of believability (as in none).

Two schlumps get freedom for a week to pursue sexual conquests because their wives are tired of their "obsession" over sex. 

That part of the story had truth to it because few married couples are sexually compatible and because most guys think that if it weren't for the wives they'd be some snatch snatching hounds. 

Guys find out that the hunting grounds for older lions aren't so fertile.  Girls accidentally find out that lions still hunt. 

That much is true.  Give an attractive woman a week and she could fudge six dozen different guys.  She could walk into JC Penney, grab the intercom and say "I'm 43 and slightly horny.  Will be evaluating guys to fudge in the blender aisle between 10 and 10:45 this morning."  There would be a line all the way to the other end of the mall within five minutes. 

For a guy, that hunt is much more difficult. 

Back to the movie..

Owen Wilson's pursed lip, mumbly mouth character had absolutely no shot or possible attraction to the babysitter nor would the blazing Australian chick be willing to hit him up.  Completely implausible, impossible and ridiculous.  Destroyed any credibility the movie hoped to maintain by setting up those scenes. 

Other than a really nice pair of tits and a couple of occasional laughs, there's not much to recommend this movie. 

If you've watched it and are married here's a question for you.  Do you consider what Jenna Fischer's character did to be cheating in the broader sense?  Or does "cheating" only involve actual sexual penetration of some orifice?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 05, 2011, 11:52:24 AM
Do you watch movies because they exist?

I mean, honestly, what leads you to order Hall Pass and push play without someone holding a gun to your head or copious amounts of alcohol being involved?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 05, 2011, 12:20:22 PM
Do you watch movies because they exist?

I mean, honestly, what leads you to order Hall Pass and push play without someone holding a gun to your head or copious amounts of alcohol being involved?

Friend says "Hey, I've got Hall Pass.  Want to watch it?  And I think 'Jenna Fischer, kinda hot in a Pammy way...'" 

That's the thought process.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 06, 2011, 04:39:25 AM
Rio

It's an animated bird movie.  Just another emesis of color and cacophony splatted on the screen without benefit of a cohesive story or anything of real entertainment value.

You've got Toy Story, Lion King, Rango, Ice Age, Shrek, Monsters Inc. and Finding Nemo on one hand.  Fantastic movies that tell stories well. 

You've got Igor, Shark Tale, any Barbie movie, The Wild, Megamind and Atlantis on the other.  Half ass efforts to cash in on the animation craze. 

Rio falls somewhere inbetween.

It's not good, but it's not slapdash awful. 

I didn't give a shoot about the birds.  Monsters Inc. made me care about a fuzzy behemoth with horns.

I didn't give a shoot about the romance between the human characters.  Toy Story made me care about a kid's relationship with a pull-string cowboy. 

The musical numbers were lame, particularly the rapping roosteratoo.  Compared to Scar's menacing musical interlude in Lion King it was bad, bad, bad.

The bad guys were caricatures.  Scar, Cruella DeVille, Jafar, Ursula, Shere Khan.  Now THOSE guys were bad to the creepy bone.  The clowns here were useless and worthless.

The same guy showed up in about 20 different scenes playing different parts but looking exactly the same.  Piss poor animation. 

Some of the jokes were crude and stupid and beneath even the target audience.

I could watch Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, Jungle Book, Toy Story, Monsters Inc., again right now.  Some of those movies are on my 20 movies on a desert island list. 

I don't care if I ever see Rio again. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 06, 2011, 04:45:44 AM
The Rite

Damn.  A PG-13 possession movie. 

Should have been a clue right there. 

Anthony Hopkins in a "based on a true story" account of a priest in Italy who performs exorcisms and his interaction with a seminary graduate in a state of disbelief and confusion. 

Hopkins was menacing when the role called for it, but I couldn't help flashing back to Silence of the Lambs.  I kept waiting for him to say something about Clarice and that was a major distraction. 

The would-be priest with doubts wasn't a very good actor and helped drop the film a peg or two. 

The journalist angle was a big pfffftttt. 

But as noted it was a PG-13 depiction of exorcisms.  So the envelope couldn't be pushed very far. 

It had a few moments, but I really liked this film a whole lot better when it was called The Exorcist and the possessed was a little girl. 

I keep expecting that to be remade any day now.  The original scared the flaming chocolate hell out of me.  Same with the original Omen.  Really the only two horror movies that have ever spooked the fudge out of me.  The Omen remake sucked turtle balls, though.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 08, 2011, 12:57:12 AM
Sucker Punch

I'm sure you're expecting a scalding review blasting this trifling load of nonsense, but the fact is that I sort of liked this little movie. 

I had no idea what was going on most of the time.  Wasn't sure what reality we were living in.  But I enjoyed the struggle. 

Abby Cornish was good. Vanessa Hudgens was good.  Emily Browning was outstanding. 

It looked like a fun movie to make and I enjoyed watching it. 

Didn't like the ending, but I understood why they went that way with it. 

I've seen it blasted by reviewers from all over.  I saw it called "icky, sadistic, tedious, boring, empty, senseless and hollow" among other things.  That's one of the reasons I waited so long to watch it. 

It was none of those things to me, except maybe sadistic. 

We're supposed to celebrate the genius of QT when he makes up a bloody fantasy about Hitler being killed in a theater by a sadistic band of Jews but this escape from reality is panned?  I don't think so. 

fudge the critics.  I liked the movie. 

I do think this is one you'll either like or absolutely hate, though.  Don't think there's much "meh" middle ground.  My wife would have hated it. 

I didn't.  I'd watch it again.  The girls with the guns and swords were fun.  A movie doesn't have to be The Reader (one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen) to be enjoyable.  Sometimes you want to leave reality at the door and watch girls with machine guns blow shoot completely the fudge up. 

How can you go wrong with this:

(http://scifimafia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/sucker-punch-chics-guns.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 08, 2011, 09:29:12 AM
Limitless


But the movie fumbled the ball.



So, Mario Fannin took up acting?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 12, 2011, 12:19:52 AM
Wild Target

British movie.  Allegedly madcap humor. 

Featuring Bill Nighy (squidward from Pirates of the Caribbean and Viktor from Underworld) as an assassin, Emily Blunt as a carefree con artist, Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley) as an accidental accomplice and the guy who played Jim on the British version of The Office as a competing assassin. 

Nighy has a contract on Blunt but is so smitten with her cavalier thievery he can't pull the trigger and inadvertently ends up as her protector. Grint is a drifter caught up in the mayhem when he gets in the middle of a botched attempt on Blunt's life. 

It's a great idea for a story but it was so, so miscast. 

The idea of a romance, particularly a long-lasting one, between the dour Nighy and the playful Blunt is unfathomable.  It simply doesn't fly.   

The crazy humor the movie hoped to deliver didn't pan out.  There was some random silliness, but nothing of the wry ribaldry Brits are known for.  It just didn't work. 

The film might have had a chance with someone other than Nighy in the lead role.  I tend to like him in everything I've seen him in, but he just didn't cut it here. 

Blunt -- damn girl.  She was Katy Perry sexy. Like a cross between Katy Perry and Demi Lovato.  Her acting left a lot to be desired, but the scene where she steals her way through a market had some sly cool going for it.  I also loved her shoes.  She had great shoes throughout.  I notice things like that.

This is a movie I hope ends up getting Americanized.  I'd like to see it with, say Reese Witherspoon/Scarlett Johanssen/Amanda Seyfried and somebody like Leo DiCaprio/Shia Lebouf/Matt Damon/Clooney/Christian Bale.   Put it in the hands of a Jerry Bruckenheimer, Stephen Soderbergh or Michael Bay (to make sure we get titties and explosions) and this could be a good film. 

It wasn't bad here, just dull and lifeless.  It didn't have the pop it needed.   


(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0BHs_R7H_Dg/TMeQvbC1YFI/AAAAAAAAFxc/CAHVuoKBNcI/s1600/WildTarget.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 12, 2011, 12:29:58 AM
How Do You Know

How do you know?  When you start throwing up ten minutes into a shootty film. 

What awful, awful crap.

I tried to watch this because I find Reese Witherspoon to be immeasurably cute and she looked pretty adorable here. 

Like super adorable. 

But hearing her sexual moans when she was allegedly in the sack with Owen Wilson (for no apparent reason) made me physically ill.  And then when her little blonde hotness is actually trying to decide between super schmuck Owen and schlump schmuck Paul Rudd?  I blew chunks in the floor. 

What a shootty, shootty, shootty movie. 

Even this couldn't keep me:

(http://eleven.com.au/images/reese_witherspoon.jpg)

I give this film

 :puke: :puke: :puke: 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 13, 2011, 03:16:12 PM
Restraint

Australian movie.  Popped up on Netflix and I decided to give it a late night shot. 

Pretty well done film that scraped the surface of a bunch of degenerates and found little soul.   

Teresa Palmer is Dale, a former stripper who seduces a psychopath into helping her escape her strip club pimp. The guy is a little too unhinged and ends up making a bloody mess from which they have to escape.  They take refuge at the home of an agoraphobic dude (some guy of True Blood, I think). 

Mr. Recluse helps them out a little, becomes infatuated with Dale and manages to contrive a happy ending -- at least for some of the cast. 

The interactions between psycho Ron, sexy Dale and calculating Andrew are pretty good and contain a decent mix of tension and frustration. 

Ron's big plan for escape is hilariously poorly thought out and hinges on "yellow bastards."

The ending left a few gaping questions that needed some answers and there were a couple of plot points that bore some better effort. 

For instance when the cops come one day and he tells them his fiance has left him, why would they blindly accept her being back the next as if nothing was wrong (or at least not make some comment). 

What was the purpose of showing the body floating on the lake if that was never going to be addressed. Wouldn't a floating body be a problem?

It's also never really clear what happened to Daddy Dearest and the original whore fiance.  But I suppose that can be left to the imagination. It can be whatever you want it to be.

As for Teresa Palmer?  Holy smoking shoot. 

One of the best bodies I've ever seen on screen.  Ass that is simply amazing.  Her face is a cross between Scarlett Johanssen and Kristen Stewart with the best features of both.  She's fudgeing hot.  Seriously fudgeing hot. 

Worth skimming through just for her.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OuKIMUeA20M/TS7zvZjrXiI/AAAAAAAAEWY/N6Yirdx_478/s1600/Teresa-Palmer-Jurlique.jpg)

(http://www.gruppiz.com/img/news/__BIG/5992_path.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 14, 2011, 01:48:15 AM
Severance

British horror/torture movie.

Not bad.

Some implausible plot points.  No way in fudge they stay at the "resort" particularly since there was no food source, no welcoming party and no amenities. 

Where did all the crazies come from and what was their real beef?


Suck
Band becomes vampires to gain fame and fortune. 

Some slightly funny moments.  Alice Cooper, Henry Rollins, Iggy Pop and Moby all make appearances. 

Jessica Pare (below) has some vampire hotness.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hALxdO3M1Tw/TLH6XQEpNUI/AAAAAAAABMA/x9anUyBUoD4/s1600/Suck2009DVDRipXviD-SPKCap1.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 16, 2011, 07:57:48 AM
Lincoln Lawyer

Nothing to see here that hasn't already been covered. 

Wasn't great.  Wasn't bad.  Emotionally flat. 

Completely forgettable.  In fact, I already have.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 16, 2011, 08:04:15 AM
Lincoln Lawyer

Nothing to see here that hasn't already been covered. 

Wasn't great.  Wasn't bad.  Emotionally flat. 

Completely forgettable.  In fact, I already have.

I liked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 16, 2011, 08:18:01 AM
I liked.

Wasn't bad.  Just that it pieced together several other movies and recycled characters we've already seen before. 

It made no impression on me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 03:29:57 AM
The King's Speech

Bloody hell.  Could that have moved any slower? 

It was fair.  I liked Barbosa's character pretty well.  He should have gotten best actor over Firth.  He was ten times better than Firth was. 

It wasn't the cinematic masterpiece I was led to believe. 

The Fighter, Toy Story 3 and The Social Network were better films.  The Fighter in particular.

But this is exactly the stuffy sort of shoot the academy award types tend to like.

Given the chance to watch this or Transformer's 3 again?  I'm taking robots every single time.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 08:46:36 AM
The King's Speech

Bloody hell.  Could that have moved any slower? 

It was fair.  I liked Barbosa's character pretty well.  He should have gotten best actor over Firth.  He was ten times better than Firth was. 

It wasn't the cinematic masterpiece I was led to believe. 

The Fighter, Toy Story 3 and The Social Network were better films.  The Fighter in particular.

But this is exactly the stuffy sort of shoot the academy award types tend to like.

Given the chance to watch this or Transformer's 3 again?  I'm taking robots every single time.

My mom keeps telling me to watch this.  I'm glad you saved me the pain.  Your pan is exactly the way I envisioned it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 09:04:25 AM
My mom keeps telling me to watch this.  I'm glad you saved me the pain.  Your pan is exactly the way I envisioned it.

My mom (who taught english lit at a junior college and fancies herself a member of the british royalty) loved it.   My wife loved it too.  Both have clamored for me to watch it for months.  I've had the Netflix Blu-ray sitting here since June.

I didn't hate it. It didn't offend me.  But seriously.  We know the fudgeer stutters and tried to get help. Does that take two hours?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 11:58:49 AM
My mom (who taught english lit at a junior college and fancies herself a member of the british royalty) loved it.   My wife loved it too.  Both have clamored for me to watch it for months.  I've had the Netflix Blu-ray sitting here since June.

I didn't hate it. It didn't offend me.  But seriously.  We know the fudgeer stutters and tried to get help. Does that take two hours?

I expect it wouldn't offend, but bore.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 01:16:27 PM
I expect it wouldn't offend, but bore.

It was funny when he was screaming profanities. 

fudge, fudge, fudgeity, fudge, bugger, buggery, fudge, fudgeity, fudge.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 08:35:28 PM
It was funny when he was screaming profanities. 

fudge, fudge, fudgeity, fudge, bugger, buggery, fudge, fudgeity, fudge.
I expect to say the same thing this season. Prolly several times
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 17, 2011, 09:34:37 PM
It was funny when he was screaming profanities. 

fudge, fudge, fudgeity, fudge, bugger, buggery, fudge, fudgeity, fudge.

Well, shoot, I may have to rent it now.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 18, 2011, 04:25:05 PM
You should.   It's worth a watch.  Just wait until you have nothing better to do.  Or when you want to score wife points (she will like it).
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 20, 2011, 11:13:23 PM
Took the Fam to see "Smurfs".  It wasn't as bad as I expected.  Katy Perry plays Smurfette, I have to admit I had some perverse thoughts.  Doogie Howser's plays a married man, married to the girl from Glee with the germ phobias.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 21, 2011, 01:08:59 PM
McGruber

Was on.  Wasn't completely tired.  Figured I'd give it a spin. Couldnt be as bad as I'd heard, surely.  I remember the marketing blitz was unavoidable.  No way they would have pumped that much effort into marketing something that was inferior to a wet turd. 

I was right.  It wasn't as bad as I'd heard. 

It was ten times fudgeing worse. 

Every time I think Ive seen the shoottiest movie ever, remind me of this. It was absolutely horrible. 

The high point of the comedy was Ryan phillipe sticking celery up his ass.  Yes, you read that right. 

Just an awful, dreadful movie. 

I really don't (and never will) understand how people working on this shoot can watch the dailies and think "damn, we nailed that.  Some funny shoot there...". Terrible.  Just terrible.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 22, 2011, 10:10:01 AM
Arthur

Why remake a movie when you have nothing to add? 

The excesses of Arthur played well in the sprawling early 80s when the country was flush with newfound enthusiasm, AIDS was something only gays and monkeys got and everybody drank and smoked.  It caught the tail end of the old boozy Dean Martin era and meshed with the new drug-fueled excess of the Studio 54 crowd.  In those days we were still willing to forgive the lifestyle of the rich and famous. 

Today?  Things have changed.  Arthur would be forced to give a public apology, go into rehab and would be stalked by TMZ.  Charlie Sheen tried to be Arthur in real life and look what that got him.

The sodden man-child just didn't play at all in this film.  Besides, Dudley Moore was a much more charming Arthur than Russell Brand.  Granted you didn't have Liza Minelli's outlandish schnozz and ugly mug clotting up the screen so it did have that for it. 

But the idea of a hard-drinking rich boy flaunting his wealth just didn't resonate in these difficult economic times. 

Brand gave some effort but wasn't really as charming or amusing as he needed to be. 

The old woman failed to deliver the humor that John Gielgud brought to the caretaker role of Hobson in the original.

Greta Gerwig was shootloads better than the ugly ass Minelli of the original, but that's not saying a whole lot, really.  A babboon's ass is better looking than Minelli.

Jennifer Garner continues her desperate career spiral.  I used to think she was so incredibly hot and now I just want her to get the fudge off the screen as soon as possible.  She was terrible, just abysmal here.

I was never convinced that Gerwig's Naomi would be remotely interested in the idiotic Arthur unless it was for the money.  His character displayed no redeeming qualities whatsoever and to imagine that she would remain unattached and/or remotely interested while he floated through his lengthy voyage of self discovery is unfathomable.

In all, a rather drab and sad retelling of a story that no longer has any place in the world today. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 01:33:52 AM
Blow

Johnny Depp.   Blow. 

So I was disappointed...

Very underrated movie.  Good performances from Depp, Pee Wee, Franka and Bobcat.  Didn't care for Penelope.  Never have. 

Told the at least somewhat true story of George Jung who became the original cocaine cowboy of the late 70s.  Found his way into the Escobar circle and was literally swimming in money. 

Like a real life Scarface, he lost it all.  Corrupt government stole most of it. 

Cautionary tale that there is always a time to get out but most people can't recognize it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 09:41:36 AM
Blow

Johnny Depp.   Blow. 

So I was disappointed...

Very underrated movie.  Good performances from Depp, Pee Wee, Franka and Bobcat.  Didn't care for Penelope.  Never have. 

Told the at least somewhat true story of George Jung who became the original cocaine cowboy of the late 70s.  Found his way into the Escobar circle and was literally swimming in money. 

Like a real life Scarface, he lost it all.  Corrupt government stole most of it. 

Cautionary tale that there is always a time to get out but most people can't recognize it.

This is an awesome movie with a great soundtrack, please tell me this isn't the first time you are seeing this?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 09:49:49 AM
This is an awesome movie with a great soundtrack, please tell me this isn't the first time you are seeing this?

Ok.  I won't tell you that. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 10:31:11 AM
Ok.  I won't tell you that.
Son, we need to help you with your que list. If you are watching shoot like McGrubber and you haven't seen Blow...tha fudge.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 10:37:30 AM
Son, we need to help you with your que list. If you are watching shoot like McGrubber and you haven't seen Blow...tha fudge.

I watch what's on sometimes.  I may have seen this one back in the day, but I don't think I ever saw it in toto before yesterday. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 11:55:46 AM
I watch what's on sometimes.  I may have seen this one back in the day, but I don't think I ever saw it in toto before yesterday.
sounds like Jumbo's forearm after Dorothy stumbled upon the x on the way to Oz
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 03:59:46 PM
The Omega Man
Cheesy 70's apocalyptic awesomeness. 

Charlton Heston at the height of his sweaty barechested Apesian dudeitude.  You get the full effect of his teeth-gritted steely glare, his cryptic snarls and his Shatner-esque over-emoting.

He makes it with a black chick who sports a mega-fro.  That added to his suave coolness.

Awesome cars.  Crazy 70s musical score.

Horrible makeup on the Family, though.   And I don't understand why they kept carrying fire and burning shoot when they were afraid of lights.

So much better than the Will Smith remake "I am Legend." 

Bonus: The head of the family is the guy who ran the amusement park rides in KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 11:16:48 PM
The Omega Man
Cheesy 70's apocalyptic awesomeness. 

Charlton Heston at the height of his sweaty barechested Apesian dudeitude.  You get the full effect of his teeth-gritted steely glare, his cryptic snarls and his Shatner-esque over-emoting.

He makes it with a black chick who sports a mega-fro.  That added to his suave coolness.

Awesome cars.  Crazy 70s musical score.

Horrible makeup on the Family, though.   And I don't understand why they kept carrying fire and burning shoot when they were afraid of lights.

So much better than the Will Smith remake "I am Legend." 

Bonus: The head of the family is the guy who ran the amusement park rides in KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park.

fudge Heston.  fudge him for his shootty acting and his political activism.  I want my actors to act and leave their fudgeing politics at home.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 24, 2011, 11:22:00 PM
fudge Heston.

I'm sure you would, princess...

(http://www.stillsecureafteralltheseyears.com/ashimmy/WindowsLiveWriter/charlton%20heston.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 25, 2011, 08:05:31 AM
fudge Heston.  fudge him for his shootty acting and his political activism.  I want my actors to act and leave their fudgeing politics at home.

I only want that when I disagree with them, you damn dirty ape.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 25, 2011, 08:15:23 AM
I want my actors to act and leave their fudgeing politics at home.

If you are putting that qualifier on then you are not going to have much outside entertainment in your life.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 25, 2011, 08:34:00 AM
Winter's Bone

Very grim movie.

Imagine if your typical Finebaum caller, say Legend, had a family.  This is what it would be like. 

Don't ever want to hear anything about Alabama rednecks or trailer trash after watching this look into Mizzourah hillbilly life. 

Desperate to save what little her family has 17-year old Ree Dolly sets out determined to buck the hillfolk ways and find her missing daddy before he jumps bail on an upcoming court date and sacrifices the cabin and land he put up as bond.  She's essentially alone in the world raising two younger siblings after her mom mentally checked out and dad is either in jail or on the run due to his meth-cooking lifestyle.

The white trash authenticity is outstanding right down to the cheap shoot on the walls and cluttered kitchen counters.

If Ree can't find her daddy her only possible hope of escaping the abject misery of her existence is the Army but even that dream has no wings.

There's no grand and tidy resolution, drug-baked dad doesn't magically appear after being rehabbed with the keys to a fantastic new home, Ree doesn't get a miracle scholarship that saves the family.  In the end she is what she is and will likely never rise above the anchors of her family's poverty.  This film illustrates the shame of that situation because she is obviously smart, she's filled with courage, she's savvy and determined. She clearly aspires to be something other than Ree Dolly, hillbilly meth whore.  Too bad that's the only path realistically available to her.

In one of my previous vocations I used to sell/rent furniture, appliances and electronics to people like the Dollys.  I can't count the number of times I saw teenage boys and girls who were bright enough but just had nothing.  I often wondered what they could have become had they just had half a chance of shedding the burden of their situation.  Remember one girl in particular who lived in a rented shack in Holt with her five brothers and sisters, her indifferent mom and her sometimes employed dad (when he wasn't laying out drunk or stoned).  She was smart, she was beautiful and with just a sliver of opportunity there's no telling what she could have done with her life.  Instead she was married by 17, had a bruised and battered face and a kid by 18, divorced by 20 and strung out on some nasty shoot.  Last time I saw her was in a mug shot.  She looked haggard and mean and her eyes were dead. 

But I digress. 

The film was very well done.  The pace was a little slow, but the tone was right, the actors were all completely believable and the background was depressingly realistic. 

Jennifer Lawrence, who played Ree, was fantastic.  If she was acting you couldn't tell it.  It was like they plucked somebody from the hills and told them to just be themselves.  I'll be interested to see her in something else to see if she can carry that same legitimacy to other roles. 

Best line came from her uncle to his wife/live-in:

"I already told you to shut up once with my mouth..."
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 25, 2011, 09:16:53 AM
If you are putting that qualifier on then you are not going to have much outside entertainment in your life.
I was about to say that. Tim Robbins and Sean Penn have to be the absolute worst. But if they are in a good movie, I will probably watch.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 28, 2011, 02:06:13 PM
Takers
Wanted to watch this because it evoked a little Oceans 11 cool and because Idris Elba is a pretty decent actor. 

Too bad Matt 'Chompers' Dillon and Obi Wan Kenobi were on hand to fudge it up. 

The ending was idiotic and contrived.  Where you gonna go with three silver suitcases full of cash, a bullet in the gut and partners dying in a hail of bullets?  Drive to Vegas?

The resolution of the dirty cop arc was idiotic and contrived.

Bullets blow holes in walls and doors but can't penetrate couches and mattresses?

Decent performance by Elba but I typically like him.  shootty performances by Dillon, Kenobi and Marianne Jean-Baptiste who should have stayed her ugly ass in Without a Trace on tv.  Paul Walker was adequate, Chris Brown was stupid, but could run. Some Ealy character was fair.  T.I. needs to stick to rapping although is isn't much good at that either. Zoe Saldana was pretty much wasted in a "you my bitch, ho" role. 

Stole the entire blowing up the street bit from The Italian Job, but otherwise the larcenies were nicely planned and organized if a little hokey.  Could they really have planned an escape around a news chopper showing up at the precise moment it was needed?  And being stupid enough to land?

Movie aspired to be way more than it was.  Wasn't horrific. Just wasn't that good.  Stupid ending hurt it badly.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 08:22:38 AM
The Adjustment Bureau

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. 

I pretty much like Damon.  There are very few movies he is in where I don't like his character or his performance. 

This fit that pattern.  I thought he did a very good and credible job.  Blunt is like a low-rent Katy Perry.  I tend to like her too.  I thought the interaction between her and Damon felt real and wasn't forced. 

The story itself?  Well, I don't know about hat-wearing forces that control everything but I wouldn't rule it out.  We've all had things in our life that are just too impossible to be random and you wonder who is pulling the strings. 

The movie was better than I expected.

Not something you buy to watch over and over, but a decent story well acted and worth the viewing. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 08:36:43 AM
The Adjustment Bureau

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. 

I pretty much like Damon.  There are very few movies he is in where I don't like his character or his performance. 

This fit that pattern.  I thought he did a very good and credible job.  Blunt is like a low-rent Katy Perry.  I tend to like her too.  I thought the interaction between her and Damon felt real and wasn't forced. 

The story itself?  Well, I don't know about hat-wearing forces that control everything but I wouldn't rule it out.  We've all had things in our life that are just too impossible to be random and you wonder who is pulling the strings. 

The movie was better than I expected.

Not something you buy to watch over and over, but a decent story well acted and worth the viewing.

I watched it on a plane a couple of months ago.  It made me want to hit the emergency exit....While in flight.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
The Adjustment Bureau

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. 

I pretty much like Damon.  There are very few movies he is in where I don't like his character or his performance. 

This fit that pattern.  I thought he did a very good and credible job.  Blunt is like a low-rent Katy Perry.  I tend to like her too.  I thought the interaction between her and Damon felt real and wasn't forced. 

The story itself?  Well, I don't know about hat-wearing forces that control everything but I wouldn't rule it out.  We've all had things in our life that are just too impossible to be random and you wonder who is pulling the strings. 

The movie was better than I expected.

Not something you buy to watch over and over, but a decent story well acted and worth the viewing.

It felt weird.  It had moments, but got way out in left field for me with the hat and doors thing.  And I fudgeing hate goofy hats too.  But goofy hats with magical powers?  It had potential, but went the wrong way.  It also felt like it stole discarded shootty ideas and combined them in a not so good way from movies like that shoot thing where Nick Cage played the angel that turned mortal for love, Heaven Can Wait, and something else that escapes me.  I kept waiting on a cameo by Sinatra too.  Chairman?  The fudge?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 10:34:30 AM
Oh, and not to mention the whole Hollyweirds poking fun at Christianity crap.  God and Angels who are called "The Chairman", and whatever the fudge the adjustment fudges were called.  Then the whole "God has a plan, but if you want to change it bad enough you can" routine.  Nah, I wanted to like it...I couldn't.  And I do like Damon.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 12:19:55 PM
It's actually from a 1954 story by Hugo winner Phillip K. richard (heh heh heh, I said richard) called "Adjustment Team"

So maybe all that other shoot you mentioned stole from this, I dunno. 

I wasn't looking for deep metaphysical meaning.  And I liked the brims. 

The questions I wanted answered were as follows:

Were the lead characters believable?
Did the chemistry between the primary actors work?
Was the film well-acted, well-paced and well directed? 

Yes, yes, yep.  Good enough for me. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 30, 2011, 12:25:09 PM
It's actually from a 1954 story by Hugo winner Phillip K. richard (heh heh heh, I said richard) called "Adjustment Team"

So maybe all that other shoot you mentioned stole from this, I dunno. 

I wasn't looking for deep metaphysical meaning.  And I liked the brims. 

The questions I wanted answered were as follows:

Were the lead characters believable?
Did the chemistry between the primary actors work?
Was the film well-acted, well-paced and well directed? 

Yes, yes, yep.  Good enough for me.

I could probably agree with all that.  Just that some of the off the wall shoot distracted me, and yes, I know, it's make believe...still, not all "impossible or improbable concepts" in movies distract me.  This one did.  I knew it was a remake or rehash of some kind.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on August 31, 2011, 01:49:27 AM
The Mechanic

I like Jason Statham less and less every time I see a movie he is in. 

This is utterly and absolutely unwatchable. 

Sucked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 01, 2011, 12:23:31 AM
The Machinist

Christian Bale lost a lot of weight.  Looked like a concentration camp survivor. 

Too bad he did it for this plodding dreary film. 

Saving grace?  Jennifer Jason Leigh's pretty tits.  I loved them in Fast Times at Ridgemont High when she was Stacy and I liked them a lot here. 

Christian Bale lost a scary amount of weight. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 01:40:13 AM
True Grit

Preface:  Never seen, never intend to watch the original.  Blasphemous as some may think this to be, I consider John Wayne merely William Shatner in a saddle.  I don't care for his acting and never have.  So I had no baseline or comparison when it came to this remake. 

And now the review:

fudge me. 

What the hell was that?  Jeff Bridges sounded like he was trying to channel Karl Childers from Slingblade.  I kept expecting him to ask for a fudgeing mustard biscuit. 

Remember what I said about liking Matt Damon's body of work?  There are exceptions and this is certainly one. 

The girl was okay, but compared to Jennifer Lawrence's  amazing work in Winter's Bone she might as well have been Wednesday Adams reciting spider poetry. 

Why did the entire movie seem to me as if they were doing a parody of Raising Arizona or O Brother Where Art Thou?  The funny, clipped and affected speech added to those films.  Here it just sounded stupid.  I could have sworn I heard the girl tell Hi to "get back up there and get her a Chaney." 

I didn't hate the movie, I just didn't care.  The interaction between Mattie and the horse guy was good.  Everything else beyond that sort of sucked dusty, crusty ass. 

I didn't buy Mattie's emotional attachment to Cogburn, I didn't buy her whims of allegiance and her turnaround on LaBeef. 

Seems I heard that in the original LeBeef dies.  That would have been better. 

I don't know if the bullshoot about losing an arm, going to a traveling show and Cogburn being dead when she got there was part of the original, but the ending absolutely sucked sweaty pimple laden balls.  If that was the original ending just fudge that completely. 

I could have gone all my life without seeing this badly done film.  In fact I wish I had.  Now when I hear people talk reverently about the John Wayne masterpiece True Grit I'm going to think of this boiler pot of shoot. 

I really hope the original was better.  But now I for sure don't want to find out. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 05:56:30 AM
True Grit

Preface:  Never seen, never intend to watch the original.  Blasphemous as some may think this to be, I consider John Wayne merely William Shatner in a saddle.  I don't care for his acting and never have.  So I had no baseline or comparison when it came to this remake. 

And now the review:

fudge me. 

What the hell was that?  Jeff Bridges sounded like he was trying to channel Karl Childers from Slingblade.  I kept expecting him to ask for a fudgeing mustard biscuit. 

Remember what I said about liking Matt Damon's body of work?  There are exceptions and this is certainly one. 

The girl was okay, but compared to Jennifer Lawrence's  amazing work in Winter's Bone she might as well have been Wednesday Adams reciting spider poetry. 

Why did the entire movie seem to me as if they were doing a parody of Raising Arizona or O Brother Where Art Thou?  The funny, clipped and affected speech added to those films.  Here it just sounded stupid.  I could have sworn I heard the girl tell Hi to "get back up there and get her a Chaney." 

I didn't hate the movie, I just didn't care.  The interaction between Mattie and the horse guy was good.  Everything else beyond that sort of sucked dusty, crusty ass. 

I didn't buy Mattie's emotional attachment to Cogburn, I didn't buy her whims of allegiance and her turnaround on LaBeef. 

Seems I heard that in the original LeBeef dies.  That would have been better. 

I don't know if the bullshoot about losing an arm, going to a traveling show and Cogburn being dead when she got there was part of the original, but the ending absolutely sucked sweaty pimple laden balls.  If that was the original ending just fudge that completely. 

I could have gone all my life without seeing this badly done film.  In fact I wish I had.  Now when I hear people talk reverently about the John Wayne masterpiece True Grit I'm going to think of this boiler pot of shoot. 

I really hope the original was better.  But now I for sure don't want to find out.

Pfffft!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 09:57:28 AM
Pfffft!

I agree with him. Remake was a total piece of shoot.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 09:59:16 AM
I was about to say that. Tim Robbins and Sean Penn have to be the absolute worst. But if they are in a good movie, I will probably watch.
Sean Penn hasn't been a good actor since playing Spicoli
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 10:01:10 AM
Sean Penn hasn't been a good actor since playing Spicoli

(http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/spicoli.jpg)

True.

But some of the movies he has been in have been 'decent'. Not much anymore however.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 10:01:48 AM
I watched it on a plane a couple of months ago.  It made me want to hit the emergency exit....While in flight.

At least it was original, I didn't mind it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 11:08:05 AM
I agree with him. Remake was a total piece of shoot.

Not as good as the original, not even close, but it had no chance to be.  Not a bad movie IMO.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 11:12:34 AM
True Grit

Preface:  Never seen, never intend to watch the original.  Blasphemous as some may think this to be, I consider John Wayne merely William Shatner in a saddle.  I don't care for his acting and never have.  So I had no baseline or comparison when it came to this remake. 

And now the review:

fudge me. 

What the hell was that?  Jeff Bridges sounded like he was trying to channel Karl Childers from Slingblade.  I kept expecting him to ask for a fudgeing mustard biscuit. 

Remember what I said about liking Matt Damon's body of work?  There are exceptions and this is certainly one. 

The girl was okay, but compared to Jennifer Lawrence's  amazing work in Winter's Bone she might as well have been Wednesday Adams reciting spider poetry. 

Why did the entire movie seem to me as if they were doing a parody of Raising Arizona or O Brother Where Art Thou?  The funny, clipped and affected speech added to those films.  Here it just sounded stupid.  I could have sworn I heard the girl tell Hi to "get back up there and get her a Chaney." 

I didn't hate the movie, I just didn't care.  The interaction between Mattie and the horse guy was good.  Everything else beyond that sort of sucked dusty, crusty ass. 

I didn't buy Mattie's emotional attachment to Cogburn, I didn't buy her whims of allegiance and her turnaround on LaBeef. 

Seems I heard that in the original LeBeef dies.  That would have been better. 

I don't know if the bullshoot about losing an arm, going to a traveling show and Cogburn being dead when she got there was part of the original, but the ending absolutely sucked sweaty pimple laden balls.  If that was the original ending just fudge that completely. 

I could have gone all my life without seeing this badly done film.  In fact I wish I had.  Now when I hear people talk reverently about the John Wayne masterpiece True Grit I'm going to think of this boiler pot of shoot. 

I really hope the original was better.  But now I for sure don't want to find out.

We finally agree on something: Wayne is an overrated hack.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 11:13:27 AM
We finally agree on something: Wayne is an overrated hack.

You shut your dirty whorish mouth.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 11:30:26 AM
We finally agree on something: Wayne is an overrated hack.

Your mouf.  It's dirty and whorish.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 02, 2011, 01:45:44 PM
We finally agree on something: Wayne is an overrated hack.

Marion Morrison was an incredible actor he just played one character, John Wayne.

I guess next your going to say that The Rock sucks.  Commie.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 04, 2011, 10:21:56 PM
Anyone see the original "Straw Dogs" from the 70's with Hoffman?

There is a remake coming out in a couple of weeks. Instead of Wales, it takes place in Southern Mississippi. Looks decent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7krZZabaC_U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7krZZabaC_U)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 05, 2011, 04:09:09 AM
Battle Los Angeles

Pleasantly surprised. 

I didn't expect much considering Independence Day and Skyline had come before it.  Pretty good movie, though.  Lots of explosions, lots of combat, no effort to use the aliens to represent some evil corporate empire or axis of evil.   

Just a straightforward documentation of one group's efforts to execute a mission and the complications that follow. 

It borrowed from Independence Day.  It borrowed from Blackhawk Down. It borrowed from We Were Soldiers. It borrowed from Alien and Predator.  But it pretty much only borrowed good parts. 

The confrontation between Staff Sgt Nantz and Lockett was a little contrived and tried to hard to be a tearful rallying point, but beyond that the performances in battle were solid throughout. 

There was no political posturing at all.  We didn't see or hear what the president or congress thought about it.  We just saw US soldiers hit the ground brawling.  That was a welcome change.

Soldiers using their own tenacity and training figured out a way to knock the invading bastards down, it didn't take some wacky, wonky scientist and his iPad to put a virus in their machine or drunk Cousin Eddie in a biplane.  Nope.  These military guys just figured out a way to kick ET ass.  I liked that.

There was a little too much "oooh RAH, we are the Auburn family and we never leave a game early marines and marines don't quit" bluster and some ham-fisted dialogue, but that's sort of expected in this kind of film.  It wasn't overbearing. 

In a way it was a lot like a first-person shooter game.  In fact if there is one I wouldn't mind trying to fight my way through LA or NY or Chicago to find the alien command center and call in an airstrike to light that bitch up.  Might be fun. 

There was no gut-wrenching drama, the directors didn't try to get us too personally involved in the outside lives of the soldiers.  We knew the basics -- enough to go "well damn" when one of them died -- but there was no huge 'let a taxi driver marry you before you go send emails to aliens' moment. 

I loved Independence Day when it first came out.  But as I look back on it, that was some cheesy silly shoot.  This movie took it more seriously and at ground level. 

As I expected, reviewers savaged this movie.  I pretty much hate all of them.  They suck. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 07, 2011, 10:28:54 AM
Insidious

Nothing new to see here.  Basically Poltergeist. Replace the creepy girl with a comatose boy, replace the creepy woman with a less creepy shrew and replace Craig T and sexy momma Jobeth with wooden Patrick Wilson and some no-tit drip and you've got Insidious. 

It went so far as to feature raw steak in a blatant nod to the vastly superior Polter.

Demons were not frightening. Lead demon was, in fact, laughably ridiculous.  It smeared lipstick on it's face to look pretty (something no one who watched the film understood without the Blu-Ray extras) and ended up looking like a drunk Darth Maul.  Idiotic and about as frightening as a meerkat. 

The story was goofy, the acting overboard.

The only startling moments in the film came when the music suddenly tamped from about a three volume to a 43.  Often there was no action to warrant the shreik. 

When a "horror" movie has to rely on a blaring soundtrack to startle it's an epic fail. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 09, 2011, 11:07:34 PM
I know K hates Will Ferrell, but I just saw Everything Must Go.

Loved it. As I've mentioned, I really like dry, dark comedies. I like when normally mainstream comedians do these types of flicks. Loved Punch Drunk Love, Dan in Real Life, etc. This was along those lines.

Ferrell did a surprisingly good job in this. Pretty big departure for him, but he pulled it off.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 14, 2011, 01:15:41 AM
Hereafter

Clint Eastwood directed and produced this film. 

I guess he's getting old and as all people who age eventually do, he's begun to contemplate his own passing.  What happens to Eastwood when the lights go out?  Is there something after death?

This meandering morose trip into nothing will have you wishing for death.  It's long, tedious and just flat out boring. 

Matt Damon (been on an accidental Damon kick it seems) is as completely dull as you could ever hope to make him.  The dead twins are lifeless (get it?  haha).  The French author is a snoozer. 

There's just nothing here. 

I kept waiting for the big denoument, for the moment that tied the disparate and disjointed stories together but it never delivered. 

Eastwood and Damon have done some great work separately.  This isn't one either will be remembered for.  If Clint was aiming to cement his legacy as a filmmaker he shouldn't have dished up this warmed over oatmeal mush. 

Boo.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 14, 2011, 09:51:47 AM
Battle Los Angeles

Pleasantly surprised. 

About how I felt.  Only thing I didn't like was at the ending, when the Marines didn't want to eat.  I've never known Marines to turn down chow.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 14, 2011, 10:05:25 AM
About how I felt.  Only thing I didn't like was at the ending, when the Marines didn't want to eat.  I've never known Marines to turn down chow.

Yeah.  Calling bullshoot on that one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 15, 2011, 12:39:06 AM
127 Hours

Wanted to like it.  Didn't. 

Not a James Franco fan and he was barely adequate here.  Too much mugging. 

The music was absolutely horrific.  Completely inappropriate for the scenes and jarring.  Nails on a chalkboard bad.  The music would have ruined the movie on its own had the rest not fallen so flat on the promise. 

What happened to the two splash chicks?  Why have them in there at all if they played no part in the end?

Clemence Poesy (who I loved in In Bruges) was good but wasted. 

And the bullshoot at the end about a "premonition?"  Kiss my premonited ass. 

Great story poorly done. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2011, 01:51:49 AM
Contagion

Hang on, let me go wash my hands before I start this. 

Okay, a slow-moving and not quite satisfying tale of the life cycle of an epidemic. 

Hang on, need to go wash my hands again. 

Pretty well told in terms of what might be happening day to day, but some question marks remain.  If there was widespread panic who was keeping the power on and the cell phones running?  Who was paying the bill for months?

Give me a second, I'm going to wash my hands.  And stay away from me, okay?   I'm taking my own plastic forks to restaurants and I'll be bringing my own sterilized glass.  Don't pour me anything unless it comes directly from a bottle.  In fact, don't pour me anything at all.  And don't touch my credit card.  Or anything on my table.  No, I don't want to use your pen.  Quit breathing air around me. 

Viruses suck.  I don't want them.  If you've been to Hong Kong stay the fudge away from me.   
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2011, 02:04:17 AM
Just Go With It

Why the fudge does Adam Sandler think he needs to star in his own movies?  Put almost anybody else in his role and you've got a pretty decent little movie.  But him? 

Let's list the things that didn't work:

1) Not buying for a second that he was a plastic surgeon. 
2) The chance of there being any attraction from Brooklyn Decker toward his peanut head ass is roughly negative infinity.  It wasn't realistic.  This continues a pattern where he pairs himself with people in movies he could never hope to sniff in real life: Kate Beckinsale, Salma Hayek, Teresa Palmer, Jessica Biel, Paz Vega, Drew Barrymore, Winona Ryder, Fairuza Balk, Julie Bowen, Bridgette Wilson, etc.  Not happening. 
3) Not buying the attraction between him and Jennifer Aniston. At all.
4) And he's dropping $18k a day for suites in Hawaii?  Yeah.  That's happening. 
5) Any scene he was in.  He fudgeing sucks. 

Aniston, however, looked pretty awesome.  Much better than she did in Horrible Bosses.  Probably one of her better roles. 

The boy child was good.  The girl child needed to be punched in the gullet. 

Brooklyn D -- meh.  Not hot enough to overcome her wooden acting. 

The schlump playing his friend?  fudge that assbag.  I'd almost rather Jonah Hill have played that role and I hate me some Jonah Hill. 

Could have been a cute movie.  In Sandler's untalented hands it just fizzled out and went flat. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 17, 2011, 10:00:31 PM
The Lion King: 3D

The 3D gimmick adds nothing to the movie other than some ViewMaster-ish depth.

No matter, it was a great experience to see this film in theaters again after 17 years.  If the only place your kids have seen this film is on DVD, it's worth the trip to see it again in all its glory. 

One of the best films I've ever seen.  The opening sequence is straight up magic. 

Long live the King. 

Fantastic movie.  Absolutely fantastic. (And I'd say that even if I didn't have kids to take).

I wish Disney would slow-release all of its classics from Jungle Book to Mulan to Pocahantas to Beauty and the Beast again in theaters.  I'd love to see them all again on the big screen. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 18, 2011, 01:14:23 AM
Drive Angry

So wanted to loathe this movie.  Assumed it was a Fast and Furious  type load of testosterone with a brain-dead script and a plethora of clumsily delivered lines.  Plus it had Nicholas Cage, one of the worst actors in American history. 

Oddly enough I didn't hate it.  This is the kind of garbage Cage should do exclusively.  He was terrible but it didn't really matter. 

Basically a revenge story with some odd twists, it wasn't all that bad.  Some silly plot contrivances and the obligatory ham-fisted dialogue, but not so much that it destroyed the movie. 

If the director had used a little of Tarantino's visual style it would have fit in nicely with the Grindhouse/Machete series. 

It was at least as good as Machete and IMO, better than the Grindhouse with Kurt Russell.

On top of that, Amber Heard was so astonishingly, jaw-droppingly, mind-fudgeingly hot that she transcended any flaws the film might have, including her here-and-gone accent. 

It didn't try to pretend to be something it wasn't, it just chewed scenery from start to finish while loading up a steady dose of rock and roll riffs.

The closing song "Alive" sounds a bit like Meatloaf (it isn't) and was written by Desmond Child.  Interesting guy, Desmond.  He collaborated with Paul Stanley to do "I Was Made for Loving You" "X In Sex" and "Heaven's On Fire" (among others) and worked with Bon Jovi to write "You Give Love a Bad Name" and "Livin' On a Prayer."   He also worked with Aerosmith, Meatloaf and Alice Cooper.  He wrote Ricky Martin's two biggest songs "La Vida Loca" and "She Bangs."  Recently wrote Katy Perry's "Vegas" song.  Just an aside that means nothing. 

Wanted to hate the movie.  Was fully prepared to hate it.  And didn't. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 18, 2011, 01:18:13 AM
Wanted to hate the movie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4TLiiY5VCE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4TLiiY5VCE)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 19, 2011, 01:26:52 PM
I thought Just Go With It was funny as hell.  Look, you know going in that it's Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston.  Why expect Charlton Heston and Audrey Hepburn? It's just the usual stream of predicatble one liners and snappy comebacks.  I thought they did a good job with this one and the theater was rolling throughout.

Spy Kids 4 on the other hand....Had to take one for the team yesterday and take mini.  Holy schnitzkies, worst kids movie I believe I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 19, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
I thought Just Go With It was funny as hell.  Look, you know going in that it's Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston.  Why expect Charlton Heston and Audrey Hepburn? It's just the usual stream of predicatble one liners and snappy comebacks.  I thought they did a good job with this one and the theater was rolling throughout.

You just like it cause you want to put it in her butt.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 19, 2011, 01:55:03 PM
You just like it cause you want to put it in her butt.

Nice catch, Captain Obvious
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 21, 2011, 12:26:40 AM
Post Grad

Alexis Bledel, Carol Burnett, Michael Keaton, Jane Lynch, J.K. Simmons (in a throwaway role), Fred Armisen (in essentially a cameo) and Craig Robinson (Darryl from The Office in another cameo basically). 

Girl graduates from college with big dreams, has trouble finding a job, ends up back with her nutty family where she discovers who she is and what's important to her. 

Netflix delivered this although it wasn't in my queue.  Thanks Netflix, I guess now that you're in your anaconda death throes you'll start fudgeing things up. 

Quirky movie held back by a frustrating mix of over the top hamming it up (Keaton and Burnett) and stiffly wooden, emotionless portrayals (Alexis and her wanna-be-beau Zach Gilford). 

Burnett's surgically altered face was a distraction.  She's fudgeing gross. 

Keaton, who was once a promising actor, just channeled a combination of Beetlejuice and Lindsay Lohan's dad from the Herbie movie.   

Lynch looks like a big bull dyke lesbian so the effort to pass her off as Keaton's wife interest was flatter than a flitter.

The story itself was okay, but it tried to meld too many movies all at once.  If it had focused on the retardo kid and his relationship to Keaton's character, fine.  If it had focused on Burnett's preoccupation with death, good. If it had developed a triangle between Alexis, Gilford and Mr. Brazil next door, cool.  If it had confined itself to her struggle to find her identity while searching for a job, awesome.  If it had decided to be a comedy, great. If it chose to tell a dramatic story of personal discovery, I'm there.  If it wanted to trifle with romance, I could deal.  But to try to horn all of that (and then some) into the same film?

It ended up doing none of it very well.  Too much of it was left partially baked and a lot wasn't cooked at all. 

If this film is Alexis Bledel's resume, she may get that job search experience she pretended to get here.  She's cute, but there are a ton of cute girls out there and a lot of them can act, too. 

I kept watching Alexis and wishing hard for Emma Stone, ya know?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 21, 2011, 04:27:30 PM
Anyone see the original "Straw Dogs" from the 70's with Hoffman?

There is a remake coming out in a couple of weeks. Instead of Wales, it takes place in Southern Mississippi. Looks decent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7krZZabaC_U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7krZZabaC_U)
Im hearing from most that this movie blows donkey bollocks.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 12:32:32 AM
Morning Glory

Rachel McAdams at the height of her earnest can-do bubbliness as the producer of a failing morning show. 

Heavy hitting supporting cast including Harrison Ford, Harrison Ford's socks, Diane Keaton, Jeff Goldblum, Patrick Wilson and John Pankow.

This is another of the new Netflix "oops" deliveries as it wasn't in my queue but appeared in the mailbox.  So I watched it anyway. 

Glad I did. 

Wasn't the best movie ever, but was oddly endearing.  So much better than the trite schlock of PostGrad.  At times McAdams was a little too gamin grin and Ford sometimes struggled to provide the right gravitas to the washed up news anchor role he pulled, but overall the tone and balance was pretty good.  I believed McAdams in the role and enjoyed her cuteness.

Story meandered to a predictable conclusion, but it wasn't a painful ride to get there.

And a few of the scenes with the weatherman made me laugh.  That's a plus.

I wonder sometimes why movies like this that aren't terrible just sort of disappear while other craptacular films get more attention.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 09:07:18 AM
Morning Glory

Rachel McAdams at the height of her earnest can-do bubbliness as the producer of a failing morning show. 

Heavy hitting supporting cast including Harrison Ford, Harrison Ford's socks, Diane Keaton, Jeff Goldblum, Patrick Wilson and John Pankow.

This is another of the new Netflix "oops" deliveries as it wasn't in my queue but appeared in the mailbox.  So I watched it anyway. 

Glad I did. 

Wasn't the best movie ever, but was oddly endearing.  So much better than the trite schlock of PostGrad.  At times McAdams was a little too gamin grin and Ford sometimes struggled to provide the right gravitas to the washed up news anchor role he pulled, but overall the tone and balance was pretty good.  I believed McAdams in the role and enjoyed her cuteness.

Story meandered to a predictable conclusion, but it wasn't a painful ride to get there.

And a few of the scenes with the weatherman made me laugh.  That's a plus.

I wonder sometimes why movies like this that aren't terrible just sort of disappear while other craptacular films get more attention.

She is super hot. That is all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 10:00:48 AM
She is super hot. That is all.

Gotta disagree.  She's more elfish cute.  Her eyes are too far apart and her mouth has a sharkish quality. 

Another one you guys harp on is Sandra Bullock.  I saw about 15 minutes of All About Steve.  The movie was so fudgeing horrendously shootty I turned it off and tried to sear it from my memory.  Beyond that, she was frighteningly heinously ugly in the film. 

Look at this surgically-butchered shoot:

(http://pophangover.com/images/sandra-bullock-face-5.jpg)
(http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/sandra-bullock.jpg)

She looks like Michael Jackson after fighting a UFC match.  She's fudgeing hideous.   I would not touch this hag with Joan Rivers' richard. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 10:25:50 AM
I wonder sometimes why movies like this that aren't terrible just sort of disappear while other craptacular films get more attention.

Because the world is full of stupid people.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 10:54:32 AM
Gotta disagree.  She's more elfish cute.  Her eyes are too far apart and her mouth has a sharkish quality. 

 

You are one choosy begger.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 11:31:04 AM
Because the world is full of stupid people.

Meet me at the mission at midnight, we'll divvy up there.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 11:32:02 AM
Meet me at the mission at midnight, we'll divvy up there.

I've got the pistol, so I get the pecos
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 11:36:32 AM
I've got the pistol, so I get the pecos

That seems fair.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 11:43:47 AM
That seems fair.

It's so refreshing to see these movie reviews
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 12:05:40 PM
Meet me at the mission at midnight, we'll divvy up there.

I've got the pistol, so I get the pecos

You boys are scoring some big points with these posts.  I'm a Roger Clyne junkie.

Did you watch the Turbo Ocho DVD?  Awesomeness from start to finish.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 23, 2011, 07:44:16 PM
You are one choosy begger.

I choose not to beg.  Difference. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 24, 2011, 03:16:40 AM
Get Him To The Greek

I expected a festering turd.  I got a turd but it didn't fester. 

Jonah Hill wasn't quite as loathsome as he has been in other roles, but I still hated his ass.  Movie would have been so much better without that lousy fudge in it. 

I really wish Judd Apatow would try just a little to reach for some quality humor because on the rare occasions he wipes the shoot from his mouth you see glimmers of hope that he might actually use whatever gift he has.  And then he dives right back into the very bottom of the cesspool. 

The guy isn't a visionary. He's not a great comedic director.  He doesn't get subtlety, he fails at situational comedy, he can't get his head out of the toilet long enough to develop honest characters and give them emotional responses that could lead to humor.  Face it. Apatow movies, by and large, suck complete and total ass.  He uses a rubber mallet when a finishing hammer would serve better. It's like he only knows one volume and he keeps it turned to braying jackass stupidity 24/7.

I hate Jonah Hill. That miserable bastard made this movie almost unwatchable and that's sad because almost everybody else was passable.  Brand played himself, so that was easy.  The girlfriend had to dig deep into her actress training and pretend to be attracted to that filthy Hill son of a bitch, so she should get an Oscar or two for that.  Puff, P-, Diddly, Dirty D or whatever the fudge he calls himself these days was adequate in his role and had a few funny lines. 

The neat resolution of the relationship between the disgusting Hill and the slightly cavewoman girlfriend was asinine and was clearly written with no women in the room.  You ass dial your girlfriend four times while you're fudgeing/about to fudge/attempting to fudge/stoned and high in a week?  She's not going to let your diseased and drugged out friend go down on her for kicks and then let that all be a wash.  fudge no.  That shoot is OVER, brother.  If you do get back in that house you have no hand whatsoever and you do whatever the fudge she says whenever the fudge she says it.  You never, ever, ever, ever live that down.  Ever.  And you don't bury the hatchet with the dude who suggested the menage the same day, either.  Nope.  That shoot will be indelibly burned into your mind and will destroy the friendship and the romance.  Done.  Toast.  fudge all ya'll. 

I expected to hate this film with a roaring, flaming, burning intensity.  That I didn't hate all of it is a mild victory, I suppose.  I've seen worse. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on September 26, 2011, 10:57:27 PM
Hachi: A Dog's Tale

Richard Gere, Joan Allen and George Costanza in a sweet and touching movie about a dog who understood the meaning of "All In." 

If you don't feel a little something when Joan sees the dog after an extended absence, you don't like dogs or you aren't human. 

Not a cinematic masterpiece by any stretch, but a very solid depiction of a small New England town that became a community home for loyal Hachi.  Did a good job of capturing the daily walk in the small town (I think it was supposed to be in Rhode Island, I've been to some of the places were it was shot) and gently and believably laid out the steadily growing bond between Hachi and Gere. 

I don't understand why Joan had to move, but that was the only thing that made no sense to me.  Why move?  What was the point of that?

I also don't understand why a beautifully shot and well framed story like this, one that has a relatively broad appeal just gets shoot on by Sony. 

It never got a theatrical release in the US (made $45 million overseas) and wasn't promoted at all.

Meanwhile, utter donkey shoot like "Smurfs" which has no socially redeeming value gets a massive marketing push and pulls in $500 million.  fudge a smurf. 

 I wonder if the name of the film wasn't problematic in itself.  I resisted watching it because "A Dog's Tale" didn't interest me all that much.  My mistake.

Also a little disappointed to discover that while Hachi was real, he lived in Japan.  Before WWII. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 03:13:19 AM
Thor

Thud. 

At least it had Kat Dennings, who I find delectable.  Too bad she spend the entire movie swaddled in layers of clothes and a goofy toboggan. 

Everything that makes Iron Man cool and suave and funny and enjoyable was missing in this film. 

Big cast. Wasted most of it.  Renee Russo: Wasted.  Bootstrap Bill: Wasted. Idris Elba: Wasted.

Where was Nick Fury? 

I think I'll pass when they finally start linking all these movies up like comics.  And I'll pass on the Justice League, too, if it ever gets that far.  Given the turd laid by Green Lantern, I hope that project is on hold now.

Heath Ledger as Joker was outstanding casting and a picture perfect portrayal in the Dark Knight. Brilliant take on the character. Too bad it almost got lost amidst the meandering story lines. DK got bogged down in too many side stories, an ugly, fugly, nasty ass Rachel (Maggie Uglyhaul) and a less than capable Harvey Dent (Aaron Suckhard).  It tried to be too many things.  Should have just been Joker and Bruce, mano y psycho.   fudge, I'd have been happy to watch a Joker movie without even Batman to clean it up. 

Thor didn't really try to be anything.  Felt like a backstory with some silly extraneous shoot tacked on. 

IDGAF about the bridges and rainbow walkers and ice cream castles.   Too much musing, not enough Thoring. 

Another dud in the Marvel line. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 02:15:40 PM
Thor

Thud. 

At least it had Kat Dennings, who I find delectable.  Too bad she spend the entire movie swaddled in layers of clothes and a goofy toboggan. 

Everything that makes Iron Man cool and suave and funny and enjoyable was missing in this film. 

Big cast. Wasted most of it.  Renee Russo: Wasted.  Bootstrap Bill: Wasted. Idris Elba: Wasted.

Where was Nick Fury? 

I think I'll pass when they finally start linking all these movies up like comics.  And I'll pass on the Justice League, too, if it ever gets that far.  Given the turd laid by Green Lantern, I hope that project is on hold now.

Heath Ledger as Joker was outstanding casting and a picture perfect portrayal in the Dark Knight. Brilliant take on the character. Too bad it almost got lost amidst the meandering story lines. DK got bogged down in too many side stories, an ugly, fugly, nasty ass Rachel (Maggie Uglyhaul) and a less than capable Harvey Dent (Aaron Suckhard).  It tried to be too many things.  Should have just been Joker and Bruce, mano y psycho.   fudge, I'd have been happy to watch a Joker movie without even Batman to clean it up. 

Thor didn't really try to be anything.  Felt like a backstory with some silly extraneous shoot tacked on. 

IDGAF about the bridges and rainbow walkers and ice cream castles.   Too much musing, not enough Thoring. 

Another dud in the Marvel line.

100% agree!  I never was a comic fan, and don't know what I was expecting when I went to see it, but got exactly what you described and it sucked.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 02:35:22 PM
100% agree!  I never was a comic fan, and don't know what I was expecting when I went to see it, but got exactly what you described and it sucked.

I was a huge Marvel fan growing up with DC close behind.  Only a few movies have really captured the spirit of what the particular comic or character was.  Spiderman was spot on.  Followed the original story lines, kept the characters in tact and didn't try to go over the top to make it something it wasn't.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 02:45:14 PM
I was a huge Marvel fan growing up with DC close behind.  Only a few movies have really captured the spirit of what the particular comic or character was.  Spiderman was spot on.  Followed the original story lines, kept the characters in tact and didn't try to go over the top to make it something it wasn't.


You need to review this thread.  Kaos cannot do Spiderman because Kirsten Dunst
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 02:54:18 PM

You need to review this thread.  Kaos cannot do Spiderman because Kirsten Dunst

I would have nailed that....more than once.  Not much of a Toby McGuire fan but if you grew up reading Spidey comics, he was the perfect fit.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 03:30:29 PM
I would have nailed that....more than once.  Not much of a Toby McGuire fan but if you grew up reading Spidey comics, he was the perfect fit.

As I recall her face was too round or some such nonsense. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 03:33:03 PM
As I recall her face was too round or some such nonsense.

I just googled her and now I need a cigarette
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 04:20:34 PM
I was a huge Marvel fan growing up with DC close behind.  Only a few movies have really captured the spirit of what the particular comic or character was.  Spiderman was spot on.  Followed the original story lines, kept the characters in tact and didn't try to go over the top to make it something it wasn't.

Dafoe?  Perfect casting. 

Toby?  Peter Parker is not a peter puffer.  He sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked. 

And that punchy faced Dunst chick?  B-leh.  bluarf.  Worst. Mary. Jane. Ever.

MJ is supposed to be curvy, sexy and red-headed. 

(http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kze7yqsNVw1qzu26wo1_500.png)

She's not supposed to look like an anorexic pan-faced putz. 

(http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/gallery/celebbookclub/kirsten_dunst300.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 04:28:50 PM
Has anyone did a review of Kaos' Reviews?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 04:33:12 PM
Has anyone did a review of Kaos' Reviews?

Most movies suck.

A few don't.

"Simmons Family Jewels" should splice together season one for theatrical release.  It would win an Oscar.

I just summarized 41 pages of posts.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 04:34:51 PM
Most movies suck.

A few don't.

"Simmons Family Jewels" should splice together season one for theatrical release.  It would win an Oscar.

I just summarized 41 pages of posts.

Kaos got wood on your third sentence. He thanks you.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 04, 2011, 04:58:40 PM
Most movies suck.

A few don't.

"Simmons Family Jewels" should splice together season one for theatrical release.  It would win an Oscar.

I just summarized 41 pages of posts.

Reality TV, including Family Jewels, as a rule sucks. 

The only television series I can think of off the top of my head that would benefit from a movie treatment are:

The Sopranos
Dexter
Dead Like Me
Walking Dead
La Femme Nikita (the Peta Wilson version)
Oz


Each of those series should essentially "start over" and tell a different story than TV, though.  Sopranos, for instance, I always thought could pick a spot somewhere in Season Four or Five -- bring back Adriana -- and just tell a story from that season.  Wouldn't have to tie all the arcs together like the series did. 

My movie reviews are gold.  Most movies DO suck.   Great films are rare. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2011, 10:17:46 AM
Reality TV, including Family Jewels, as a rule sucks. 

The only television series I can think of off the top of my head that would benefit from a movie treatment are:

The Sopranos
Dexter
Dead Like Me
Walking Dead
La Femme Nikita (the Peta Wilson version)
Oz


Each of those series should essentially "start over" and tell a different story than TV, though.  Sopranos, for instance, I always thought could pick a spot somewhere in Season Four or Five -- bring back Adriana -- and just tell a story from that season.  Wouldn't have to tie all the arcs together like the series did. 

My movie reviews are gold.  Most movies DO suck.   Great films are rare.

Been so long now I forgot specifics, but they left several story lines hanging in the Sopranos that could be a movie unto themselves.   I fudgeing hate the way HBO fudgeed that series up with odd seasons starts, and long layoffs.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2011, 01:36:10 PM
I fudgeing hate the way HBO fudgeed that series up with odd seasons starts, and long layoffs.

K might know, but I have no idea why Chase and HBO did that.  Maybe had something to do with filming, contracts, etc. I think the series would have went on another season or two if not for Gandolfini wanting to leave and try other things. He was getting mucho bucks per episode. I think the most ever until Sheen broke his record a couple of years back. The long layoffs made the characters age more (especially the kids) than they really did in the storylines.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
K might know, but I have no idea why Chase and HBO did that.  Maybe had something to do with filming, contracts, etc. I think the series would have went on another season or two if not for Gandolfini wanting to leave and try other things. He was getting mucho bucks per episode. I think the most ever until Sheen broke his record a couple of years back. The long layoffs made the characters age more (especially the kids) than they really did in the storylines.

Back in 2003 Gandolfini sued HBO because he thought he was underpaid and used a loophole in his contract to say the network neglected to inform him in a timely manner that he was expected back for the fifth season (one of the best, actually). 

He was making $5 million.  Wanted $16.  Not sure what they settled on. 

This came after he asked for and got permission to delay the fifth season (and I think one other) so he could work on some really shootty movies that nobody remembers. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 05, 2011, 01:52:39 PM
Back in 2003 Gandolfini sued HBO because he thought he was underpaid and used a loophole in his contract to say the network neglected to inform him in a timely manner that he was expected back for the fifth season (one of the best, actually). 

He was making $5 million.  Wanted $16.  Not sure what they settled on. 

This came after he asked for and got permission to delay the fifth season (and I think one other) so he could work on some really shootty movies that nobody remembers.
He's done some USO project for HBO as well. Although I find it admirable he did that, to have his mind on that looking forward post Sopranos during the peak of one of the best shows in history and to know that's where his mind was during Season 5 and 6 - IS beyond me. Careerwise - not a good move IMHO. Andy Griffith, Seinfeld, MASH, Friends, Lucy, Cheers - when your show that you are the star of is already being mentioned with these shows, and all you have on your mind is doing a 2nd rate USO documentary and trying to wrap up the show so you can get to this project - I have to question what the hell you are thinking.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 10:22:39 AM
Resident Evil: Afterlife

New record. 

Turned this gob of shoot off 11 minutes after it started. 

That is all.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 10:27:38 AM
Resident Evil: Afterlife

New record. 

Turned this gob of shoot off 11 minutes after it started. 

That is all.

I always wanted to do naughty things to Milla Jovovich's pink parts.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 10:52:55 AM
And I've always had a throb for Ali Larter. 

Didn't save this gabage.  Just a shootty movie.  Everything about it piss poorly done. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 10:58:08 AM
And I've always had a throb for Ali Larter. 

Mostly because of this:

(http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn16/wesf9977/ali06.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 12:01:13 PM
As it happens I didn't see that movie right away.  I saw her first getting ramrodded from behind in a movie called Three Way. What hooked me with Ali was her Maxim spread.

It included this photo:

(http://www.ratewall.com/cpics/fb36380d-d09e-463f-bde3-c67e43eb5b49_Ali%20Larter.jpg)

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 06, 2011, 12:15:22 PM
As it happens I didn't see that movie right away.  I saw her first getting ramrodded from behind in a movie called Three Way. What hooked me with Ali was her Maxim spread.

It included this photo:

(http://www.ratewall.com/cpics/fb36380d-d09e-463f-bde3-c67e43eb5b49_Ali%20Larter.jpg)

I think I just skajizzled my Jockeys
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 19, 2011, 01:08:59 AM
Everything Must Go

Will Ferrell in a serious role. 

Watched this on the recommendation of another poster here. 

When it was over I didn't know whether I should review and comment or commit suicide.  It was a difficult decision. 

Should have known when there were 15 minutes of previews and every single one was for an incredibly shootty movie that what was to come would be more of the same. 

Like how most of Ferrell's comedic efforts are nowhere near as funny as he thinks they are, this dramatic effort was nowhere near as poignant as he obviously thought it was.  It wasn't "worst movie ever" realm -- we'll save that for Blades of Glory -- but it was incredibly slow and lame.  Nuance my ass. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 03:07:34 AM
Middle Men

All Wilsons suck, but this one sucks less than the others.  Don't know his name, don't care. 

Pretty good story and told pretty well.  It had a little Blow, it had a little Goodfellas, it had a touch of Boogie Nights. 

The IBill story is very interesting from the geek perspective.  All of us keep hoping we'll stumble on that simple idea that will make us shootloads of cash.  Watching two immature idiots do it is, at the least, entertaining. 

The fact that I know at least peripherally one of the key players loosely portrayed in the film added to it for me.  That knowledge also clued me in to the ridiculous liberties "inspired by a true story" allows.  About 2/3 of the shoot didn't happen that way and the other 1/3 was fabricated.

As a film, it could have used just a little more character development so you could get a better sense of the emotional struggle the Owen guy endured.  Should have probably done a better job of showing how his lines slowly grayed as opposed to some of the leaps he made. 

As I've watched some acquaintances and former associates go down the path that leads to unsavory ends, it's never the big decisions they make that lead to enforcement agents knocking at the door, it's always the cumulative effect of the smaller ones. 

Not for everyone, but I enjoyed the movie a good bit. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 03:18:04 AM
Hanna

Weird ass white girl (seriously white) who has lovely bones kicks people's asses in freaky locales, makes out with a 12-year old girl and guts an elk or a reindeer (or some shoot).  She's fascinated with a light switch because she's never seen electricity, but can jump on a computer and master teh Googles in 15 seconds well enough to dig into super secret government projects.  She doesn't know what a coffee maker is, but knows how to reconfigure a car. She's terrified of a hotel shower but has no trouble navigating mass transit in a busy metro area. 

Eric Bana makes faces and butchers another accent.  He's John Travolta bad.   

Some crazy white bitch with red hair brushes her teeth until they bleed.

Mr. Grimm has a fairytale house. 

"Dad" sends her off on a solo cross-country journey but they're supposed to meet up at some random locale.

Crazy CIA bitch caps people's asses left and right and there are no repercussions.

Lord Cutler Beckett from Pirates of the Caribbean shows up in the gayest tennis outfit known to man. 

fudgeing weird movie with a fudgeed up Chemical Brothers backbeat and some odd framing. 

Not sure what I expected, but I expected much more than this.   I didn't hate it, but I could have gone my whole life without watching it and been ok-fine.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 08:48:20 AM
Is it me, or have most of the reviews of recent movies been well-deserved harsh criticisms? 

I've got this theory that 99% of the movies being released over the past decade have been absolute shoot. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 08:58:20 AM
Is it me, or have most of the reviews of recent movies been well-deserved harsh criticisms? 

I've got this theory that 99% of the movies being released over the past decade have been absolute shoot.

When it comes to movies, I'm pretty hard to please. 

I want a coherent storyline that doesn't contain ridiculous gaps, illogical leaps, improbable/impossible coincidences and dangling plot points. 

I want actors that engage me and make me forget they are acting (See Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone, what a damn fine performance THAT was). 

I want time and attention paid to the set.  I want creativity. 

I want smart storytelling, clever dialogue.  I want to be surprised. 

In the absence of that, I want to be ENTERTAINED (See Transformers). 

I can like any style of movie, but it has to at least try.  Most movies today don't.  When Judd Apatow is hailed as a creative/comedic genius we are in a world of shoot.   The worst Cheech and Chong movie is more clever and creative than anything the Apatow line has shat out. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 10:19:19 AM
Night before last, I watched 6th Sense again.  I'm sure some thought it was lame, but for me, it was the last time I walked out of a theater and couldn't stop talking about what I just saw.  One of those movies where the ending makes every scene you thought meant one thing, suddenly becomes part of a totally different storyline.  All the way home, we're going, "Oh yeah, and remember the scene where he meets his wife for dinner and she gets up and walks out?"  "But what about when...?"
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 11:00:32 AM
Kaos, I'm too lazy to go back in this thread to find out for myself.  Have you reviewed the paranormal activities films?  I know they are fake, but I really like them and can't wait to watch the next one.  MmmK thanks.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 11:11:17 AM
Kaos, I'm too lazy to go back in this thread to find out for myself.  Have you reviewed the paranormal activities films?  I know they are fake, but I really like them and can't wait to watch the next one.  MmmK thanks.

Not sure if reviewed.  I watched the first one.   

I thought the build ups were great.  They did a good job of drawing out the tension. 

But I was underwhelmed with the end reveals.   

I remember watching The Entity back in the 80s (Barbara Hershey's boobs squeezed by an invisible force).  It was the same kind of thing but a little better.  It also channeled Blair Witch a bit and I wasn't a huge Blair Witch fan. 

They're okay, but derivative. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 11:13:25 AM
Not sure if reviewed.  I watched the first one.   

I thought the build ups were great.  They did a good job of drawing out the tension. 

But I was underwhelmed with the end reveals.   

I remember watching The Entity back in the 80s (Barbara Hershey's boobs squeezed by an invisible force).  It was the same kind of thing but a little better.  It also channeled Blair Witch a bit and I wasn't a huge Blair Witch fan. 

They're okay, but derivative.

Thanks.  And I only watched about 30 minutes of Blair Witch and turned it off.  That shaky camera shoot just didn't do it for me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 02:05:00 PM
Not sure if reviewed.  I watched the first one.   

I thought the build ups were great.  They did a good job of drawing out the tension. 

But I was underwhelmed with the end reveals.   

I remember watching The Entity back in the 80s (Barbara Hershey's boobs squeezed by an invisible force).  It was the same kind of thing but a little better.  It also channeled Blair Witch a bit and I wasn't a huge Blair Witch fan. 

They're okay, but derivative.

Didn't think they were all that great but I thought it was different and creative. They are laughing all the way to the bank as are the Napoleon Dynamite makers. None of those movies cost anything make. Very smart business people if nothing else.

ssg - have you seen both 1 and 2? It seems that 2 shows the buildup to where 1 begins. Kind of interesting. Although I thought 2 had scarier moments in general, the last 10 mins of 1 could make someone shoot their pants.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 02:18:28 PM
Didn't think they were all that great but I thought it was different and creative. They are laughing all the way to the bank as are the Napoleon Dynamite makers. None of those movies cost anything make. Very smart business people if nothing else.

ssg - have you seen both 1 and 2? It seems that 2 shows the buildup to where 1 begins. Kind of interesting. Although I thought 2 had scarier moments in general, the last 10 mins of 1 could make someone shoot their pants.

Yes I've seen them both.  2 did have its moments but like you said, the end of 1 was great.  I guess the reason I like them is because they are different than the normal scary movie type of crap.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 02:19:44 PM
Yes I've seen them both.  2 did have its moments but like you said, the end of 1 was great.  I guess the reason I like them is because they are different than the normal scary movie type of crap.

Its the angle of them being "real" like Blair Witch.

And yeah, they are fake as hell. But clever. The new one comes out soon I believe.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 02:25:14 PM
Its the angle of them being "real" like Blair Witch.

And yeah, they are fake as hell. But clever. The new one comes out soon I believe.

I think it's the fact that you are sitting there just trying to find the smallest thing happening and then, BOOM all the fudgeing cabinet doors open and slam shut.

Yes I've seen the trailer for #3 and can't wait to get it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 02:52:45 PM
I think it's the fact that you are sitting there just trying to find the smallest thing happening and then, BOOM all the fudgeing cabinet doors open and slam shut.

Yes I've seen the trailer for #3 and can't wait to get it.

Just looked in the Columbus (GA) paper. It opens tonight.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 07:23:49 PM
When it comes to movies, I'm pretty hard to please. 

I want a coherent storyline that doesn't contain ridiculous gaps, illogical leaps, improbable/impossible coincidences and dangling plot points. 

I want actors that engage me and make me forget they are acting (See Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone, what a damn fine performance THAT was). 

I want time and attention paid to the set.  I want creativity. 

I want smart storytelling, clever dialogue.  I want to be surprised. 

In the absence of that, I want to be ENTERTAINED (See Transformers). 

I can like any style of movie, but it has to at least try.  Most movies today don't.  When Judd Apatow is hailed as a creative/comedic genius we are in a world of shootake.   The worst Cheech and Chong movie is more clever and creative than anything the Apatow line has shat out.

You want Batman XXX or Pirates...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 21, 2011, 08:50:05 PM
Is it me, or have most of the reviews of recent movies been well-deserved harsh criticisms? 

I've got this theory that 99% of the movies being released over the past decade have been absolute shoot.
The same could be said for TV nowadays as well. I mean, I'm only 28, and I think TV sucks. A few weeks ago my wife and I were discussing how movies and TV have both gone to shoot, really. Pretty much the only shows my wife and I watch are Hell's Kitchen, Kitchen Nightmares, Storage Wars, Glee, Boardwalk Empire, True Blood, and America's Funniest Home Videos (some for us, some for the kids). We have sort of gotten into X-Factor recently. I don't like American Idol, but I think X-Factor is OK so far. So You Think You Can Dance is pretty good too.

The sitcoms, and TV in general just aren't the same as they used to be. I think movies are getting worse and worse due to the need to just pop one out every so often. Good ones are just fewer and farther between. And there doesn't seem to be a middle of the road anymore, either. They are either good, or a total dud.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 05:07:15 AM
The same could be said for TV nowadays as well. I mean, I'm only 28, and I think TV sucks. A few weeks ago my wife and I were discussing how movies and TV have both gone to shoot, really. Pretty much the only shows my wife and I watch are Hell's Kitchen, Kitchen Nightmares, Storage Wars, Glee, Boardwalk Empire, True Blood, and America's Funniest Home Videos (some for us, some for the kids). We have sort of gotten into X-Factor recently. I don't like American Idol, but I think X-Factor is OK so far. So You Think You Can Dance is pretty good too.

The sitcoms, and TV in general just aren't the same as they used to be. I think movies are getting worse and worse due to the need to just pop one out every so often. Good ones are just fewer and farther between. And there doesn't seem to be a middle of the road anymore, either. They are either good, or a total dud.

Good TV: The ones that properly "retool" Ricky and Lucy, and All in the Family, plus the rare one that does something a little fresh in a good way.

Bad TV: The ones that improperly "retool" Ricky and Lucy, and All in the Family, plus the plethora that attempt something fresh and fail miserably. 

Movies: almost same same, but there's a little bit more freedom on the big screen to do something unique, but few have the balls and talent to do it. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 09:56:17 AM
I think family comedies can still thrive.  Take Modern Family for example. 

I haven't seen Tim Allen's new show, but I have high hopes.  What seems to be missing is diversity when it comes to family shows. 

In the prime of family TV shows (my childhood of course), you had Home Improvement, Everybody Loves Raymond, The Cosby Show, Fresh Prince, Full House, Married with Children, Malcolm in the Middle (late childhood), Roseanne, and Family Matters.

Each one of those shows brought a unique perspective of family life with its own style of comedy. 

The family show has been replaced with a bunch of extended Saturday Night Live skits that feature late 20s/early 30s single people. 

Not that those shows are inherently bad.  A few are great. 

But comedy is mostly dead on TV. 

Luckily, a few stations like AMC have had the audacity to put HBO-level shows on TV.  Breaking Bad, The Walking Dead, and Mad Men have all flourished on cable. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 10:39:53 AM
Pretty much the only shows my wife and I watch are

Hell's Kitchen Reality show bullshoot.  Garbage.

Kitchen Nightmares Reality show bullshoot.  Garbage.

Storage Wars Reality show bullshoot.  Garbage.

Glee Fag

Boardwalk Empire Good show, but the Sopranos in the 30s is all it is

True Blood Fag

America's Funniest Home Videos (some for us, some for the kids) Dumb


We have sort of gotten into X-Factor recently.  Fag


TV hasn't declined.  Your taste in television is shoot, you fudgeing goat roper.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 10:41:26 AM

In the prime of family TV shows (my childhood of course), you had Home Improvement, Everybody Loves Raymond, The Cosby Show, Fresh Prince, Full House, Married with Children, Malcolm in the Middle (late childhood), Roseanne, and Family Matters.

Each one of those shows brought a unique perspective of family life with its own style of comedy. 

FWIW?  Most of those were terrible, horrible shows.  HI and ELR in particular sucked the monkey tit.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 10:52:15 AM
FWIW?  Most of those were terrible, horrible shows.  HI and ELR in particular sucked the monkey tit.

 :fu: Watching Home Improvement right now and laughing. 

(http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/GifGuide/DealWithIt/unclesamdeal.gif)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 11:11:15 AM
TV hasn't declined.  Your taste in television is shoot, you fudgeing goat roper.

Although I like Hell's Kitchen for comedic value, I have to pretty much agree with K's take.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 01:22:03 PM
FWIW?  Most of those were terrible, horrible shows.  HI and ELR in particular sucked the monkey tit.

THIS

Ssg, caught paranormal 3 in auburn last night. Best one yet. The plot thickens. There are some root cause things going on now. There will be a PA 4 at least.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 01:38:56 PM
:fu: Watching Home Improvement right now and laughing. 
Unless you watch what Kaos watches, you're a moron. Get it right.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 01:40:06 PM
TV hasn't declined.  Your taste in television is shoot, you fudgeing goat roper.
Yeah, and you like KISS (and dress up like them).


Fag.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 23, 2011, 03:50:46 PM
Unless you watch what Kaos watches, you're a moron. Get it right.

fudge you, shoot eater.  You watch ignorant fag shows. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:17:02 AM
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:33:21 AM
Unless you watch what Kaos watches, you're a moron. Get it right.

True...and he and I disagree heavily on movies.

But, he is correct about Home Improvement and Raymond.  Banal garbage.

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:36:25 AM
True...and he and I disagree heavily on movies.

But, he is correct about Home Improvement and Raymond.  Banal garbage.

So not everybody loves him?
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:37:34 AM
So not everybody loves him?

Some people, in fact, loathe him.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:39:40 AM
Some people, in fact, loathe him.

I like the prospects of this new series.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 09:52:38 AM
Some people, in fact, loathe him.

His shrew bitch wife for one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 10:05:23 AM
Some people, in fact, loathe him.

I loathe him heavily.

Ray Romano is one of the unfunniest people ever. Show was horrid.

And I am now on the Breaking Bad train with you guys. Excellent show.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 10:53:30 AM
I loathe him heavily.

Ray Romano is one of the unfunniest people ever. Show was horrid.



^^^This
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 11:13:08 AM
^^^This

"Most of Tigersx Loathes Raymond"

But apparently TBS and all of the syndication deal makers love him.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 01:15:25 PM
The last show that I watched that was consistently funny was "Better Off Ted".  It lasted two seasons.  Work place comedy that just went straight for off the wall laughs.

Best episodes was one where the company installed motion sensors that operated all the door locks and lights, but they didn't "see" the black employees.  Hilarity ensued.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ1TaYwU394&feature=related

Another one that comes to mind is one where the company released a memo that mistakenly said "Employees must now use abusive language" and refused to admit to making a mistake.  Hilarity ensued.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh7Nz4bIwss
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 01:36:00 PM
The last show that I watched that was consistently funny was "Better Off Ted".  It lasted two seasons.  Work place comedy that just went straight for off the wall laughs.

Best episodes was one where the company installed motion sensors that operated all the door locks and lights, but they didn't "see" the black employees.  Hilarity ensued.


Another one that comes to mind is one where the company released a memo that mistakenly said "Employees must now use abusive language" and refused to admit to making a mistake.  Hilarity ensued.


Last 2 network shows or sitcoms that I watched regularly were Friends and Drew Carey. I like Carey's brand of dry humor. Some people hate him. I thought the chemistry and harsh humor between him and Mimi was great. Friends wasn't great but it was a decent all around show that could keep my attention. Plus the hotties didn't hurt. It had some hilarious moments.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 01:50:13 PM
Plus the hotties didn't hurt.

Yeah, Chandler and Joey were-

Wait...nevermind.  Nothing to see here...move along...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 03:09:59 PM
Yeah, Chandler and Joey were-

Wait...nevermind.  Nothing to see here...move along...

I figured you more as a Ross Gellar kind of guy.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 03:30:53 PM
I figured you more as a Ross Gellar kind of guy.

Paleontologists have the best boners...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 03:37:37 PM
Paleontologists have the best boners...

I was thinking more because he was Jewish. You prefer the Jewish cut down "there".
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 03:38:51 PM
I was thinking more because he was Jewish. You prefer the Jewish cut down "there".

Or I'm just a (Jew) gold digger.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 04:47:06 PM
TV Shows I think are good: 

Modern Family
Psych
Burn Notice
Men of a Certain Age
Warehouse 13
Castle
Mythbusters
Bar Rescue
Glades (not great, but they film around my house a lot)
Anthony Bourdain - No reservations

Movies I would love to see made:

Monster Hunters International
Steven King's Darktower novels
Rick Reilly's Missing Links
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 05:13:17 PM
Y'all are fudgeing up K's thread.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 10:34:46 PM
Y'all are fudgeing up K's thread.

Good. Maybe he'll get pissy. He's been soft lately.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 11:04:22 PM
Good. Maybe he'll get pissy. He's been soft lately.
:jaw:
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 11:11:14 PM
:jaw:

Hes not as interesting when he's not pissy. It's a compliment actually.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 24, 2011, 11:25:19 PM
Y'all are fudgeing up K's thread.

That's right!  He doesn't need any help screwing up his own threads!!!  Ya'll get off the lawn!!!
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 26, 2011, 01:10:26 PM
Funny to me that you watched 4 more minutes of All about Steve then you did Resident Evil: Afterlife.

All about Steve might almost be as bad as What's Eating Gilbert Grape, how the fudge did they get actors to make that movie. fudge me.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 26, 2011, 02:03:52 PM
Funny to me that you watched 4 more minutes of All about Steve then you did Resident Evil: Afterlife.

All about Steve might almost be as bad as What's Eating Gilbert Grape, how the fudge did they get actors to make that movie. fudge me.
Steve and Grape or HORRRIBLEEEEE oh and a big fudge you to P.S. I Love You.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 26, 2011, 02:06:07 PM
Funny to me that you watched 4 more minutes of All about Steve then you did Resident Evil: Afterlife.

All about Steve might almost be as bad as What's Eating Gilbert Grape, how the fudge did they get actors to make that movie. fudge me.

DiCaprio was a slow starter.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 12:12:00 AM
Back to the purpose of the thread.

Puss In Boots

So many try.  So many fail. 

Despicable Me, a little flat.
Hop. Just not good.
Rango. Good movie, but still missing one string on the guitar. 
Rio, Cloudy with Meatballs, Megamind, Gnomeo, Mars Needs Moms, Tangled, How to Train Your Dragon, Planet 51, Monsters vs. Aliens, Happily Never After, Coraline, Ice Age... the list goes on forever.  Each of them had their own charms, but all were somewhat incomplete.  Rango, for instance, was more enjoyable to me than it was to my kids because I understood all the iconic spaghetti western imagery. 

And then there's Puss.

Great movie.  Very well done. 

Hit just the right balance between subtle adult humor and kid- friendly charm.  On occasions I found myself laughing at something in the film at the same time as my kids and her friends but we were laughing for two entirely different reasons.

The film, a spinoff of the Shrek franchise, could have taken the easy route and pulled in cameos from the green ogre or the gingerbread man or any of the other assorted characters who populated Shrek's swamp.  But the didn't.  Instead they crafted an entirely new story, bastardized a few fairy tale legends along the way and delivered a solid home run. 

Well animated, well told, well paced.  And Antonio Banderas owns the role he was meant to play.

Could have done without Zac Guffingkafackas as Humpty Dumpty but there are those who appreciate his work (God knows why) and he wasn't utterly awful.  His whining delivery was the only sour note in the entire film. 

If you're a parent and been forced to sit through some drizzly shoot like Happy Feet, Rio or Cars 2 in order to pacify the kids, pretend you're making a sacrifice, take the kids and earn brownie points at a showing of Puss.  Well worth it.  If you don't have kids, borrow some and go. 

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 12:24:00 AM
If you don't have kids, borrow some and go.

If by "borrow some and go," you mean kidnap some kids from the local elementary school, take them to a movie, and then keep them in your basement forever, then I'm all in.

(http://images.wikia.com/wikiality/images/c/cb/UNCLE_PEDOBEAR_by_Lemon_of_Doom.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 03:50:56 AM
Back to the purpose of the thread.

Puss In Boots

So many try.  So many fail. 

Despicable Me, a little flat.
Hop. Just not good.
Rango. Good movie, but still missing one string on the guitar. 
Rio, Cloudy with Meatballs, Megamind, Gnomeo, Mars Needs Moms, Tangled, How to Train Your Dragon, Planet 51, Monsters vs. Aliens, Happily Never After, Coraline, Ice Age... the list goes on forever.  Each of them had their own charms, but all were somewhat incomplete.  Rango, for instance, was more enjoyable to me than it was to my kids because I understood all the iconic spaghetti western imagery. 

And then there's Puss.

Great movie.  Very well done. 

Hit just the right balance between subtle adult humor and kid- friendly charm.  On occasions I found myself laughing at something in the film at the same time as my kids and her friends but we were laughing for two entirely different reasons.

The film, a spinoff of the Shrek franchise, could have taken the easy route and pulled in cameos from the green ogre or the gingerbread man or any of the other assorted characters who populated Shrek's swamp.  But the didn't.  Instead they crafted an entirely new story, bastardized a few fairy tale legends along the way and delivered a solid home run. 

Well animated, well told, well paced.  And Antonio Banderas owns the role he was meant to play.

Could have done without Zac Guffingkafackas as Humpty Dumpty but there are those who appreciate his work (God knows why) and he wasn't utterly awful.  His whining delivery was the only sour note in the entire film. 

If you're a parent and been forced to sit through some drizzly shoot like Happy Feet, Rio or Cars 2 in order to pacify the kids, pretend you're making a sacrifice, take the kids and earn brownie points at a showing of Puss.  Well worth it.  If you don't have kids, borrow some and go.
I watched tonight in 3D, great movie and the 3D was actually worth the extra cash.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 10:47:59 AM
Zac Guffingkafackas there are those who appreciate his work (God knows why)

Thank you.

I thought I was the only one.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 06:59:51 PM
If by "borrow some and go," you mean kidnap some kids from the local elementary school, take them to a movie, and then keep them in your basement forever, then I'm all in.
Don't be ridiculous - you misunderstood - read it again....
take the kids and earn brownie points at a showing of Puss. Well worth it.  If you don't have kids, borrow some and go.
He's saying you should take them to a porno - but one with women in it, so not your normal fare

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 07:37:05 PM
He's saying you should take them to a porno - but one with women in it, so not your normal fare

Trannies count as half women...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 09:01:27 PM
Trannies count as half women...
trannie hookers count as zero, because hookers have no soul
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 09:04:52 PM
trannie hookers count as zero, because hookers have no soul

They're not hookers if they're paid by a third party to have sex while being recorded.

At any rate, why are we focusing on the trannies here?  I thought we were talking about more important things, like kidnapping children...
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 10:08:08 PM
They're not hookers if they're paid by a third party to have sex while being recorded.

At any rate, why are we focusing on the trannies here?  I thought we were talking about more important things, like kidnapping children...
How about tranny kids, with lesbians too!
 (http://www.tigersx.com/forum/index.php?topic=16143.0)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on October 31, 2011, 10:15:11 PM
How about tranny kids, with lesbians too!
 (http://www.tigersx.com/forum/index.php?topic=16143.0)

(http://assetsus3.wordansassets.com/wordansfiles/images/2011/2/3/65221/65221_340.jpg)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 07, 2011, 07:55:09 PM
A Face In The Crowd

1957.  So way, way, way behind on this review. 

I guess I've seen parts of this movie over the years.  Today I ended up watching the whole thing. 

First let me say I love Andy Griffith.  The Andy Griffith Show ranks among the best television of all time. He was the perfect choice to play that role and in an ironic way became almost as famous and important as the Lonesome Rhodes character he plays in A Face In The Crowd. 

But my lord did he overact, over mug, over ham, over goof this role.  I know some of it is the way films were done in that era, overacting was part of the deal but he was so over the top it was hard to take his character seriously. 

When he was supposedly winning people over with his folksy charm he looked more like a drug-addled baboon. How the director ever got away with portraying that braying jackass becoming a national icon is beyond me. 

Then, of course, I wasn't alive in 1957 so maybe that kind of buffoonery would have been a big hit. 

Andy was better when he reined it in a little and showed some of the inner menace behind his bumpkin persona. 

Patricia Neal was pretty bad, too.  I never thought she could act a dadgum lick and she shore proved it here, fellas. 

Walter Matthau was pretty good in the film.  Understated and believable. 

The story itself is timeless.  When Andy and his benefactor are trying to shape a presidential candidate and they're drilling him on soundbytes and personality-driven presentations, when they're explaining that what he really believes is unimportant compared to what people believe about him, when they're explaining that his abilities are less important than the ability to market him to the people... It resonated hard even 54 years later. 

In Senator Curly Worthington, I saw Obama.  Shaped and molded to fit a demographic, his ability to perform the duties of the office completely secondary. 

I've seen this film hailed as a cinematic masterpiece. I disagree. The acting was too broad (and too bad) and the peripheral characters too stereotypical for this film to occupy a spot on the same shelf that holds To Kill A Mockingbird, On The Waterfront, Kane, Cool Hand Luke, Godfather, etc.   But it's worth watching at least once, particularly when you can now view it through the lens of the Reagan, Clinton and Obama presidencies as well as the rise of politically active entertainers like Baldwin, Streisand, Eastwood and their ilk. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 08, 2011, 09:49:13 AM
I've seen the movie before.  I liked it, but it was over the top.  You know most people think that the movie was aimed directly at folksy Will Rogers.  It was just shocking to me to see young Andy Griffith as a philandering, power hungry bad guy.

I think the manic personality thing was big for celebs in the '50's (remember this is the time of Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard, Wolfman Jack, and other people who would just be looked at as cartoonish today).  I also think drug use was heavily implied though the way he acted to, and the drugs of choice in the '50's after you moved past weed were bennies and other amphetamines (see On the Road).  Actually you can look at On the Road also for the whole manic personality/'50's thing.  Dean Moriarty (the real life Neal Cassady) basically was the major emphasis behind the beat movement and later the hippies based purely on his personality, drug use, and antics.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 08, 2011, 05:07:25 PM
I've seen the movie before.  I liked it, but it was over the top.  You know most people think that the movie was aimed directly at folksy Will Rogers.  It was just shocking to me to see young Andy Griffith as a philandering, power hungry bad guy.

I think the manic personality thing was big for celebs in the '50's (remember this is the time of Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard, Wolfman Jack, and other people who would just be looked at as cartoonish today).  I also think drug use was heavily implied though the way he acted to, and the drugs of choice in the '50's after you moved past weed were bennies and other amphetamines (see On the Road).  Actually you can look at On the Road also for the whole manic personality/'50's thing.  Dean Moriarty (the real life Neal Cassady) basically was the major emphasis behind the beat movement and later the hippies based purely on his personality, drug use, and antics.


I read that the movie was actually a satire directed at Arthur Godfrey. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 15, 2011, 12:48:46 AM
X Men: First Class

Amazing cast. 

Movie? Pffffttttttttttttttttttttt.  Hahahahahaha.  What a joke. 

I adored Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone.  Thought she could be the next great actress, maybe the first great one in a long time.  fudge a bucket, I was wrong.  She was absolutely fudgeing hideous here.  She was Amanda Byne-level.  Horribly used.  If this shoot had come out before WB she'd have been laughed out of the Oscar Nomination she deserved her WB performance.

Terrible film.  Everybody in it sucked.

Kevin Bacon?  BAAAA HAAA HAA HAAAA HAAAA... shootty. 

Call me... Magneto... BAAAA HAAAA HAAA HAAA HAAAA. 

Wait, was this a comedy?  I might have to change my view.  Batman snickered when he saw this film.  Brandon Routh was relieved because his shootty, shootty Superman movie has competition.

FWIW, this continues a pattern.  No previews or extras on the Blu Ray.  Whenever that happens the movie sucks moldy ass.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 15, 2011, 12:59:04 AM
The Perfect Host

Ever wonder if Maris Crane was real?  Ever give thought to the fact that Niles Crane might have had some really kinky weird shoot going on when he wasn't bothering Frasier, disappointing his dad or lusting after Daphne? 

If it ever crossed your mind, The Perfect Host is a film that gives you a glimpse into the possibilities.  Whatever his name is will always be Niles Crane.  He can't escape that persona.  And he doesn't here despite his best efforts. 

A desperate outlaw seeks refuge in the house of the guy who is not Niles and finds out that he may have gotten way more than he bargained for.

The "Working at the Carwash" scene is almost worth it.  If you don't watch the movie you should at least look that up on YouTube.  It won't make a lot of sense without the context that leads up to it, but it's interesting.

The movie doesn't quite reach the level of depravity it should and because of that leaves a lot on the table. 

Other than Niles, the rest of the cast is basically upper-tier porno quality.  Well, except for Helen Reddy and she doesn't even reach those heights.  The film itself suffers from a definite lack of production values, the sets and lighting are pretty bad, the wardrobe selections are not even porno-level and the supporting cast is terribly weak and wooden. 

It's clearly a very low-budget film but it does have some entertainment value.  I guess when you're pigeonholed as Niles you'll take about anything to try to break that mold. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 15, 2011, 11:20:12 AM
Fred Claus

Vince Vaughn never acts.  He merely portrays himself in various films. 

Here he fudgeing sucks.  As always.

I was hoping the usually good Paul Giamatti could elevate this film.  He was worse here than he was as orangutan. 

I hoped the typically sexy Rachel Weisz would give me some incentive.  She did not, bundled as she was in a fur cap and heavy postman gear.

I was looking forward to the adorable Elizabeth Banks.  Sadly, not enough to make this film watchable. 

Festering turd of a film. 

Vince Vaughn is the worst of the Turd Pack of no-talent hacks which includes Ferrell, Wilson (all of them) and the rest of that painfully unfunny crew. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 15, 2011, 11:21:45 AM
Fred Claus

Vince Vaughn never acts.  He merely portrays himself in various films. 

Here he fudgeing sucks.  As always.

I was hoping the usually good Paul Giamatti could elevate this film.  He was worse here than he was as orangutan. 

I hoped the typically sexy Rachel Weisz would give me some incentive.  She did not, bundled as she was in a fur cap and heavy postman gear.

I was looking forward to the adorable Elizabeth Banks.  Sadly, not enough to make this film watchable. 

Festering turd of a film. 

Vince Vaughn is the worst of the Turd Pack of no-talent hacks which includes Ferrell, Wilson (all of them) and the rest of that painfully unfunny crew.

This was on TV the other night after How the Grinch Stole Christmas (the good one with Boris Karloff, not Jim Carrey's travesty).  You are correct sir, it got 86'ed about 3 minutes in.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 16, 2011, 09:25:35 AM
All I know is The Negotiator was on again last night for the 217th time.....and I watched it...for the 217th time.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 16, 2011, 02:32:12 PM
All I know is The Negotiator was on again last night for the 217th time.....and I watched it...for the 217th time.

Same with me except mine was: Jenna does (ah nevermind)
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 18, 2011, 01:24:42 AM
Bridesmaids

Not at all what I expected. 

2:05:00 of my life I wish I could have back. 

Kept waiting for it to hit its stride and all it did was wallow.  Kristin Wiig cannot carry a movie.  Neither can Maya.  Both are better in supporting -- minor -- roles.

A bad NBC sketch comedy full of SNL and The Office castoffs. 

How this dismal stink bomb earned critical praise and was considered a "comedy" is beyond me. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 20, 2011, 09:01:13 AM
I Am Number Four

No.  You made number two on the screen. 

Wasted the gorgeous Teresa Palmer. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 28, 2011, 04:55:07 PM
Ed Wood

Johnny Depp in an angora sweater and blonde wig just wasn't everything I thought it would be.  Not even when he showed his bra, panties and leggings did the film rise up. 

I wasn't as impressed with Depp as I expected to be in this role. He made the same face he made throught Willy Wonka but this one was just in black and white and without all the cool props.

I assume it was meant to be as campishly bad as all of Wood's campishly awful movies and in this it was a success. 

Landau as Lugosi was excellent.  Outstanding job.   I forgot he wasn't Bela for a while. 

The rest of the cast .... meh.  Intentionally bad I think. 

A film only serious Depp fans could appreciate and I guess I'm just not as serious as I thought I was.   

Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on November 28, 2011, 05:10:34 PM
Bridesmaids

Not at all what I expected. 

2:05:00 of my life I wish I could have back. 

Kept waiting for it to hit its stride and all it did was wallow.  Kristin Wiig cannot carry a movie.  Neither can Maya.  Both are better in supporting -- minor -- roles.

A bad NBC sketch comedy full of SNL and The Office castoffs. 

How this dismal stink bomb earned critical praise and was considered a "comedy" is beyond me.
Another one I agree with you on...perhaps the world is coming to an end.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 11, 2011, 10:09:45 AM
Captain America

If there was an online survey I'd check "neither liked nor disliked" this movie.   It wasn't good. It wasn't bad.  It wasn't all that entertaining.  It wasn't boring. 

The big reveal at the end and the continuing push toward the big group Avengers-type film was idiotic and contrived.  Stupid, it was. 

I don't really want to see the big Avenger-fest anyway.   It's like when you take the stupid kids and try to mainstream them in with the bright kids hoping that the better students will inspire and elevate the poorer ones.  Doesn't work that way.  Always sinks to the lowest level.  The dumb remain dumb while the smart dull it down. 

So you've got Ironman -- one great and one pretty good movie.   Hulk: a number of dreadfully shootty movies.  Thor: One bowl of cold oatmeal of a movie.  Hawkeye, who hasn't been in a movie . Black Widow who made a cameo in the worst of the two Ironman movies.  And Loki.  What the fudge is Loki?  Going to add this dry and uninspiring Captain America to that mix.  Bleh. 

The guy playing Captain America was a horrible actor.  Terrible. He brought no panache to any scene he was in. Plus he is already Torch in the Fantastic Four.  That's like having Gwen Paltrow also play Catwoman.  Or Zach Quintl also play Han Solo in a Star Wars reboot. She's either Pepper or she's Selena.  He's either Spock or Han. Can't be both.  And did I mention that he's a wooden stiff of an actor with zero screen presence.  He has no chemistry with his supposed best friend, no chemistry with the army lady, none with Tommy Lee Jones and none with a squandered Stanley Tucci.
 
TLJ was utterly wasted.  Nothing but a set piece. Any number of nameless, faceless character actors could have filled that role adequately. Red Skull wasn't intimidating in the least.  His girlfriend is now close to 100 and probably smells dusty. Not that I bought that relationship anyway. 

The film went all in with a special effects bonanza which saw a shrimpy version of the wooden actor become a more chiseled version of the same bad actor.  Yeah, that was pretty cool but it wasn't enough to carry the movie and by the end had really no bearing on anything. 

That portion of the story was a little reckless, actually. So what, Captain America can hit 70 home runs or win the league MVP trophy now that he's juiced up on HGH and roids?

As a one-off waste of time, it was fair.  As a building block to the beginning of the Avengers franchise, I cringe.  Ironman is great.  These dreary supplemental pieces will do nothing but drag that quality franchise into the shootter.  I hope they never  do Justice League. 

Welcome back Cap'n.  You been sleep for 70 years.  Pfffffffffffffffttttttttttttttttttttt.  Would have been better if he'd woken up to apes running the country.  Way better. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 16, 2011, 11:55:17 PM
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Now that's what a movie should be. 

Being that it was a sequel it suffered somewhat from sequel disease.  It was a little bloated and overlong; it wasn't quite as oddly charming as the first episode; it tried to do a little too much; it tacked on some action sequences that defied belief. 

And yet...

Great movie.  Action mixed with fun mixed with a dash of drama and intrigue thrown in for good measure.  Kept you guessing, made you care. 

Robert Downey, Jr. is the man.  I hate Jude Law in everything else but this.  Here, he's quite good. 

Not going to bother you with the extremely convoluted story or nitpick the action that occasionally bordered on ridiculous (and at the end crossed the line completely into absurd). 

See the movie.  It's worth the ticket. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 17, 2011, 03:47:01 PM
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Now that's what a movie should be. 

Being that it was a sequel it suffered somewhat from sequel disease.  It was a little bloated and overlong; it wasn't quite as oddly charming as the first episode; it tried to do a little too much; it tacked on some action sequences that defied belief. 

And yet...

Great movie.  Action mixed with fun mixed with a dash of drama and intrigue thrown in for good measure.  Kept you guessing, made you care. 

Robert Downey, Jr. is the man.  I hate Jude Law in everything else but this.  Here, he's quite good. 

Not going to bother you with the extremely convoluted story or nitpick the action that occasionally bordered on ridiculous (and at the end crossed the line completely into absurd). 

See the movie.  It's worth the ticket.

Agree on Downey. When the dude is sober he's a great actor.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 17, 2011, 07:10:53 PM
Agree on Downey. When the dude is sober he's a great actor.

Agree on Downey as well, and I plan to see the movie.  Loved the first one.  I can handle the absurdly ridiculous action stuff in movies like this. 
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 17, 2011, 09:57:14 PM
Agree on Downey as well, and I plan to see the movie.  Loved the first one.  I can handle the absurdly ridiculous action stuff in movies like this.

Agreed.  Suspension of disbelief works in movies like this, can't wait to see it.
Title: Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
Post by: XMember on December 18, 2011, 03:50:00 AM
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Now that's what a movie should be. 

Being that it was a sequel it suffered somewhat from sequel disease.  It was a little bloated and overlong; it wasn't quite as oddly charming as the first episode; it tried to do a little too much; it ta